Luvaglio & Stafford Leave Peterlee

Prosecution Case
Luvaglio and Stafford leave Peterlee at 11:00pm, drive the E Type to South Hetton, where they meet Angus, collide with his Mark X,
murder him at 11:50pm and manhandle his body into his car.
One of them drive his car until it seizes up (as a result of the damage from the collision which punctured the radiator) just prior to Pesspool Bridge, return to the E-Type and drive back to Newcastle to be at the Birdcage Night Club at 12:30am Jan. 5th.

  1. Contradicting Evidence:
    All Peterlee witnesses said they left Peterlee at 11:30pm. Three witnesses saw the E-Type (with a black soft top) at Chelsea Grove, Newcastle around midnight.
    How could their E-Type be seen 18 miles away from the murder scene only 10 minutes after the murder??
    How could Stafford and Luvaglio have done all that the
    prosecution accused them of without any cross transfer of
    forensic evidence occurring, then manage to arrive at the Bird Cage in immaculate condition just 40 minutes after the murder was to have taken place?
  2. Contradicting Evidence:
    Not a single prosecution witness described the E-Type as having a black soft top. On Jan 7th Mr. William Potts Hall saw a red E Type driving around in Peterlee.
    The E-Type Stafford and Luvaglio were driving had a black soft top and was taken into police custody on Jan. 5th, so could the
    E-Type that was spotted on Jan. 7th have been the one that was seen in South Hetton on Jan.5th.?
  3. Contradicting Evidence:
    P.C.McQueen (qualified Car Engineer) inspected the Mark X in Peterlee Police Station on Jan. 6th and noted in his notebook “Started – Good Mechanical Order”. On Jan. 11th he inspected it again and for some reason that was never explained, his notes this time stated ”Car radiator punctured and leaking badly
    – engine knocking”.
    P.C. McQueen’s notebook only came to light along with other
    police notebooks in November 1972 – so this evidence was not heard by any court.
    Mr. Bowman (Engineer) stated that he believed the hole in the
    radiator was deliberately caused by an implement not related to
    either of the cars.* See Mr Bowman’s Statement.
  4. Contradicting Evidence:
    Police photographs show the Mark X in different positions in the Police Yard while in custody. In addition, the windscreen wipers were also in different positions, indicating that the cars may have been started up and driven around the yard, although the Mark X was supposed to have been seized up and non-drivable. This would certainly back up P.C. McQueen’s notebook entry that the car started and was in good mechanical order.
    The police photographs were taken between the 6th and 10th of January in the Peterlee Police Yard.

Click below to see the statements
(click to enlarge):