Free The Great Train Robbery by Andrew Cook

those concerned with the administration of the law must indeed be grateful for that achievement. 5

    However, it is clear from the correspondence that Edmund Davies received after the trial and sentencing that Hobson’s claim that ‘no single word of criticism from any quarter’ had been heard was untrue. In addition to the large volume of letters from members of the public agreeing or disagreeing with the sentences handed down, there are detailed memorandums from a number of noted legal authorities who expressed degrees of reservation concerning his conduct of the trial. 6
    The committal proceedings against the train robbers so far charged commenced at Aylesbury on 26 September 1963. Between then and 2 December, the court sat for nineteen days. As a sign of things to come, the ten prisoners were taken to and from court by twenty constables. On 2 December, all those charged appeared before the Linslade Magistrates sitting at Aylesbury. It was at this point that Mr Sabin, a junior counsel for the prosecution, told the chairman of the bench that the prosecution had decided to withdraw the charge against Mary Manson for receiving, and would not in fact be proffering any other charge against her. He then outlined the case against her and spoke of her connection with Reynolds.
    He told the bench that:

    It would be quite unfair for the prosecution to ask the bench to regard Reynolds as any other than the person with whom she went to the Chequered Flag Car Showrooms. No evidence had been produced to connect Reynolds in any way with the crime. 7 Reynolds was simply a man with whom she went to the garage and no more, and the prosecution could not prove that any of the money that came from her bag came from the train robbery. 8

    Mr Sabin concluded his address by asking for all the other accused to be committed for trial on the charges that had been placed before the court. Mary Manson was then dismissed and the chairman of the bench said that costs would be allowed from public funds.
    Lewis Hawser QC then submitted that Brian Field had no case to answer on the charge of robbery, on the basis that the evidence to support the charge of conspiracy was extremely thin and that Field should only be tried for receiving.
    The court adjourned and on its return the chairman of the bench announced that they rejected all the submissions. Submissions were then made by all the defence counsel for the case to be committed to the Central Criminal Court (the Old Bailey). The reason given by the defence was that such a relocation would be more convenient for all concerned: defendants, counsel, witnesses etc. The chairman rejected the submissions and committed the prisoners to stand trial at the Buckingham Winter Session of Assize at Aylesbury, which was scheduled to begin the following month. 9 Applications for bail were made on behalf of Brian Field by his counsel Ivor Richards and for Gordon Goody by Wilfred Fordham. The magistrates’ bench, however, refused both applications.
    Finally, solicitor Ellis Lincoln asked that the prisoners be sent to await trial at Brixton Prison, claiming that it would be more suitable for the prisoners and more convenient for the counsel. This application was also refused, probably on security grounds, the authorities preferring a location well away from London.
    Following on the arrests of John Daly on 3 December and Roy James on 10 December 1963, both appeared before the magistrates at Linslade Magistrates’ Court. They were then remanded in custody until 27 December, when they were further remanded until 31 December 1963. It was on New Year’s Eve that the committal proceedings were held at a special sitting of the Linslade Magistrates at Leighton Buzzard. Part of the prosecution evidence was given and both prisoners were then remanded in custody for trial before the Buckinghamshire Assize Court. 10
    By the time of the 1964 Assize case, nine of the sixteen men believed to have taken part in the mail train