True Crime All The Time - Edward Cairney and Avril Jones

Episode Date: July 7, 2025

In the late ‘90s, Margaret Fleming was living under the care of Edward Cairney and Avril Jones, friends of her deceased father. In October 2016, the police launched an investigation when concerns were raised about a benefits claim made by Avril on Margaret’s behalf. Join Mike and Gibby as they discuss Edward Cairney and Avril Jones. The police found no trace of Margaret and learned she hadn’t been seen or heard from in years. It took a very long time, but when police finally developed their theory, it was dastardly. You can help support the show at patreon.com/truecrimeallthetimeVisit the show's website at truecrimeallthetime.com for contact, merchandise, and donation informationAn Emash Digital productionSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello everyone and welcome to episode 442 of the True Crime All the Time podcast. I'm Mike Ferguson and with me as always is my partner in true crime. Mike Gibson, give me, how are you? Hey, I'm good. How about yourself? I'm doing great. Yeah.

Had another birthday. Yeah, you look older. I do look older. Feel a little older. Yeah. Notice it this morning when I got a... It shows. It does.

It does. It does. Degon time. Let's go ahead and give our Patreon shoutouts. We had Allie. Hey, Allie. Debra Broom. What's going on?

Jenny Day. What up, Day. Stephanie Harrington. Hey, from the Harrington's. Ace. Trish Maslakowski. Easy for you to say. I'm trying.

Hey, Trish. Kai. What's up, Kai? Jen Silvius. Ah, hey, Jen. Julia Longoria. Julia. Who you said on Patreon was probably related to Eva.

Yeah, I think so. Robin Jorday jumped out at our highest level. Hey, Robin. And last but not least, Robert Garvey. Garcia. Hey, Garcia. So we appreciate that new support. And then if we go back into the vault, this week, we selected Tuesday Craythorn.

Yeah, you were saying the name wrong. You're like, Tuesday. That's how you were saying it. I don't know how in the world you were pronouncing it. But we also had a great PayPal donation, a sizable donation from Robert Vindiddy. Hey, thanks, Robert. So we appreciate all the support. We do.

Gibbs, we have an episode out right now. on true crime all the time on salt, where we're talking about Mary Rogers, known by many New Yorkers, as the beautiful cigar girl. In this case, goes back to like 1841. Wow. Mary was found in the Hudson River. You remember 1841? I don't. That's good. I don't. I just want to check. Make sure you. Not that old. Yeah. I'm old, but I'm not that old. Yeah. You used to the car smoker? You probably aren't. No. I've never seen you smoke a cigarette. I was going to say, you have been around me for years and years and years. I didn't know if you're one of those quality cigar smokers.

Don't you think you would have seen me light up a cigar at some point in time? No one's around. You break one out, going to the basement bathroom and sitting there. In my velvet robe. In your velvet robe. With my single malt scotch. Well, there you go. No, that's not me.

All right, buddy. Are you ready to get into this episode of True Crime all the time? I'm ready. We're talking about Edward Kearney and Avril Jones. In the late 1990s, Margaret Fleming was living under the care of Edward and Averill, who were friends of her deceased father. In October 2016, the police launched an investigation when concerns were raised about a benefits claim. Made by Avril on Margaret's behalf, the police found no trace of Margaret and learned that she hadn't been seen or heard from in years. Margaret Fleming was born on November 1st, 1980.

She was the only daughter of Derek Fleming and Margaret Crookshanks. She grew up in Port Glasgow, Inver Clyde, Scotland. Oh, Scotland. Yeah. Just another chance for you to do your accent. Maybe, but that's what the Fergus Clon is. Yeah? Yep.

Derek and Margaret were married for several years before their daughter was born and stayed together for her. People do that. Yeah. I think a lot of people do that. Actually, you hear that after they eventually do get divorced, that it came out that the relationship maybe wasn't great for a long time, but they stayed together for the kids until the kids got to be a certain age.

Why are you looking at me when you're saying that? Did you do that? I did. Yeah, did you? Okay. Margaret's mother indicated that she struggled to bond with her daughter and liked her, quote, well enough until Margaret began to show physical aggression between ages three and seven. Her father initially questioned paternity, but around age four, he took a more active interest

in Margaret when he realized she had additional needs. I like her well enough. Yeah, such a strange statement. I mean, it's obviously not a very caring statement. And then liked her even less when she started to show signs of physical aggression. But then also her dad questioned the paternity. So either, you know, he didn't want to be a dad or there was some other things going on where he thought maybe somebody else could be the dad. You know your partner or spouse loves when you do that?

Hey, uh, are you sure it's mine? Yeah. Again, everybody's relationship is different. That's true. They could have had one of those, you know, put your keys in the bowl type of party every Friday night. I thought you didn't do that anymore. I don't do that anymore. Yeah. I never did that. Oh, now that's, you never done it. Okay. But it's also interesting that her dad started to take more interest once, you know, it was realized that she had special needs. Now, Margaret wasn't formally diagnosed with a learning disability, but needed support throughout. her life. Her medical records list the doctor's suspicion that she had Soto's syndrome, a rare

genetic disorder, but she wasn't officially diagnosed with it. This was partly the basis for her receiving benefit. But there are some inconsistencies in Margaret's records. Some records state that she had developmental difficulties, while others said she was within a normal range. Social work services arranged a nursery placement at Margaret's mother's request so she could improve her ability to communicate and socialize with others. Important functions. Yeah, I mean, it's very difficult to kind of get along in the world, right? When you do not have the ability to socialize with others, communicate with others,

get along with others. Margaret attended mainstream primary and secondary school. her father was the one who pushed for her to go to a mainstream school and sought to understand her condition and her ability to learn. But she struggled with reading and writing and her progress was slow. Now, I think that would be the downside of going to what in the articles was termed a mainstream school. You know, if you're not getting specialized instruction or specialized attention, And, you know, someone could really fall behind quickly, struggle. Some of Margaret's teachers thought it might be better to have her in specialist provision

because she could have been at the top of her class, which might have given her more confidence. Probably would have. It probably would have. And let's face it, confidence is important. It is. I know when I was at top of my class, it gave me all type of confidence. Well, you were homeschooled. So I don't know if those certificates and ribbons and things really mean what you think they do.

I just had to beat out my little brother. Valedictorian. My big brother was not in the competition. So I just had to beat out my little bro. In a 1995 report, Margaret's teacher Elizabeth Brown wrote, Margaret Fleming has moderate learning difficulties. She works fairly well to her ability, but needs written instructions, set out simple. and gone over verbally.

Brown would later testify per the BBC. If you left Margaret alone on her own, she would do very little. You had to prod her to do the work. Her marks were all at the very bottom end of the school. And again, that's tough. It is. I mean, I think it's very easy to see

that she was struggling mightily in school. Teacher Elaine Moore said she was quite isolated. her and her dad were a wee unit. She was concerned about him and he was concerned about her. Those who knew Margaret agreed she tended to blend into the background. She didn't have many friends and may have been subjected to low level bullying, according to one report. And that wouldn't surprise me at all. I mean, I know we're over in the UK, but I don't think it matters, you know, where you go.

bullying is going to happen. It will. And does. And, you know, if you have someone like Margaret, who is maybe behind the rest of the class, seems to me that maybe she would be a target for some people. Probably an easy target, unfortunately. Margaret was two years old when her mother first filed for divorce. This application was withdrawn.

But Derek and Margaret Crickshanks, finalized their divorce in January 1993 after 20 years of marriage. Derek had primary custody and Margaret had visitation rights. She visited her daughter regularly. Derek got engaged to a woman named Jean McSherry. Margaret had a good relationship with her dad's fiancee and her extended family. It's a little different, right? It's not the norm that the dad gets primary custody.

it does happen, and obviously it did happen in this situation. I wonder how much of that, Gibbs, was Margaret not wanting primary custody? Could have been a pretty sizable factor. I mean, she said it, right? Liked her well enough until she started showing signs of aggression. So when it came down to it, you know, she might have just given up. She might not have contested at all. Right.

Margaret and her father became homeless due to a house fire, so they moved in with her paternal grandparents. Derek was extremely protective of Margaret, and he didn't want to upset her so much so that he didn't tell her when he was diagnosed with terminal cancer. Oh, that's rough. That is very rough. Something that a lot of people have to go through, both with being diagnosed with terminal cancer. and then on the other end, you know, being a family member who has to find this out. Derek's condition deteriorated by October 20th, 1995. When Margaret's mother took her to the social work office in Inverclyde,

they had arranged a meeting to discuss Margaret's behavioral problems, which included arguing with her grandparents. The referral notes per the BBC, Margaret does not know why her father is in hospital, and is afraid it is something serious. Wow. Obviously, we know it is. Sure.

I get it. He doesn't want to upset her, but it seems like she was upset in not knowing. I'll say the not knowing's having an impact too. Yeah. So maybe there was no way around upsetting her. The report noted that Margaret was always with her father and felt rejected by her mother. The author of the report wrote,

feel like Margaret is rather lonely, an isolated girl who is living with elderly grandparents. Margaret appears to be surrounded by a great deal of uncertainty and ill health. How can you not feel for this little girl? Yay, yay, I know, I do. Just five days later, Margaret's father passed away from cancer, and Margaret was devastated and would soon go through another big change in her life. Derek had expressed his worry that his parents, were too elderly to care for Margaret, he told his fiancee Jean McSharrick that if anything happened

to him, his friends Edward Kearney and Avril Jones would look after Margaret. Edward and Avril ran a local hotel that Margaret and her father frequented. So tough position for Derek, right? He knows he's going to die. I think he also knows that Margaret living with her mother was not going to be the answer. And I'm assuming his fiance probably wasn't wanting to take on that responsibility. But apparently he had some friends that said they would. I mean, what are you going to do in that situation? What's the alternative? Yeah, it's definitely a tough situation. At Derek's funeral, Margaret was approached by Edward, who said he would provide care for Margaret if she ever needed help. and Margaret's mother was grateful for their help.

At first, Margaret lived with her mother full time, but she gradually started spending more and more time with Edward and Avril until she was spending up to two weeks at a time with them. Margaret Crikshanks would later testify that her daughter was difficult to handle. After losing her father, she said, as quoted by the BBC, she would come back from school when I'd say, What were you doing? Her temper would be up and she would batter me.

Although she had outbursts of aggression at home, she was quiet at school and needed constant encouragement from teachers. In November 1995, Margaret and her mother met with social worker Denise Monroe to get additional support. Monroe noticed the strained relationship between Margaret and her mother. She supported Margaret until she went on maternity leave in July 1996. By this time, Margaret was enrolled in a life's life. skills course at James Watt College in Greenock. Fellow students said she enjoyed her time there because she got to have new experiences and go on trips out of town.

Margaret ultimately did not complete her course. In August 1996, Margaret Crookshanks told the social work department that her daughter's behavior had deteriorated, but she received no further support because no one had replaced a social worker who had gone on leave. So eventually Gibbs, Margaret was living with Edward and Avril full time. Margaret Crookshank's relationship with the caretakers deteriorated when she alleged that Edward attacked her. It's going to put a rock in that relationship. Yeah, I mean, it would if it happened.

But it's an allegation. On November 26, 1997, Margaret went to their house in Inverkip to tell Edward, she was, wanted her daughter to come home. After he assaulted her, Avril brought Margaret down from her attic bedroom and asked where she wanted to live. Margaret said she wanted to stay. I know it's tough because both of these individuals are named Margaret. They are, yeah. But the mother Margaret called the police, who performed a welfare check and said her daughter was fine. She stopped visiting and received a letter from her daughter saying she didn't want to see her anymore. And, To be honest with you, that doesn't surprise me.

This is a relationship that did not seem to be good, really from a very early age. I'll say pretty early on. Margaret's father's ex-fiance also said she was treated aggressively when she visited and tried to maintain a relationship with Margaret. Like Margaret Crookshanks, she reluctantly withdrew from Margaret's life. So it sounds like it's kind of hard to do. Well, and does, you know, her account maybe back up or lend a little bit of validity to Margaret Crookshank's account? Yeah, I think it does.

It's not because it's not just her saying it. You know, the ex-fiance said something very simple. According to a report by the Inverclyde government, the female and child unit at the Greenock police station had already received allegations. that Margaret's paternal grandfather was being exploited by Edward Kearney, but there were limited efforts to follow up and the case was closed. And if that was going on, it'd be a tough position for the grandfather. Yeah, we don't know at this point exactly what being exploited means. But if it was brought to the authority's attention and they really didn't look into it

or didn't do anything about it, yeah, that's tough. But we're also getting Gibbs kind of a picture of Edward here. You know, allegations that he was physically abusive, allegations that he was exploiting Margaret's grandfather. Margaret saw her doctor for the last time. In October 1999, he thought Margaret was socially and educationally isolated and referred her to a psychologist. Dr. Allen Smith visited before Christmas,

but all attempts to contact Margaret to arrange an appointment were unsuccessful. And I can't help but wonder, you know, how much of that was Edward Cairney, right? It seemed like he was trying to keep pretty much anybody in her life away from her. He was trying to isolate her. And he was doing a good job at it. Right. You know, her mom, her dad's ex-fiance, now we have a, psychologist who is trying to get in touch with her.

The last confirmed siding of Margaret took place on December 17th, 1999. Edward and Averill brought her with them to visit Averill's brother, Richard, at his new home. Richard Jones remembered Margaret playing with his two children while he moved items into the house. But Margaret didn't join the Jones family for Christmas dinner the following week. on January 5th, 2000. Averill told her mother that Margaret ran off. And that would be really strange, right?

This is a person who at least in some instances had been coming around the family, right, with Edward and Averill. And then all of a sudden, she doesn't come for Christmas dinner. And Averill says, well, she ran off. Okay. What does that mean? Are you looking for her or that's it?

Yeah, she ran off. Whatever. After January 2000, Edward and Avril secluded themselves from the outside world and their home fell into disrepair. But here's the thing. They continued collecting government benefits for Margaret for years. Oh, fraudsters. A benefits investigator attempted to visit Margaret in June 2012, but was told by Avril that Margaret wouldn't see her. The investigator said a social worker should have gone.

gone to the totally chaotic house to follow up on Margaret's welfare, but no one did. This is 12 years. Wow. That has gone by and nobody has followed up until a benefits investigator comes out to check up on Margaret. So they were receiving funds all that time. Yeah. Authorities became suspicious once again in October 2016.

When concerns were raised about a benefits claim made by Avril Jones on Margaret's behalf, Margaret would have been 35 years old at this point. So there's some suspicion in 2012, but it doesn't crop up again until more than four years later. So they just keep continuing to pay out these benefits. That's nuts. Even though nobody has made contact with her, you would think that there would be, be some follow-up. Yeah, some requirement that, hey, you got to come in, do a little interview. Or we come to the door. We have to talk to you or something. Avril filled out an application

for personal independence payments. She wrote that Margaret needs constant care, harmed herself, and was caught eating out of a dog bowl. A social worker called the offer help and was told Margaret had not been to the doctor, despite claims that she had picked a hole in her head. Sounds gross. Yeah. But these are claims being made by Avril, right? Margaret's eating out of the dog bowl.

She's harming herself. She's picked a hole in her head. Police Skyland launched a missing person's investigation. On October 28, 2016, officers came to search the house. They had to clear a path through garbage. and other items just to get upstairs. Oh, man.

Horder. But Margaret was nowhere to be found. Yeah, I mean, it sounds like a real mess in there, like an episode of hoarders. Officers noticed that Edward and Avril did not appear concerned that Margaret was missing and they were very evasive under questioning. I'm sure they didn't appear all that concerned. 16 years has gone by.

Yeah, it's a big chunk of time. And they didn't seem too concerned all the way back in 2000 when they told their family that Margaret ran off. Edward and Avril were unable to help the police obtain a DNA profile. They did hand over a sweater, t-shirt, socks, and a stuffed animal. They claimed belonged to Margaret, but these items had no traces of Margaret's DNA on them. So not helpful at all. No, but they're making it seem as though they're being helpful. Yeah.

officers only had Margaret's DNA because of a routine blood sample, taken shortly after she was born. Police would compare the DNA to a number of unidentified bodies and body parts across the UK, but there was no match. Four days later, the police returned to start a detailed search of the home. They cleared each room individually and set up a mobile lap in the garden to process items. once a room was empty, it was sprayed with luminal. One detective told the BBC, it was so detailed, they recovered two scabs from a bedroom.

Okay. We examined them for DNA and it came back that they were both avarles. I mean, I am picturing a real shithole here. What it sounded like. I mean, you got scabs that are uncovered after, you know, you move this mountain of debris. Yeah. Room by room. I mean,

tough job for, you know, these investigators or the authorities who had to do this. Investigators noted that Margaret's former attic bedroom

had no bed, no carpet, and the walls were knocked down into the eaves. Strange. Yeah, I mean, I think you can look at it

a couple different ways. It had been 16 years. So, you know, is it plausible that at, at some point in time. They got rid of the bed or, you know, whatever was constituting her bedroom.

And then I think the other thing you have to contemplate is, did she ever have a bedroom at all? Did they ever set one up for? Maybe not. A lot of cases like this, they don't. Well, especially if this was not thought to be long term at all, right? If this was thought to be very short term. But everything in the house. suggested only two people live there.

The last known photo of Margaret was taken in March 1999. In Avril's diaries and calendars, the last reference to Margaret was in January 2000. Officers found a Christmas card book in which Averill listed cards sent and received. There was a check by Margaret's name in 1997, 1998, and 1999, but not after that. as the police looked into records and obtained witness statements,

they realized Margaret had not been seen since December of 1999. Wow. I think my first thought is, you know, how does this happen? How is it that no one realizes that this person hasn't been seen for 18 years? I think there are a number of factors, right, playing into it. Her mother didn't seem to be, you know, extremely caring. I'll say that. I don't want to denigrate her too much, but she didn't want to be a huge part of her life.

From day one. From day one. But she was also isolated by these two individuals. The ex-fiancee was isolated. Her dad had died. And her grandparents were, you know, probably pretty elderly at this point. And so I don't know who else would have been looking for her. I still go back to like, you know, the benefits people, the social workers.

It seemed like somebody should have come out during that 12 year period from 2000 to 2012. And then even after 2012, it's like, okay, well, we can't talk to her. And nothing happens for another four years. It just doesn't seem like a great system. Definitely flawed. Additional statements detailed Margaret's life with Karen and Jones and the drastic punishments she received. Averill's brother recalled driving up to the home in April 1999

and seeing Margaret locked in her room with tubes on her arms. She was wailing and dragging her fingers down the window. They decided not to go into the house that day. Good choice. Yeah, I get it. You realize something is going on that you may not want to be a part of. From 1999 to 2016, Averill Jones claimed 182,000 pounds of benefits for Margaret. That's a chunk of change.

That is. Edward and Averill repeated their claim that Margaret had left their home in January 2000 and came back occasionally to collect benefits. They presented three typed letters posted on January 9th in January 13th, 2000. Detective showed the typed letters to Margaret's former English teacher in secondary school who didn't think Margaret would have been capable of writing those letters. So number one, they're typed. Yeah.

Which is to me always a little strange. Suspicious. Because obviously that kind of rules out any type of handwriting. analysis, but we mentioned, right, the troubles that she was having in school. So you go back to some of her teachers and they're like, oh, there's no way that she would have written this. The police searched for six months and did a full excavation of Edward and Avril's garden. Officers launched a proof of life investigation while building a case against Edward and Avril. They contacted every police force, health board,

doctor's office, bank, and local authority in the UK. But they couldn't find any record of Margaret. There was also no evidence of calls or texts between Margaret and her caretakers. And I think that's important, right? Averill was making this claim that Margaret took off, but she came back regularly to maybe pick up her money. because she's going to have to explain this $182,000. Right.

Even if Margaret's okay and really did run off. Right. Then why were you collecting these payments on her? Well, it's because I was giving them to her. That's what Averill said. Sure. But the other thing that I'm thinking Gibbs is they're trying to build a case against these two.

But I can imagine it would be pretty tough. Nobody. How are you going? going to prove that this person is not alive, didn't run off, and, you know, is in another country, living under a different name. That's the tough part, I think. If you're talking about murder or something along those lines, investigators also visited almost 50 possible matches to Margaret, but none of them were

hurt. The circumstances around Margaret's disappearance were so mysterious. that at one point, the police asked Edward and Avril if Margaret even existed. I think to them, there was no evidence she was ever there, really. Now, there was family who said they had seen her there and things like that. But like we talked about, right? At the time, there was not enough evidence to charge the couple. Even though I'm thinking police deep down had this suspicion that something terrible happened.

Yeah, I think they smelled something rotten. They just didn't know how to prove it. In October 2017, Edward Kearney made a series of strange claims in interviews with journalists. For example, in an interview with journalist Suzanne Allen, when asked if they'd heard from Margaret, Edward said, oh, yes, she's alive and working as a gangmaster in Poland. Okay. First of all, what is a gangmaster? They're a master of gangs. Is that like the head gangster or?

Suzanne Allen wrote, some of the things Kearney said about Margaret were unrepeatable, unkind, and distasteful. Okay, so he was bad-mouthing her as well. But that doesn't surprise me all that much. You know, I didn't get a real good vibe of this Edward Kearney character.

Being a stand-up type of guy. No, it didn't seem like it. Edward and Averill were, were arrested on October 25th, 2017 at the Glasgow train station, they were attempting to travel to London with 3,500 pounds worth of cash. Now, could you take 3,500 pounds with you on a holiday to London? Maybe. Could you also be making a getaway? I guess 3,500 pounds is probably and not all that much in 2017. Yeah, that was probably similar to like maybe $3,000 here.

But, you know, it's a lot of pennies too, you know, pounds to pennies, pennies to pound. You know, if you're in for one, you got the other or something like that. I think there is a saying, not exactly that, but something like that. Yeah, I don't know what the conversion rate was back then. I don't think you do either. you're just making stuff up, but I appreciate the effort. Edward was interviewed by the police on October 26, 2017, prior to being charged with murder.

He claimed he saw Margaret in London just 10 days earlier. Prior to that, he claimed he saw her at a Starbucks in London in November 2016. Very specific. Yeah. Yeah. That's either the old Starbucks. Right. Starbucks in November.

And then just 10 days. prior to being interviewed in 2017, right? He saw her. But I go back to the communications, right? We talked about it. They checked out calls, texts. There was none of them. So if she really was coming by to get payments,

don't you think there would be at least some calls or tech saying, hey, just want to make sure you're there, I'm stopping by? Yeah, you think there'd be some type. at some point. Right. So if you have none of that, it's very suspicious. The murder trial started in the late spring of 2019. Both defendants were charged with murder, fraud, and other charges related to the concealment of Margaret's disappearance. But remember, they have not found Margaret or her remains. So that is going to be a struggle for the prosecution, or at least, you know, an obstacle.

Yeah, nobody. Margaret's mother, Margaret Crookshanks, testified that she last saw her daughter on November 26, 1997. When she was summoned there by Edward, she told the couple she wanted Margaret to come home. Margaret testified, as quoted by the BBC, he started to assault me. He banged me up against a wardrobe and threw me over a chair and said he wanted me out of the house and he spat in my face. It was a surprise. I can imagine that would be a surprise being assaulted like that. Yeah. On top of that, being spat in your face. Avril was in the room when the assault

took place. Margaret was then brought down and asked where she wanted to live. According to her mother, she said, I think she was a bit nervous. And she turned around and said she wanted to stay there. there was nothing I could do about it. Margaret described how she requested a welfare check and received a letter from her daughter. She testified that she thought she saw Margaret and Edward outside a store about two months after the assault. But she did say it could have been more than two years later. Averill Jones's mother, Florence, testified that the last time she remembered seeing Margaret was at her anniversary celebration on March 31, 1999. not. Margaret was not there at Christmas. As we talked about, she spoke to Avril on January 5th,

2000. And that's when Avril told her that Margaret had taken off. And I said at Gibbs, I really didn't want to denigrate, you know, Margaret's mother. She said in court, there was nothing I could do about it. Now, she did request a welfare check, but what did she do after that? Did she do anything for the next 16, 17 years. Doesn't appear so. Not that we know of. Yeah. And again, it's tough to cast blame, but if that's your daughter and you really do care about

her, we've seen the links that people will go to to find their kids. I'm just not sure what links she actually went to. Pretty limited. It seems that way. Now, when you talk about some people in Averill's family, well, I mean, they were told that Margaret Rannell. Is that believable? Maybe it was based on some of her behavior, some of the things they had witnessed.

I don't know. Maybe they just didn't feel comfortable questioning it either. Yeah. And maybe they weren't, you know, at the home. Sounds like nobody was at the home. Edward and Avril made sure of that. I mean, that's kind of a red flag, I think. But it could be.

But if they really were hoarders and this house was as bad as, as was described. Is this a place where you would want to actually go? No. I don't even have enough room to entertain anyway. No, you probably had no desire to go over there and weighed through mounds of whatever,

scabs and things like that. Yeah. Jacqueline Cahill, who taught Margaret's high school English class, testified that in 2016, the police showed her typed letters, allegedly written by Margaret dated January 9th and January 13th, 2000. She said she didn't think Margaret was capable of writing these letters because she struggled

with writing and reading. She testified a number of difficult words in the letters are correctly spelled. And there's a stream of consciousness in the writing. Margaret could have written a hundred words with short sentences and maybe one idea. I would be doubtful about Margaret using a phrase like stopped in your tracks. Her literacy skills were not great. And we've talked about this in other cases. You know,

you and I text back and forth quite a bit. I would know if someone was trying to impersonate you. Yeah. There would be, you know, too many sentences that were perfectly spelled. You know, ideas would be just completely

uniform and well clear and well thought out. I'd be like, who is this? There is no way this is Gibby. And if I somebody act like they were you and they were nice to me, I'd be like, all right, buddy. Who is? This can't be for you. Morag Deegan from the Department of Work and Pensions testified

that she visited Edward and Avril on June 18th, 2012. After Margaret failed to show up for a medical check for her incapacial. capacity benefit, she spoke to Averill who said Margaret wouldn't talk to her due to her condition or mental health. Deegan reported that she was concerned about Margaret's living conditions and the fact that Margaret was not registered with a primary care physician. She told the court she expected a social worker would follow up. However, social worker Helen Morley testified we didn't get the client's consent and we basically closed it down as a referral. So to dead in.

And it seems like a real black hole in the system, right? There's there's something wrong with the system as it stood back then. My other thing was, okay, 2012 was the first time that a medical check was needed. It had been at the very least 12 years. That's really sad. What's the schedule for medical checks? We're really behind. We'll be there next century.

Forensic scientist James Hawkins testified that he tested the items submitted by Edward and Averill, which they claimed belonged to Margaret. Edward's DNA was found on the socks and his and Averill's DNA were found on the sweater. Found on or in the socks? It said on. Okay. So I don't know. Yeah. Okay.

Margaret's DNA was not found on any of the items, which was unexpected if Margaret actually handled those items regularly. Hawkins did find DNA that was not suitable for analysis, which could have belonged to Margaret. You could have. Yeah. I mean, you can't exclude it because you can't test it. So you can't 100% for sure say it wasn't hers. But, you know, we talked about, I think one of the things was like a stuffed animal. Yeah.

I mean, we know how kids drag around their stuffed animals. I know. They might sleep with them, slobber on them. You would expect at the very least to have to find some DNA on that. Kind of describes your whole furry outfit. Exactly. Costume, yeah. Detective Sergeant Scott Carson testified that he and Detective Constable Andrew Haggerty

traveled to London in November 2017, search for CCTV footage after Edward told them he met Margaret in London 10 days before he was arrested. They checked CCTV images from the junction of Tottingham Court Road in Oxford Street from October 16, 2017, and did not see Margaret. There was footage of Edward walking along Tottingham Court Road towards a bank. Tonningham must be a popular road because we've had that in other cases.

Yeah, it comes up a lot. Now, they didn't attempt to obtain footage from the alleged siting on November 4th, 2016, because neither officer had read or listened to this part of the interview prior to going to London. Edward had also claimed he saw Margaret on cheering crossroad,

but no CCTV footage was obtained because he didn't name any specific locations in that area. but I do think it's a it's a big deal right he says hey I saw her at Starbucks but they can't find any footage of her well you know it sounds like they did some pretty good research but to only see him in the tapes and not her I mean it's going to put some doubt in your head was she ever there yeah I mean I think the doubt was already there right that what they were saying was correct I think this just helped cement it probably in their minds. Hey, we found him in the footage, but not her.

So come on. The court also heard that almost 300 bone fragments were found in the garden of Edward and Averill's house, but none of those fragments were recognizably human in origin. Most of them were too small to identify. And no DNA was obtained from these bones. So is that saying, we're not saying they're not human, but we can't say they are human. Yeah.

But I, I'm, I'm kind of wondering why there was no DNA obtained from these bones. Also, where did the bones go? Yeah. Obviously, they don't have them because there's no way to go back and try to extract DNA. And the fact that they were too small to identify, what does that mean? I mean, it could have been that they were pulverized. They were burned. I have no idea what that means.

Former firefighter Paul Nielsen testified that he smelled burning human flesh coming from a bonfire at Edward and Aruel's home in 2008. The fire lasted for days. He testified that he was a firefighter for 14 years and had smelled burning flesh at fatal fires. It was a very distinctive smell. He would not easily forget. Well, that might answer your question right there. Were those fragments burnt bones?

But 2008 is eight years after, at least, after the last confirmed sighting of Margaret. Yeah. So where was she for the eight years if she was indeed burned in 2008? Yeah, that's true. However, the court heard that when Nissen spoke to the police in May 2017, he didn't mention that he smelled burning human flesh and instead said it was animal flesh. When asked why he didn't mention this, he testified, maybe it was just too incredible to believe. Yeah, I don't think you would ever be sitting down in your backyard going, you know what?

I smelled that before. That's human flesh. But, nah, I can't be. I could one of my neighbors be burning somebody human, you know? That doesn't make any sense. It's probably just some animal. Well, does your first, I mean, is your first instinct to believe that someone next door is burning human bodies? No.

No, probably not. But then it's also hard to testify that you smelled human flesh and you know what it smells like because you'd smelled it before at crime scene. Yeah. During the trial, Edward Kearney was cleared of fraud charges, but not Avril. Both defendants were cleared of abducting and assaulting Margaret by locking her in a room, cutting her hair, and binding her arms and wrists with tape. They were also cleared of attempting to defeat the ends of justice by disposing of her

personal effects and pretending she was alive. Edward Kearney gave evidence as the defense opened its case. He testified that he believed the girl's place was with her mom, but Margaret wanted to stay with him. He repeated his claim that she left in early 2000. According to Edward, this was the first time. She had gone and not come back after several hours. They believed she went to London. But they said Margaret always came back to collect her benefit money.

He also claimed that Margaret was at their house on October 28, 2016, the day that she was, the police showed up at his home, but she fled out the back door when she heard them. He explained, Margaret got highly upset. He said, I was saying the police are not here for you, but she was sure of it. Edward testified at first, I didn't understand the gravity of what was going on. I went back into the kitchen to get Margaret, but I knew she would be gone. He tried to tell officers where Margaret might have gone, but said, it was like talking to zombies. He testified that he met Margaret in London in 2017 and told her the police were looking for her and holding us to ransom. He said he last saw her in October 2017 and had no idea where she currently was.

Edward was asked if he harmed Margaret and said, no, I certainly have not. I am incapable of harming a kid or a lady. But I could kill a man, I guess is what he's saying. I guess. He also explained that they tried to stop Margaret from self-harming by putting cardboard tubes on her arms. That goes back maybe to what Avril's brother claims that they saw Margaret up in the window and she had like some type of tubes on her arms. Yeah. Maybe they were trying to explain that to keep her from hurting herself. He claimed he was telling the truth in his 2017 interviews where he claimed Margaret was a gangmaster.

You're looking it up, aren't you? I got to look this up, man. What is a gangmaster? What is a gang master? All right. So it says a person who organizes and oversees the work of casual manual laborers. Okay. All you casual workers.

Or like a supervisor or something like that. Gangmaster. I've never heard of that term. I guess you could say at one point you were a gangmaster. Yeah. You could say I'm acting as a gangmaster right now. As we sit here. On June 14, 2019,

Edward Kearney and Avril Jones were found guilty of murdering Margaret within three weeks of her final siting on December 17, 1999. Avril Jones was also found guilty of fraudulently claiming 182,000 pounds and benefits. Outside court, Detective Superintendent Paul Livingstone said Margaret was a very vulnerable young woman who was manipulated, abused, neglected, and ultimately murdered by the two people who

should have been looking after her. Edward and Avril were motivated by money and kept Margaret in utter disgusting and uninhabitable condition. Shameful. He added, we'll never know just how Margaret was killed. What we do know is that she lived her last days and what can only be described as a living hell. She must have felt that she was alone in the world with no one coming to help her, which is just heartbreaking to think of. On July 17th, 2019, Edward and Avril were sentenced to life with a minimum term of 14 years. Minimum of 14. Yeah, it's different, right, than what we're used to.

But can we go back to the fact that both of these individuals were found guilty of murdering Margaret's, but found not guilty of abducting her, also cleared of attempting to defeat the ends of justice by disposing of her personal effects and pretending she was a lot. That seems strange. It does. Because the way I look at it, the disposing of her personal effects,

pretending she was alive, that's part and parcel, right, of the murder. And to me, that would be easier to prove than the actual murder. murder. I would think so too. So that was a little strange to me. The judge told them at sentencing, only you too know the truth. Only you know where her remains are. Lawyers for both defendants describe their health problems and maintain their clients' innocence. In 2022, Averill Jones agreed to pay back over 3,000 pounds and Edward agreed to pay over 24,000 pounds. Prosecutors had launched a

proceeds of crime action against them to recover the benefit money they fraudulently claimed. Okay. I got a discrepancy here as well. Why is Avril, who was actually convicted of fraud, only paying back $3,000, while Edward, who was cleared of fraud, is paying back $24,000? All I can think of is there was some type of deal struck behind closed doors. Had to have been. Something is not.

adding up here. 82-year-old Edward Cairn died in prison on October 15, 2023. On October 18th of that year, an independent inquiry into the circumstances leading to the death of Margaret Fleming was published by the Inverclyde government with a series of recommendations. Some of those recommendations were information sharing and communication. All agencies required to understand how to share information timeline to ensure vulnerable people are protected. Okay. That seems like common sense. I would say.

But obviously they found that that didn't happen. Yes. Right in Margaret's case. And we detailed some of it out. Checks and balances should be in place that balance people's rights to privacy with a clear need to protect vulnerable people who need to be seen by agencies. And this includes benefits agencies. expansion of annual health check for adults with learning disabilities should be considered.

Again, I go back to no health check in 12 years or no check of any kind in 12 years. It's a long time. Obviously, there was a hole in the system. For sure. There's just no way around it. Transition from school to college is difficult for any young person. All colleges and universities should have robust adult protection guidance. audit through the further education safeguarding form should take place across Scotland.

As a society, everyone has a responsibility to ensure that people with disabilities are seen and protected. Listening to those with lived experience is important to understand how to improve services. Each local authority should be clear on their mechanism to hear the views of people with learning disabilities and understand the local provision. This should be mapped out and made publicly available. Okay, some of this stuff to me is just common sense, but it's also not very specific. No. It's almost like, okay, we need to type something up that sounds good. That's kind of what I get from some of it. But keep it generic. Yeah. But it's all common sense stuff to me. My other question is, why did it take so long for this to come out?

2003 is when this was published. Wow. I mean, talking about a delay, what had to happen for them to finally go, hey, we better get this going now. Well, first of all, this was four years after they were found guilty. 11 years after the first check, right, in 2012. I mean, this is a case that, you know, we'll make you angry. in so many different respects.

Oh, of course. I mean, the timing, how long it took to get things done. The fact that a lot of stuff wasn't done, that you would have just thought would be already in place. And now in, in 2023, they're writing, well, we should put some of this stuff in place. You think? But we're not being specific on how it's going to be.

Somebody just needs to put this in place. You know, as we wrap this one up, Gibbs, Margaret Fleming, no doubt, was a vulnerable young woman who was abused and murdered by the people who were supposed to take care of her. People or father thought he could trust with her well-being. Edward Kearney and Avril Jones disposed of Margaret's remains in an unknown manner and fraudulently claimed benefits in her name for years. As of 2025, Margaret's remains have still not been found. and I didn't see where Avril had died, so I'm assuming she's still alive,

unless for some reason she decides to come forward and say, well, you know, here's what we did. Here's what we did. And here's where she is. I don't know unless somebody happens to stumble upon these remains, if her remains will ever be found.

But this is a very frustrating case in that given the fact Margaret, you know, was a vulnerable young person, there should have been better safeguards in place. I understand. Her dad thought that these people were going to take care of her. Now, ultimately, that was a bad decision, but at the time, he must have trusted them. Yeah, sounds like it. But if you're a young person who is drawing benefits from the government, there's no checks and balances where for 12 years nobody either talks to you, there's no checkup done,

nothing. The benefits just keep rolling. I'm kind of not surprised, though. I mean, I've read articles about other places to have these benefits that go out. And I'm not singling out the UK because we have some stuff here where people have been dead for a long time and their benefits still get paid. out. It just seems like, you know, that especially, there needs to be some kind of a better system of checks and balances for sure. But I really feel for Margaret, you know, I don't feel like her childhood was

great. No. Especially, you know, on the part of her mother, her dad did seem to, you know, be the one in her life, even though early on, he questioned the paternity. But he did. He did. He did. It's a, you know, seemed to to kind of be her world there until he died. I think one of the difficult things is we don't know exactly what she went through at the hands of Edward and Avril. We know it wasn't good. No. But we don't know how hellish it actually was.

It could have been really bad. In the period of time that she was there. And then, you know, the thought is she was murdered so that they could essentially collect her benefits. Just some really awful people. But that's it for our episode on Edward Kearney and Averill Jones. We've got a couple of voicemails. You want to check those out?

Let's hear those. Hey, y'all. I was calling because I have always been a true crime enthusiast. But things got a little personal when my daughter has been dating this guy for a while now. And one night, he told us that his cousin was a serial killer. It was Glenn Rogers, the Casanova Killer. And so I immediately wanted to find out more information. And I looked up y'all's podcasts, and I just got done listening to it.

And I just wanted to tell y'all, thank you. It was informative. And the crazy thing is, is he is from the area where Glenn Rogers grew up in Ohio. We're from Mississippi, right outside of Jackson, Mississippi. So it was kind of creepy listening to the Glenn Rogers story and the fact that he came here and did stuff. But anyway, thank you for the podcast, and y'all definitely just got another listener. Thank you. Goodbye.

I'm going to Jackson. Okay, Johnny. Glenn Rogers was a nasty individual. Yes, he was. Now, what's worse? Your daughter's boyfriend says that he's related to Glenn Rogers or he's related to Mike Gibson. Oh, that's a toss up there. I mean, I think as a parent, you got to at least be taken aback, right, at first.

By either one of those? No, by either one. No, but by the Glenn Rogers. Oh, of course. Yeah. I mean, yeah. Relations obviously don't mean that this guy's a serial killer. I'm not saying that, but.

Still, you're going to be like, is it in the bloodline? Do you keep an extra close eye on him, you know, for a while? Like when he comes over for dinner, do you put this? steak knives like in a different location put all the knives yeah hey mike and gibby uh this is savannah from louisiana i was just listening to the joseph smeggely case and at the end a lady had called in and commented that she was going half a mile an hour in traffic and you were joking that you didn't think your car could go in half miles it kind of reminded me of i worked in h-fack and the other day i was on a job site and the speed limit was 7.5 miles for

hour exactly it's very hard to get your cardio 7.5 miles an hour that is less than nothing and i just thought that was funny that half miles came up because it wasn't something i'd ever thought about before anyway keep you on time taking where in the world is the speed limit seven and a half miles an hour this is like flintstone kind of you know hey we can at least use our feet and get it up to i mean it's like 20 miles in a school zone right 20 miles an hour in a school zone thank That's pretty, pretty slow. I think I could probably lap a car or two walking. Well, you know, a fast individual can run like, I think, in the 20s.

Yeah. 20-some miles an hour. Okay. So you might be able to hit eight. Maybe. She's Savannah from Louisiana. Had a little rhyme to it. It did.

I picked that up pretty quickly. Yeah, you were late in talking about it, but yeah, you picked it up quickly. All right, buddy, that is it for another episode of true crime all the time. So for Mike and Gibby, stay safe and keep your own time ticking.