https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13728347/John-died-railway-police-accident-parents-truth-death-threats-mysterious-letter-murder.htmlWhen John died on a railway, police said it was an accident. Now his parents reveal truth about his death from chilling threats to a mysterious letter and ask the horrifying question: Has someone got away with murder?
By Paul Bracchi
Published: 01:56, 10 August 2024 | Updated: 01:56, 10 August 2024
No one would ever know John Merrick is buried in Streetly Cemetery in the West Midlands. His grave, in stark contrast to all the others, doesn't have a headstone. The plot is an empty patch of grass with nothing to indicate this is his final resting place. It would be easy, in the circumstances, to assume he died unloved and friendless. He didn't. More than 700 people turned out for his funeral. One firm, which used the services of his thriving tyre business, closed so staff could attend the service. 'Our John' was spelt out in a giant floral tribute and placed at his graveside. But no headstone. 'Until we get justice for our son it will remain unmarked,' said John's father Paul Merrick, a retired motor trade entrepreneur. 'I believe John was murdered. I want the inscription to say that. I want everyone who visits his grave to know what happened.'
More than a decade on, John Merrick's death is still mired in controversy.
Behind his tragic loss is a story involving death threats, a disturbing anonymous letter, a car chase, a feared family and the jailed son of a former deputy crime commissioner now serving time for drug smuggling which can be told for the first time today. At the centre of it all, a haunting question: has someone got away with John Merrick's murder?
Two recent developments, which we'll come to, have only added to the suspicion that the truth about what happened to John has not fully emerged. John, 32, was found lying next to railway tracks in the isolated Staffordshire countryside on the outskirts of Birmingham after crashing his car into the wall of a bridge, on the night of Friday, September 6, 2013. He was more than one-and-a-half times over the drink-drive limit and had jumped 25ft onto the railway track below in an attempt to flee the scene, an inquest heard. Why, his family and their lawyer asked, would he have jumped when he wasn't even being pursued by the police?
There is one other thing to point out here. John is supposed to have 'vaulted' (the word used by two witnesses) over the side of the bridge by swinging his legs like a gymnast traversing a pommel horse. Such a scenario would have represented a considerable feat because the brick wall is 3.5ft high and 2ft wide and, at around 5ft 8in and more than 15st, John was significantly overweight. Nevertheless, despite inconsistencies in the accounts of witnesses, criticisms of the initial investigation, and an independent report by a leading forensic pathologist questioning some of the findings of the original post-mortem examination, the coroner's verdict was accidental death. A second independent report by another pathologist recommended the exhumation of John's body. The request was turned down by the coroner. Mr Merrick and his wife Julie, both in their 70s, have fought tirelessly for the justice they believe John deserves. It would be easy to dismiss their concerns given that both the British Transport Police (BTP) and Staffordshire Police say they found no evidence of 'third-party' involvement. But, aside from any shortcomings or otherwise in the investigation, a sinister thread runs through the entire story of John Merrick which is hard to ignore. It is epitomised by a sinister threat Mr Merrick received a few months after John's death, from two unrelated men who showed up at his local pub, the Hardwick Arms in Streetly, near Tamworth. They approached one of his friends with a message to pass onto him: 'Tell Paul Merrick,' they said, 'that if he carries on with investigating the case he will end up where his son is.'
A few years later a troubling letter arrived. The couple are making it public for the first time in a bid to get the investigation into John's death reopened. The letter begins: 'It is with a heavy heart that I write this to you but knowing your pain and need for the truth of the circumstances relating to the loss of John. John had some very damning information on ******* (the name of a member of a notorious family) which would have resulted in a long custodial sentence which left ******* with no choice but to have John silenced. John knew too much of *******'s activities and unfortunately paid the price. This may or may not be a surprise to you but I'm sure that you know this to be true. John should at the very least have justice on this and you should see that he does.'
The contents of the typed note, which arrived by post at their home in Sutton Coldfield, did not come as a surprise to the Merricks, who had heard similar rumours. The Merricks now live in a different part of the country. You would be hard-pressed to find a more quietly courageous and resilient couple but one of the reasons they moved following Mr Merrick's retirement a few years ago was because they no longer felt at ease in their native West Midlands. The person referred to in the anonymous letter cannot be named for legal reasons. I have spoken to several people who've found themselves on the wrong side of this family, some of whom ended up needing hospital treatment after being beaten up, but who claim witnesses were reluctant to come forward or speak to police on their behalf. 'They are a tough family,' one told me. 'They are big fish in a small pond. People in their patch are scared of them.'
Did he believe the allegation contained in the anonymous letter was credible?
'Yes,' he replied.
John Merrick had been close to one member of this family likely the reason he is alleged to have 'known too much', to quote the letter but his parents say he was not part of any criminal activity. John was not perfect and drank too much on occasions, but the number of people at his funeral is testament to his popularity. 'He was like everyone's son, everyone's brother,' said Mrs Merrick. 'He was kind, generous and helpful and everyone loved him. So many people have been affected by his death.'
The letter and the death threat were just part of a sinister chain of events that would have left any family, not just the Merricks, questioning the outcome of the police investigation and inquest. Four days before his death, John turned up 'out of the blue', late at night, at the home of family friends on the outskirts of Tamworth.
'He said unsavoury characters were chasing him and had nearly rammed him off the road,' recalled retired accountant Dave Goulding, whose son had been John's best friend during school and their teenage years.
'He had driven into a field, hiding behind a hedge, to try to escape them. He then abandoned his car and fled on foot to our house half a mile away. He was shaken up but didn't want to say who was chasing him, or why, and he didn't want to call the police. The next day I drove him to pick up his car. It was scattered inside with takeaway food which had been hurled around in the chase.'
That happened on September 2, 2013. Four days later John Merrick was dead. The similarity between the events of September 2 and September 6 are chilling: on both occasions John had abandoned his car. On both occasions he'd bought a Chinese takeaway. 'John's death raises so many questions and some remain unanswered,' said Mr Goulding. 'I do not believe he took his own life or died accidentally.'
John's death, he said, was certainly caused by the actions of those said to have been chasing him. Paul and Julie Merrick have spent the past decade compiling a dossier on John's death to try to get the case reopened. 'We haven't slept properly for more than ten years,' said Mr Merrick. 'A door has been shut in our face at every turn.'
Until last year, it seemed, when they were contacted by the West Midlands Regional Organised Crime Unit (ROCU). A meeting was set up between the Merricks, their lawyer Sefton Kwasnik and Det Chief Supt Jenny Skyrme and another detective from ROCU. The catalyst for the meeting was John Arnold, son of Sue Arnold, former Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner in Staffordshire, who was about to be jailed for 23 years for his part in a plot to smuggle £118 million worth of cocaine into the UK. To begin with, some background. Back in 2013 Arnold, who attended the £45,000-a-year Repton School, was known to one of the family referred to in the anonymous letter. Both of them also knew John Merrick. On the morning following John's death, Arnold turned up at the scene. He claimed John's father, who was also there, had asked him to go down the embankment to the railway tracks to find his son's wallet. Mr Merrick flatly denies this. Why was John Arnold there, if not looking for the wallet?
A week later, when a detective spoke to Arnold to obtain a statement from him in the presence of his mother, he was unwilling to give the statement because, the detective said, 'he was concerned about the repercussions he might be subject to'.
His 'unwillingness' to help is disclosed in the detective's own testimony which was part of the inquest proceedings. Why, is the obvious question. Clearly, the renewed interest in John Merrick's death by the Regional Organised Crime Unit last year was prompted by John Arnold's conviction for drug smuggling. Det Chief Supt Skyrme and her colleague spent five hours speaking to the Merricks and their solicitor Mr Kwasnik at a hotel in June 2023. She later sent them a summary of what she saw as 'the main issues that needed to be addressed' in the case. The list included the family named in the letter and John Arnold. She hoped, she said, to 'be able to share' her full report with them in due course. It was not to be. In a recent email, Det Chief Supt Skyrme informed the Merricks: 'I have liaised with both the British Transport Police & Staffordshire Police who have requested that the report is not shared.'
Neither BTP nor Staffordshire Police were prepared to explain the reason for their decision. John Arnold is now in prison but his mother, who was Deputy Crime Commissioner between 2012 and 2021, insisted he had cooperated fully with the police. 'He gave the police everything he knew,' she said. 'I was there when he was interviewed. He didn't hold back. He gave them all the details he had, his exact movements.' Asked why he wasn't prepared to make an official statement, she said: 'Because he didn't want to,' adding: 'We have nothing to hide. Nothing whatsoever. We are all absolutely devastated by John's death. My heart bleeds for his family.'
The night John died has been replayed over and over again by his parents. John had met a friend for a drink after work and he then visited another pub before picking up a Chinese takeaway nearby and apparently heading home. John used the road near Tamworth twice a day to get to and from his business in Birmingham. His abandoned Fiesta was spotted on the bridge at Willow Bottom Lane, a few miles from Tamworth, sometime before 11pm. The bridge has a number 58 which is clearly displayed on a plaque on the wall, half-way across. It was from this point two witnesses say they saw a figure 'vault' over the side. If John Merrick did jump off, it couldn't have been from this spot, according to a new report by Mike Brown, one of the country's foremost specialists in biomechanics, the science which examines the 'internal and external forces' acting on the human body. If he had, claims Mr Brown who was commissioned by the Merricks, and who has worked extensively on suspicious deaths with police forces all over the country he would have 'landed directly below'. But John was actually found 18ft further to the left. The report also states that witnesses would have had a 'limited line of sight' and 'their field of view would be limited by the vehicle [the Fiesta] and its lights projecting towards them.' Any inconsistencies in witnesses' accounts, however, were dismissed by the coroner and were likely to be 'innocent errors', he said, caused by confusion on a dark, foggy night where the incident unfolded in the space of just a few seconds. One of them spoke to the Mail: 'When we gave statements to the police they didn't discuss what may have happened or why, and I can't speculate if it was a suspicious death. I don't have a clue.'
Two other young men — 'two blokes together' to use the witness's words — also arrived at the scene on the night in question, she said.
Police have never revealed who they were and, unlike the witness we spoke to, and her boyfriend, they were not called to give evidence at the inquest. What we do know is the incident log, obtained under a Freedom of Information request, shows that at 11.40pm John Merrick's death was being treated as a 'crime scene' after being considered 'suspicious' by the British Transport Police (BTP) but declared 'non-suspicious' just after midnight 31 minutes later. No crime scene photographs were taken during that period which is highly irregular and the reason why foul play was initially suspected by the BTP has never been explained. 'I have never seen so many failings of basic investigation work on the night and since,' said the family's solicitor Sefton Kwasnik.
They were compounded by the conflicting medical evidence. Most of John's injuries were sustained in the fall, the original post-mortem found, but he also 'suffered a glancing blow' from a train which severed his shoulder. There was no evidence of this, however, when the seven trains which could have been responsible for the strike were examined and the drivers questioned. The results of the post-mortem examination were challenged by two independent medical reports. The first, commissioned by the Merricks, was produced at the inquest. The second, by Dr Nathaniel Cary, a Home Office registered consultant pathologist for more than 20 years, was produced on the instructions of the BTP in 2017. Again, we do not know what persuaded the BTP to do this four years after John's death but both reports found there were a lack of injuries, such as leg breaks, consistent with a fall. Dr Cary also pointed out: 'The pathological findings alone do not rule out the possibility that the deceased was assaulted by some other means, including to a state of unconsciousness and that he was placed on the track to obscure the occurrence of such an assault,' adding: 'Abrasions on his chest and flank' were consistent with him 'being dragged through the undergrowth'.
He recommended the exhumation of John's body. The request was rejected by Staffordshire South senior Coroner Andrew Haigh, who retired in 2021. Both the British Transport Police and Staffordshire Police said there had been a number of reviews into the death of John Merrick. 'Their thoughts,' they said, 'remain with the family.'
Will a headstone ever be placed on John Merrick's grave?
'John was our life,' said Mr Merrick. 'We will never give up.'
Additional reporting: Tracey Kandohla and Tim Stewart
