Manuels Confession (from The Herald )

LETTERS - IN THIS SECTION		INDEX

Manuel’s confession

Comment | Read Comments (1)

Iain A D Mann (Letters, May 8) suggests Peter Manuel might have escaped the death penalty had he not stolen a shoe from one victim, Ann Kneilands. Lord Cameron directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty on the charge of murdering Ann Kneilands.

Although at his trial Manuel pled not guilty to four charges of capital murder, he hitherto had confessed to all of these and had taken police to the grave of Isabelle Cooke, and to the suspension bridge in Clyde Street, and pointed out where he had disposed of the revolvers used in the murders of the Watt and Smart families. In 1958, murder by shooting was a capital offence. Mr Mann asks if Manuel's execution can be justified. Surely not. Manuel must have been a sick man and for this reason should not have hanged. However, it was Manuel's confession that played a part in bringing about his convention.

He was "the man who talked too much".

Tom Hay, 1A St Leonard's Road, Ayr

Add Comment
Posted by: chris walker, west kilbride on 9:49pm Tue 13 May 08
I always remember rushing out of the office in the middle of the afternoon to read the stop press in the Evening Citizen. The first verdict that the jury brought in was that on Anne Kneilands and it was 'not guilty'. I was little more than a boy at the time and I thought this might mean that Peter Manuel would "get off" with the other murders. He didn't of course and he was executed. But for a half-an-hour at least, as I recall, I thought Manuel was going to "get off" with the lot of them. I also remember vividly the story that the police "knew" that Mr Watt not Manuel had murdered the Watt family. This hinged on how quickly Mr Watt could get up and down, or down and up, from his hotel on the Crinan Canal to carry out the murders in Glasgow. Furthermore, so the story went, Watt had paid Manuel to execute the Watt family in their beds. Glasgow is still a helluva place for rumours. Only tonight STV announced that a 'Chris Walker' had won two tickest for tomorrow's game. Before you ask, I'm "not guilty".
I always remember rushing out of the office in the middle of the afternoon to read the stop press in the Evening Citizen. The first verdict that the jury brought in was that on Anne Kneilands and it was 'not guilty'. I was little more than a boy at the time and I thought this might mean that Peter Manuel would "get off" with the other murders. He didn't of course and he was executed. But for a
half-an-hour at least, as I recall, I thought Manuel was going to "get off" with the lot of them. I also remember vividly the story that the police "knew" that Mr Watt not Manuel had murdered the Watt family. This hinged on how quickly Mr Watt could get up and down, or down and up, from his hotel on the Crinan Canal to carry out the murders in Glasgow. Furthermore, so the story went, Watt had paid Manuel to execute the Watt family in their beds. Glasgow is still a helluva place for rumours. Only tonight STV announced that a 'Chris Walker' had won two tickest for tomorrow's game. Before you ask, I'm "not guilty".
Quote | Report this post
Add your comment
Please note: to publish your comment you must be registered on this site. If you are already registered, please enter your details below.
Not registered?
Email:
Password: