The Essex Murders: Private investigators say new evidence ‘points to different killer’ in 1995 Range Rover shooting
It has been almost 30 years since one of the UK’s most notorious murder cases – the gangland shooting of three drug dealers whose bodies were found in a Range Rover parked up on farmland in a small village in Essex.
Patrick Tate, 37, Tony Tucker, 38, and Craig Rolfe, 26, were each shot in the head at point-blank range in December 1995.
In 1998, two men, Michael Steele and Jack Whomes, were jailed for the triple murder that became known as one of the UK’s biggest gangland executions.
Search for any of these names online – or type in Essex Boys Murders, Rettendon Murders, Range Rover Murders, and you’ll get thousands of results – news stories, details of appeals, films based on the stories of those involved, interviews with associates, commentary on internet forums, and social media pages set up by armchair detectives.
The killings inspired films in The Rise of the Footsoldier franchise, as well as the 2000 film Essex Boys, starring Sean Bean.
Michael Steele and Jack Whomes (below) were jailed in 1998
Essex Police say the case has been “exhaustively examined” over the years – but despite the convictions, many believe there is more to the story.
Now, private investigators from the firm TM Eye, who began looking into the case in 2020, have told Sky News they have uncovered evidence that casts doubt on the convictions. They believe the real killer has walked free.
The investigation, headed by David McKelvey, a former Met Police detective, will be featured in an upcoming three-part series, The Essex Murders, on Sky Documentaries.
“We would not be doing this if we had any doubts at all,” he told Sky News. “We’re career detectives, we’ve put bad people in prison.
“We would not be trying to get anybody out of prison who we didn’t believe was innocent. Jack Whomes and Michael Steele did not do this.”
Mr McKelvey says the pair were involved in drugs offences, for which they should have been punished.
“But they did not carry out this murder,” he added. “And the important point here is: they didn’t do it, someone else did – and that person or those people are still on the streets.”
The original investigation
TM Eye private investigator David McKelvey. Pic: Sky UK
The bodies of Mr Tate, Mr Tucker and Mr Rolfe were discovered in the Range Rover on farmland in Rettendon, near Chelmsford, on the morning of 7 December 1995.
The scene provided little in the way of forensic evidence, according to reports from the time.
All three men were known by Essex Police; part of the reason the case became so high-profile was that Mr Tucker ran security for Raquels, the nightclub where Leah Betts had taken the ecstasy tablet that led to her death less than a month before the murders.
The TM Eye investigators question Essex Police’s timeline of the night of the murders, alleging the shooting happened at about midnight, rather than just before 7pm – a farmer who heard gunshots backs this in the programme – as well as mobile phone evidence presented during the trial.
But they believe the case against Whomes and Steele rested largely on the testimony of a man called Darren Nicholls.
The word of a ‘supergrass’
In May 1996, the man then known as Darren Nicholls was arrested on suspicion of possessing a large amount of cannabis that had been imported into Clacton from the Netherlands.
While being questioned by police over this case, he told officers it was Steele and Whomes who were behind the Essex Murders and that he had been the getaway driver.
Nicholls, who said the three men had been killed over a bad drugs deal, became known as a “supergrass”; he was placed under witness protection and given a new identity after giving evidence against the pair.
“Our start point was: did Darren Nicholls tell the truth?” Mr McKelvey said. “If he told the truth, then Michael Steele and Jack Whomes are guilty and that’s the end of it. But as we’ve delved into it all a different story has emerged.”
Albert Patrick, another former detective who worked on the private investigation, says: “You have got to be ultra careful when you’re dealing with the evidence of another criminal against a criminal, as simple as that.”
The documentary includes interviews with associates of the three men who died, as well as interviews with experts and police officers who investigated the case.
Former detective Ivan Dibley, who investigated the case at the time, says the right men were jailed. Pic: Sky UK
Former detective superintendent Ivan Dibley admits physical evidence was “scant” and there was an element of Nicholls “saving his own skin”, but that his account had an “enormous” amount of detail; he says his evidence was examined thoroughly and “it was pretty clear that what he said was true”.
There is “no doubt in my mind” that the right men were convicted, he adds. But the TM Eye investigators spoke to criminals, who feature anonymously in the documentary, who tell a different story.
‘A professional assassination’
One man, known as Witness A in the series, maintains the murders were linked to organised crime in east London and that the three men were actually killed over part of the proceeds of a £495,000 armed robbery allegedly being stolen by Mr Tucker.
This man was interviewed by Essex Police shortly after the deaths, the TM Eye investigators say, but his account was not taken any further.
This is the word of another self-confessed criminal – one of the various different accounts of what happened, from people who could have ulterior motives.
The investigators say they have to be cautious, but believe they were able to corroborate this account.
“Because of our backgrounds, our history and our knowledge of organised crime, particularly in east London, we were able to get behind that,” Mr McKelvey says. “We were able to identify officers who dealt with him, criminals who knew him, and his account is compelling.”
Towards the end of their investigation, they spoke to another anonymous witness who tells them he organised the hit.
The target was Mr Tucker, he says, because of the armed robbery. Mr Tate and Mr Rolfe were “collateral damage… wrong place, wrong time”.
“When you put the whole thing together, you had serious and organised crime behind this,” Mr McKelvey says. “You had a professional assassin, a sophisticated assassination.”
The Rise of the Footsoldier
Carlton Leach features in The Essex Murders documentary series. Pic: Sky UK
One person featured in the series is former football hooligan Carlton Leach, a friend and associate of Mr Tucker whose autobiography inspired The Rise of the Footsoldier film franchise.
He tells Sky News he wanted to take part to “speak up” for his friend. While he admits his lifestyle “wasn’t right”, he says there were “a lot of people living in that world, making money [from drugs]”.
He says Mr Tucker had told him of a “meet” with Steele. “So I do know that Mickey Steele was there or involved in how they got there. I can’t say for definite, because I wasn’t there… but I do know he was part of it. As far as I’m concerned, whether he pulled the trigger or not, he was part of the parcel that killed them.”
Read more:
Rise of the Footsoldier origins: The story behind cult Essex films
However, he believes there was at least one other person involved. “I don’t think the person who’s actually killed them has ever been caught, who pulled the trigger. And I think whoever did kill them was an assassin and had done it before… it wasn’t just a random shooting, it wasn’t someone just someone running up to the car. It was a planned murder. And it was done professionally.”
Where are Whomes and Steele now?
Michael Steele and Jack Whomes leaving the High Court under armed guard in 2006, when the sentences were appealed
Since the convictions, the case has been taken to the Court of Appeal several times.
The appeals have been rejected and in 2006 Lord Justice Kay said there was no “element of unsafety” relating to the original convictions of both defendants.
The case has also been reviewed by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) and the decision was made in January 2023 not to refer the case back to the Court of Appeal.
Whomes, now 61, had his life sentence reduced in 2018 after making “exceptional progress” in prison and was approved for release under strict licence conditions in 2021, while Steele, 78, has a parole hearing in May.
What do Essex Police and the CCRC say?
The TM Eye investigators say they hope the documentary will encourage even more witnesses to come forward and that they believe the case should be reviewed by an independent police force.
A spokesperson for the CCRC said in a statement: “A comprehensive review has concluded there is no real possibility that the Court of Appeal would overturn these murder convictions.
“The decision notifications were shared with the applicants and their legal representatives.”
A spokesperson for Essex Police said there had been “an exhaustive” investigation into the murders and that the force welcomed the CCRC’s decision “as this case has been exhaustively examined over the last 27 years and there is no fresh evidence identified which would call the original verdicts into question”.
The Essex Murders starts at 9pm on 15 April on Sky Documentaries.
Environment Agency bosses have been accused of “failing” to tell a cross-party committee of peers about three large-scale illegal waste sites – including one that was recently exposed by Sky News.
Our investigation into waste crime in Wigan heard from residents who repeatedly complained to the Environment Agency that 20 to 30 lorries a day drove down their street last winter and dumped industrial amounts of waste.
The rubbish now sits at a staggering 25,000 tonnes. It burnt for nine days in July, and has seen local homes infested with rats and flies.
Since then, a similarly sized site in Kidlington near the River Cherwell in Oxfordshire sparked national outrage. One man has been arrested in connection with the dumping.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Epidemic’ of waste crime in Britain
Despite the scale of these two locations – which were well known to the Environment Agency – it neglected to name them when asked by the Lord’s Environment Committee’s inquiry into waste crime how many “significant” sites there were around the country.
Phil Davies and Steve Molyneux of the Environment Agency gave evidence on 17 September.
Just six sites were cited, but three more have been exposed in the past few weeks alone. These are Wigan, Kidlington and a mound of dumped waste in Wadborough.
Now, the Lords are worried there are more environmentally destructive locations the public aren’t aware of.
Read more:
A community plagued by 25,000 tonnes of illegal waste
Urgent action needed to stop fly-tipping by gangs, peers say
In a letter to the EA’s chair Alan Lovell and chief executive Philip Duffy, Baroness Sheehan, chair of the Environment and Climate Change Committee, said: “We are increasingly concerned that there may be other sites of a similarly large and environmentally damaging scale.”
She asked how much progress has been made to remove waste from the various sites, why restriction notices in places like Wigan weren’t served sooner – and for a full list of other sites of a similar size.
Baroness Sheehan also expressed her “disappointment” that these three new locations “were not deemed necessary to bring to the committee’s attention”, though she thanked journalists for “bringing these sites to the public attention”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
UK’s ‘biggest ecological disaster’
Her original report saw the Lords call for an independent “root and branch” inquiry into how waste crime is tackled. She said the crime, which costs the UK £1bn every year, has been “critically under-prioritised”.
Sky News has been investigating the scourge of waste crime all year, exposing how criminal gangs involved in drugs, weapons and people trafficking can make “millions” from illegally dumping waste.
In the summer, we tracked down a group of suspected organised fly-tippers who waved wads of cash on TikTok after dumping waste in the countryside.
It’s so lucrative, it was dubbed the “new narcotics” by a former head of the Environment Agency.
A new long-awaited child poverty strategy is promising to lift half a million children out of poverty by the end of this parliament – but critics have branded it unambitious.
The headline announcement in the government’s plan is the pledge to lift the two-child benefit cap, announced in Rachel Reeves’s budget last week.
It also includes:
• Providing upfront childcare support for parents on universal credit returning to work
• An £8m fund to end the placement of families in bed and breakfasts beyond a six-week limit
• Reforms to cut the cost of baby formula
• A new legal duty on councils to notify schools, health visitors, and GPs when a child is placed in temporary accommodation
Many of the measures have previously been announced.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Two-child cap ‘a real victory for the left’
The government also pointed to its plan in the budget to cut energy bills by £150 a year, and its previously promised £950m boost to a local authority housing fund, which it says will deliver 5,000 high-quality homes for better temporary accommodation.
Downing Street said the strategy would lift 550,000 children out of poverty by 2030, saying that would be the biggest reduction in a single parliament since records began.
But charities had been hoping for a 10-year strategy and argue the plan lacks ambition.
A record 4.5 million children (about 31%) are living in poverty in the UK – 900,000 more since 2010/11, according to government figures.
Phillip Anderson, the Strategic Director for External Affairs at the National Children’s Bureau (NCB), told Sky News: “Abolishing the two-child limit is a hell of a centre piece, but beyond that it’s mainly a summary of previously announced policies and commitments.
“The really big thing for me is it misses the opportunity to talk about the longer term. It was supposed to be a 10-year strategy, we wanted to see real ambition and ideally legally binding targets for reducing poverty.
“The government itself says there will still be around four million children living in poverty after these measures and the strategy has very little to say to them.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘A budget for benefits street’
‘Budget for benefits street’ row
The biggest measure in the strategy is the plan to lift the two-child benefit cap from April. This is estimated to lift 450,000 children out of poverty by 2030, at a cost of £3bn.
The government has long been under pressure from backbench Labour MPs to scrap the cap, with most experts arguing that it is the quickest, most cost-effective way to drive-down poverty this parliament.
The cap, introduced by Conservative chancellor George Osborne in 2017, means parents can only claim universal credit or tax credits for their first two children. It meant the average affected household losing £4,300 per year, the Institute for Fiscal Studies calculated in 2024.
The government argues that a failure to tackle child poverty holds back the economy, and young people at school, cutting their employment and earning prospects in later life.
However, the Conservatives argue parents on benefits should have to make the same financial choices about children as everyone else.
Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: “Work is the best way out poverty but since this government took office, unemployment has risen every single month and this budget for Benefits Street will only make the situation worse. “
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
OBR leak: This has happened before
‘Bring back Sure Start’
Lord Bird, a crossbench peer who founded the Big Issue and grew up in poverty, said while he supported the lifting of the cap there needed to be “more joined up thinking” across government for a longer-term strategy.
He has been pushing for the creation of a government ministry of “poverty prevention and cure”, and for legally binding targets on child poverty.
“You have to be able to measure yourself, you can’t have the government marking its own homework,” he told Sky News.
Lord Bird also said he was a “great believer” in resurrecting Sure Start centres and expanding them beyond early years.
The New Labour programme offered support services for pre-school children and their parents and is widely seen to have improved health and educational outcomes. By its peak in 2009-2010 there were 3,600 centres – the majority of which closed following cuts by the subsequent Conservative government.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Lord Bird on the ‘great distraction’ from child poverty
PM to meet families
Sir Keir Starmer’s government have since announced 1,000 Best Start Family Hubs – but many Labour MPs feel this announcement went under the radar and ministers missed a trick in not calling them “Sure Starts” as it is a name people are familiar with.
The prime minister is expected to meet families and children in Wales on Friday, alongside the Welsh First Minister, to make the case for his strategy and meet those he hopes will benefit from it.
Several other charities have urged ministers to go further. Both Crisis and Shelter called for the government to unfreeze housing benefit and build more social rent homes, while the Children’s Commissioner for England, Dame Rachel de Souza, said that “if we are to end child poverty – not just reduce it” measures like free bus travel for school-age children would be needed.
The strategy comes after the government set up a child poverty taskforce in July 2024, which was initially due to report back in May. The taskforce’s findings have not yet been published – only the government’s response.
Sir Keir said: “Too many children are growing up in poverty, held back from getting on in life, and too many families are struggling without the basics: a secure home, warm meals and the support they need to make ends meet.
“I will not stand by and watch that happen, because the cost of doing nothing is too high for children, for families and for Britain.”
Nigel Farage has launched a tirade against the BBC after he was asked about claims he used racist and antisemitic language when he was at school, which he denied.
The Reform UK leader accused the broadcaster of “double standards”, pointing to its past television shows when he claimed the BBC “were very happy to use blackface”.
The outburst comes as he faces continued pressure over allegations he made racist and antisemitic comments while a pupil at top private school Dulwich College nearly 50 years ago.
Mr Farage was asked by the BBC about an interview his deputy, Richard Tice, gave on Thursday, in which he claimed those accusing his boss of racism were engaging in “made-up twaddle”.
The Reform leader said the framing of the question by the BBC interviewer had been “despicable”.
“I think to frame a question around the leader of Reform’s ‘relationship with Hitler’, which is how she framed it, was despicable, disgusting beyond belief,” he said.
“The double standards and hypocrisy of the BBC are absolutely astonishing.
“At the time I was alleged to have made these remarks, one of your most popular weekly shows was ‘The Black and White Minstrels’. The BBC were very happy to use blackface.”
He added: “I cannot put up with the double standards at the BBC about what I’m alleged to have said 49 years ago, and what you were putting out on mainstream content.
“So I want an apology from the BBC for virtually everything you did during the 1970s and 80s.”
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage. Pic: PA
Turning to the substance of the allegations, Mr Farage read out a letter that he said was from someone who he went to school with.
He quotes the unnamed Jewish pupil as saying: “While there was plenty of macho, tongue-in-cheek schoolboy banter, it was humour. And yes, sometimes it was offensive […] but never with malice.
“I never heard him racially abuse anyone. If he had, he would have been reported and punished. He wasn’t.”
Mr Farage went on to quote the unnamed former school mate as saying claims from former pupils reported by the Guardian and BBC were “without evidence, except for belatedly politically-dubious recollections from nearly half a century ago”.
He said the former pupil who had written to him had described the culture in the 1970s and at Dulwich College as “very different”, and “lots of boys said things they’d regret today”.
Read More:
How record-breaking Reform UK donor Christopher Harborne made his millions
Reform UK gets record £9m donation from ex-Tory donor
Mr Farage has been under pressure since mid-November when reports from former classmates of alleged racist comments surfaced. The Guardian claims it has spoken to 20 former classmates who recall such language.
Challenged in an interview on 24 November if the claims were true, Mr Farage said: “No, this is 49 years ago by the way, 49 years ago. Have I ever tried to take it out on any individual on the basis of where they’re from? No.”
He added: “I would never, ever do it in a hurtful or insulting way. It’s 49 years ago. It’s 49 years ago. I had just entered my teens. Can I remember everything that happened at school? No, I can’t. Have I ever been part of an extremist organisation or engaged in direct, unpleasant, personal abuse, genuine abuse, on that basis? No.”
Challenged again about whether he had racially abused anyone, Farage responded: “No, not with intent.”
A Conservative spokesman said Mr Farage was too busy defending himself to “defend democracy” from election postponements announced by Labour.
“Nigel Farage just called a press conference and used it to rant at journalists over historic allegations of racism and antisemitism – allegations he has just admitted are true.
“Farage is too busy furiously defending himself to defend democracy from the Labour Party’s elections delays.
“Reform’s one-man band is in chaos once again.”
Labour Party chair Anna Turley said: “Nigel Farage can’t get his story straight. It really shouldn’t be this difficult to say whether he racially abused people in the past.
“So far, he’s claimed he can’t remember, that it’s not true, that he never ‘directly’ abused anyone, that he was responsible for ‘offensive banter’, and deflected by saying other people were racist too.
“Instead of shamelessly demanding apologies from others, Nigel Farage should be apologising to the victims of his alleged appalling remarks.”
She added that Reform UK was “simply not fit for high office”.
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024