197

THE MEDICO-LEGAL SOCIETY

A meeting of the Society was held at The Royal Society of Medicine, 1 Wimpole
Street, LondonWI on Thursday, 11th May, 1989. The President,Dr JohnBurton, was
in the Chair.

THE HUNGERFORD MASSACRE

Dr. Richard Shepherd

THE PRESIDENT: Ladies and gentlemen, as you know, the advertised talk this
evening wasto havebeen by Dr. Craigaboutthe Bambercase. Unfortunately, wehad
to put that off and Dr. Shepherdhas instead agreed to give a talk on the Hungerford
Massacre (as it has become known).
If I can introduce Dr. Shepherd. His full name is Richard Thorley Shepherd, as
everyone knows - whenonehas him in court, one always says"Youare Dr. Richard
ThorleyShepherd."It is amazinghowyouknowall thesenames - it used to be Hugh
Robert Molesworth Johnson - they come to the tongue. He is one of the new
generation of forensic pathologists. He is a pathologist at Guy's Hospital. The
Wasserman Committee, sitting at themoment, is due to reportshortlyaboutthe future
of forensic medicine,and weare hopingto be able to providea systemwhichis going
to providea goodfuturefor Englishforensic medicine.Weare hopingthat it is going
tobe as goodin the futureas itsreputationhas been in thepast. I canonly tellyouthat
one of our hopes and beliefsis that Dr. Shepherdwill be one of the people to uphold
that tradition which we have had for generations. So many of the senior forensic
pathologistshavebeen Presidentsofthis Society. I am sure the time will come when
we haveanother one to follow.
Dr. Shepherd, tonight, is going to talk to us about the Hungerford massacre.

DR. SHEPHERD: Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, thank youvery much for
that introduction. I am very grateful.
On Wednesday, 19th August 1987, at 12.47 p.m., in the small Berkshire town of
Hungerford, the first of a series of murders werecommitted. The killingsended 58
minuteslater at 13.45. In those 58 minutes 15 people died, another 15 sufferedgun-
shotwounds ofvarying severity, andmanymorehad luckyescapes; 58 minutes which
transformed the lives of everyone who was directly affected; 58 minutes which
transformed the livesof everyone in Hungerford;and 58 minuteswhichtransformed
the lives of everyonein Britain.
The eventsofthose minuteshavealso leftmanyunansweredquestions. Questions
which begin with "Why?". Why Hungerford?Why Ryan? Why then?
Multiple deaths always create shock waves in the whole community, as eventsat
Clapham,LockerbieandHillsborough haveshown,andthecountryas a wholeneeds
answersto the question "Why?" The answermaybe as simple as a loose wire, or it
maybe ascomplex as international terrorism,buttheseanswers, no matterhowsimple
or howcomplex,at leastgiveus a reasonforthedeaths.Whenthequestionsare asked
198 Medico-LegalJoumaI57/4

and there is no answer, then it is much harder for the individual, the community and
the country to come to terms with and to resolve the trauma of such an event. This
is the reason why, in my opinion, the events in Hungerford on 19th August 1987are
so widely remembered and still evoke a shiver.
There are many facets to the Hungerford killings, and I hope tonight to discuss a
few of them as they appear to me. But before I consider this particular incident in some
detail, I must first set the scene. Not the local scene in Hungerford, nor Ryan's
background, because I shall discuss these later, I must first set the international scene,
and in order to do so I must define my terms of reference.
The deaths in Hungerford were multiple - of that there is no doubt. But what
actually constitutes "multiple deaths"? Is it more than two deaths? Or more than three?
Or more than 10?Each of these figures is entirely reasonable, but the arbitrary figure
that is chosen is five.
The commonest cause of such multiple deaths in Western Society are accidents of
all sorts, and this is followed by acts of terrorism. But I am not talking tonight about
accidents and I am not talking tonight about terrorism, I am talking about multiple,
deliberate murder. The same numerical point applies for multiple murder as it does
for any other type ofmultiple death: if five or more people are killed, the deaths are
considered multiple.
In collecting cases involved with multiple murder, I have excluded one particular
group, and that is the group of deaths associated with arson, since the multiple deaths
caused by arson are very different from the multiple murders caused by gun, knife
or rope. The most important differentiating point here, in my view, is that there is a
separation of the act of fire raising from the deaths, even though the deaths follow
directly from that act. In my opinion, murder by arson has greater similarity to
terrorism because of this separation. For the purpose of my talk tonight, then I am
going to define murder in a particular way. I am going to define it as a single death
occurring from a single act: pulling a trigger, stabbing, tightening a ligature. I would
readily accept that this definition of murder does not apply in all discussions, but it
is the definition I am going to use tonight.
Now that I have defined multiple murder, it is possible to see how rare or how
common this event is. Surprisingly, this is not as easy as it might sound. Little has
been written in the medical journals on this subject. The few reports that do exist
concern single incidents without discussing the whole area of multiple murders. Most
of the papers that have been published concern the psychiatric features of multiple
homicide, and quite a few of those papers relate back to the holocaust in Nazi
Germany. There is very little for the pathologist to grasp hold of in considering this
interesting area of multiple murder. I was forced to tum to other sources. Where could
I go? Multiple killings are news, as we see from the tabloid press, and so I consulted
the cuttings and the reports libraries ofTimes International and Reuters. I should say
here that I am extremely grateful to them, not only for providing me with the
information but also for waiving their not inconsiderable fees.
This list of multiple murders (Fig 1) that I have been able to draw up is based, in
the main, from the information which they supplied to me. I am aware that the list is
not complete, not only because of the question marks that lie within it but also in the
number of cases shown. I extracted these 20 cases between 1965 and 1989, and they
The Hungerford Massacre 199

Fig 1. Chronological list of Multiple Murders 1965-1989

Type Date Place Dead Inj Mode Result

Serial 1965 Yorkshire 5+ 0 Strangled Arrested

Serial 1980 Yorkshire 13 0 Blunt Arrested
Spree 9/82 Pennsylvania 13 ? Gun Killed
Serial 1982 London 16 0 Strangled Arrested
Serial 1984 France 7 0 Strangled Arrested
Mass 8/84 California 21 15 Gun Killed
Mass 2/84 Columbia 9 ? Gun ?
Mass 1985 Essex 5 0 Gun Arrested
Spree 8/86 Oklahoma 14 ? Gun Suicide
Serial 1986 London 7 0 Strangled Arrested
Spree 12/86 Columbia 29 ? Gun Killed
Spree 8/87 HUNGERFORD 16 15 Gun Suicide
Mass 8/87 Melbourne 7 19 Gun Arrested
Mass 12/87 Melbourne 8 5 Gun Suicide
Spree 12/87 Arkensas 16 0 Gun Arrested
Mass 12/87 Iowa 9 3 Gun Suicide
Serial 1987 Poland 9 ? Blunt Arrested
Serial 1988 Moscow 33 ? ? Arrested
Serial 1988 South Africa 7+ ? ? Arrested
Mass 1/89 California 5 30 Gun Suicide

willserveas a goodbasisforthe discussion.I shouldaddthat I havegainedextracases

but they do not falloutside the parameters defined in this list. None of the new cases
wouldchange any of the points of discussion that I am going to base on the list.
Atfirstsightthislistofmultiplemurdersisjumbledanddisordered,andthere are no
obviousfeatures that are discerniblefrom the list. Toattemptsomeresolution, let me
definemultiplemurdet a littlemore. Wecan splitmultiplemurdersinto three groups.
(1) Serial murders: multiple deaths over a period of time in many different places.
(2) Spree killings: multiple deaths at one time in many different places.
(3) Mass killings: multiple deaths at one time in one place.
The additionof theseclassificationsto the list does not really help at all. However,
if we break this list down into serial killings on the one hand and mass and spree
killingson the other, then some interestingand importantfeaturesbecome apparent.
Let me take first serial killings(Fig2). A serial killer, remember, is someonewho
killsa numberof peopleovera period oftime, oftenwiththe sameor similarmethod,
often in the same or similar areas. Sex may be very relevant to this type of killing,
although it maynotbe as obviously expressed as a rapeor a sexualassault. In thegroup
shown here, the arrest rate is really quite striking. Everyone of these eight cases
resultedin an arrest, althoughnot all serial killersare arrested, as the continuingsaga
of Jack the Ripper shows.
Butnot all serial killers fallintothe sameclass as Jack the Ripper. The serial killer
in France in 1984 wasatypical. He wasa poor French farmer whocould neither cope
withcontraception nor withthe increasing sizeofhis family, and he reverted to infanti-
200 Medico-Legal Journal 57/4

Fig 2. Chronological listofserial murders 1965-1989

Type Date Place Dead Inj Mode Result
Serial 1965 Yorkshire 5+ 0 Strangled Arrested
Serial 1980 Yorkshire 13 0 Blunt Arrested
Serial 1982 London 16 0 Strangled Arrested
Serial 1984 France 7 0 Strangled Arrested
Serial 1986 London 7 0 Strangled Arrested
Serial 1987 Poland 9 ? Blunt Arrested
Serial 1988 Moscow 33 ? ? Arrested
Serial 1988 South Africa 7+ ? ? Arrested

cide at birth as a wayof controlling the growth of his family - not the type of serial
killer that would immediatelycome to mind when I defined it. Not all arrests are as
straightforwardas that of Neilsen. The serial killings in and around Moscowwhich
ended in 1988with the arrest and executionof a man had been preceded by what are
termed "several" previoustrials for the same offencesofother individualswho were
alsofoundguilty. They too werereportedas havingreceivedthe "severestsentences".
Newspeakinterpretsthisas beingexecution. Russia,ofcourse, is nottheonlycountry
to sentencethe wrong man for a murder which later turns out to be a part of a series.
The case of Christie and Evans in this country may well be another example.
However, therearemanytypicalserialmurderers,andthe namesofBrady, Sutcliffe,
Neilsen and Erskine come immediatelyto mind. The mode ofdeath in serial killings
usually requires close proximitybetween the murderer and the victim. The ratio of
injuries to death is low; in other words, there are few injuries with many deaths.
Indeed, it appears fromthis thatthe chancesof survivingan attackfroma serial killer
maybe minimal, possibly because these killers refinetheir methodsof tracking and
of killing their victims with experience and time and, particularly in the later stages
of their careers, successseemsalmostcertain. Indeed, manyofthese killers are only
caught by chance. Wehaveto remember Neilsen and his unlucky (for him anyway)
contact with Dyno-Rod.
Of all of the groups of multiple killers, this group has been the most investigated.
Partly,no doubt, becausethe awareness ofthe existenceofa multiplemurderer leads
to intensepolice activityoverquitea longperiod of time. Partly,also, becausea large
number of serial murderers are incarcerated.What could be a better sittingtargetfor
a researcher? Much fascinatingwork has been done by the FBI and by many others
concerning the psychological profilingof these serial killers (and also ofother serial
offenders).
I haveone fmalcommentto makeabout serial killers:the existence ofa serialkiller
is onlyperceivedwhenseveral murdersare ascribed to one person,either by thedirect
linking of forensic evidence such as fingerprinting or DNA profiling, or by a
policeman or pathologist noticing similarities between severalcases - be it in the
method of operationof the killer or in the patterns of injury.Until that moment, each
murder is considered to be a separate entity.
Professor Gee from Leeds has pointed out in a recent article on serial killers that
The Hungerford Massacre 201

thespeedofmodemtransportallows an individual to committhesametype ofmurder

inverydifferent geographical areas,maybeevenin different countries. It is important
thatbothpoliceandpathologists are awareofthispossibilityand thatthe collection,
consideration andcollationofthedetailsofmurdersare continuednotjust in a single
force but countrywide.
Let me now consider the mass and spree killers, the other groups of multiple
murders(Fig3). Bytheir verynaturetheseare instantly obvious to thepoliceand the
public.Bothmassmurderersand spreemurderershaveverydifferentfeatures from
thoseseenin serial murdersand theyare best consideredtogetheras a group. All of
the murderersin this group killedat least someof their victimsfrom a distance.All
thosedocumented in this list useda gun. There is a high injury to death ratio - a lot
of peopleare injured compared with the number of people that die - and so more
people survivean attack.

Fig 3. Chronological list of mass and spree murders 1965-1989

Type Date Place Dead Inj Mode Result

Spree 9/82 Pennsylvania 13 ? Gun Killed

Mass 8/84 California 21 15 Gun Killed
Mass 12/84 Columbia 9 ? Gun ?
Mass 1985 Essex 5 0 Gun Arrested
Spree 8/86 Oklahoma 14 ? Gun Suicide
Spree 12/86 Columbia 29 ? Gun Killed
Spree 8/87 HUNGERFORD 16 15 Gun Suicide
Mass 8/87 Melbourne 7 19 Gun Arrested
Mass 12/87 Melbourne 8 5 Gun Suicide
Spree 12/87 Arkensas 16 0 Gun Arrested
Mass 12/87 Iowa 9 3 Gun Suicide
Mass 1/89 California 5 30 Gun Suicide

Another featureof spree killingsparticularly is the inclusionof family members

within the numbers of people killed. In the Arkensaw case in December 1987, 16
members ofan extended family diedwhenoneoftheirnumberkilledthemjust before,
during and after Christmas. But I think that the most striking featurehere is that in
only three of these 12 cases did the killer survive: the Bamber Case, (Essex),
Melbourne and Arkensaw.
There are two unusualcases. The Bamber case in Essex in 1985 is atypical, and
I do notwanttopursueit furthertonight. Theothercasewhichisatypicalis thismass
killing in Columbia. Nine people died; guns were used. It would appear from the
newspaperreports that a group of people wereinvolved. It wasnot a singleperson,
it was a group, andthismaywellbe betterclassified asa gangland killing, thuscoming
under the group of terrorism.
Incidentally, so far I have said "he" in my comments because mass and spree
murderers are almost exclusively male. Females are generally more subtle. Most
female multiplemurderershaveusedpoison, usuallyovera periodoftime, and thus
202 Medico-Legal Joumal 57/4

they must be classified as serial murderers. However, there wasa recent incidentin
the UnitedStateswherea womanentereda schoolplayground and shotdeadonechild
and injured five others before killingherself. I think this showsthat womenare not
excluded from the ranks of those who could be, if the situation is right, mass
murderers. It also highlights a particularly American problem - or rather it is a
problem that is particularly American at the moment; and that is the targeting of
schoolsby peoplecommitting massmurder. I havenotseenanyreasonor explanations
whytheyshouldchoosethese victims,but it is a worryingdevelopment inthehistory
ofmultiplemurder.WhenI presentthe sequenceofevents in Hungerfurd, bear in mind
this developmentand consider the proximityof the Hungerford Primary Schoolto
Ryan'shouse. Consider also that this was the summer holidayand not term time.
Havingdefinedthe subgroupsof multiple murder, we can nowsee that Ryan and
the eventsin Hungerforddo fit into a pattern. Theyare not totallyrandom. Theyare
thepatternofa spreekiller. Wecouldhavepredicted fromtheoutsetthatitwasunlikely
thatRyan wouldsurvive. It wasalsounlikely thathismotherwould survive if shecame
within range, and we could havepredicted that a large number of people wouldbe
injured and not killed. What we cannot say is why he did it and, if you will pardon
the expression, what the trigger was.
Let me now make a few comments about the town of Hungerford. I revisited
Hungerfordon Tuesday ofthis week. I had only been to the towntwice before:once
was on the night of the murders and once was at the time of the inquest when there
wasthe full glare of publicity in the town. There is little to sayabout Hungerford. It
is a small English country town with a population of about 5,500. It is a peaceful,
pleasantplace. I do not intendto be derogatoryaboutthe townbycallingit small, for
it is small. The one thing which struck me about Hungerfordwhile I wasthere was
just how ordinary it is. It is just like hundreds of other country townsup and down
Britain:a HighStreet, somepubs, a station,a river,shops,houses.It isjust ordinary.
There is nothing to distinguish it from any other town in Britain.
There is one previouseventof note in Hungerford, and this was in the 1870s: two
policemenwereshotandkilled by poachers.An ironcrossstandsoutsideHungerford
in their memory.
Wehave defined the type of murder, I havetold you about the place, now let me
definethe man as best as I can. MichaelRyantoo wasordinary.He wasborn on 18th
May 1960. He wasthe only son of Alfred and Dorothy Ryan. He had livedall of his
life in Hungerford, attendingthe local schools until he left at the age of 16 with no
qualifications.He is describedas beinga quiet, happyboy. Other reports saythat he
had a temper. It appears that parental control might not have been strict, as other
people saythat he was never told off. His father, though, is also described as being
a rather domineeringman. This mixedpicture of a growingchildprobably suggests
thathe fellintothegroupofnormality. Hisfatherdiedin 1985 ofcanceraftera slightly
protracted illness.
After school Ryanwentto work, initially as a gardener, and this was followed by
severalshort periods of employment interspersedwithperiodsofunemployment. In
April 1987 he began work on a Government environmentalscheme tidying up the
countryside. He usedto workfourdays a week, for whichhe received the sumof£69.
On 9th July he left thatjob - sayinghe had anotherjob to go to. There is no record
TheHungerford Massacre 203

of his workingagain.
Hehad nomedicalhistoryandcertainlynopsychiatrichistory. His car, a metallic
silverVauxhall AstraGIC, D registration,wasownedbyhismother.Shehadbought
it with a personal loan and given it to him.- perhaps the sign of a doting, clinging
mother.
As an adult he wasdescribed as a loner, his main interest beingguns of all sorts.
His only trips away from the house at 4, Southview that he shared with his mother
were said to be to gun clubs.
In January 1978 he applied for and wasgranted a shot-guncertificate. This was
renewed in February 1986. His shot-guns, incidentally, were recovered from the
remainsof hishouseanddid notplayanypart in theeventsof 19thAugust. However,
inSeptember 1986 hejoineda localshooting club.He hadprogressed. Shot-guns had
becomehandgunsand rifles. He appliedfora firearmscertificatein thatNovember.
In July 1987he joined another shootingclub. On 14th July 1987 he applied for and
wasgranteda certificatefor fiveguns in additionto his three shot-guns. These guns
werea 9mmBeretta, a .22Bemadelli pistol,a .32CZ pistol,a .30Underwood carbine
(otherwiseknownas an M1), anda 7.62 Kalashnikov assaultrifle. The certificatehe
was given also allowed 500 rounds of ammunition per weapon; 2500 rounds of
ammunitionin all.
The Bemadelli pistolwas soldon 12th August andtheCZ pistolwas beingrepaired,
so on the 19th August1987 Ryan had in his possessionthree shot-guns, the Beretta,
carbine, Kalashnikov and over 2,000rounds of ammunition.
Hisuseofguns,however, wasnotconfined to thegunclubs. Heoftencarriedloaded
gunsto work.He showed themto hisworkmates. Heboastedthathe usedtogo round
at nightshooting up roadsigns - one roadsignin particular. Indeed, afterhis death,
the police foundthis road sign and there were a number of holes in it.
There was another facet to Ryan. He had told a number of people that he was a
mercenaryin Africa. He told a number of people that a "Colonel" somewherewas
goingtomakehimthebeneficiary ofhis willandhe wasgoingtobe rich, he wasgoing
to have a Porsche, he wasgoingtohavea Ferrari, he wasgoingtohaveholidays. None
of these stories is supported by any evidence at all, despite extensive police
investigations. Interestingly, his mother supported his story about the Colonel to
friendsandto relatives. Whyshedid so, wedo notknow. Perhapstheypointtoa need
to fantasise, both in the mother and the child.
I must turn nowto the eventsof that afternoon. I intendto relatethe tale of Ryan's
walk aroundHungerford. Generally I am reluctant to showpathological photographs
to an audience, but in this case I think it is important that you mayat least glimpse
someof the scenes. I hope that this will not be too upsetting.
In factevents thatdaystartednotin Hungerford butin thenearbySavemake Forest.
In the Savernake Forestthere is a little road. It is calledthe GrandAvenue. Ryan was
somewhere in Savernake Forestin the morningofthe 19th, and whilein the foresthe
came across Susan Godfried. Susan Godfried and her two children had gone into
Savernake Forestto havea picnic.Theyhadfinishedthe picnicandthechildrenwere
strappedback intotheir childseatsin thecar. Atthispoint Ryan droveup and parked
nextto them. What happenednext is not clear. The children weretoo youngto give
anysensiblereportof whathappened,other than "Mummywentoffintothe forest".
204 Medico-Legal Journal 57/4

-"\ -.
I
pu.... .a'f FIE!.»
\ I
I I
/
~ I
r-_
- -------_ ~ II
,
I

, I 7-- ..,
,, ' ' I.
,
\tI "'l!...,. ,.. L
J/ /.1
I
,
ll~el!"~I_"L

6"eu..~ 1// / ':

,,, /J ,:
,,
~
t//
,~ :,,
,,,
- ---...I..- <,
'*

Figure 4. MapofareaofHungerford involvedshowing Ryan'sroute; "+ ..indicatesfatalities

and " •• , indicatesinjuries.
The Hungerford Massacre 205

Certainly Ryan tookMrs. Godfriedintothe forest.It may wellbe thathe tried sexually
to assault or rape her and when she escaped he shot her a number of times with the
Berettapistol. Atthe post mortem examinationthere wasno sign ofa sexualassault.
He thenfledthesceneanddrove, onemayassumeat considerable speed, back towards
Hungerford.
En route he stopped in Froxfield at the Golden Arrow service station, but instead
ofpayingforthe petrolhe hadtakenhe fired the carbineat the cashier.One shotbroke
a window;he tried to fire the gun againbut itjammed. He droveoff towardsHunger-
ford. The cashier wasunhurt. She immediately informedthe policeof the events,and
this information wasthe first recorded evidence of Ryan'sactivities that afternoon.
Some time later Mrs. Godfried's children were found wandering in Savernake
Forest. Thetwoevents werelinked, but by this time Ryanwasalreadyin Hungerford.
Ryanwasseen driving very fastup Southview and into the driveway ofhis house at
abouta quartertoone. Shortlyafterwards a numberof shotswereheardand Ryanwas
seenrunning along Southview (Fig 4) towardsthe open fields, firing as he went. He
had shot at his car, and his neighboursRonaldand Sheila Mason were already dead.
He continuedalongSouthview, shootingas he went. He injured a younggirl in her
house. He injured a woman, Mrs. Jackson. Mrs. Jacksoncrawled back to the phone
and telephoned a friend, George White. She told him that she had been injured by
someoneshootingand askedhim to fetchher husbandfrom work. Mr. Whiteagreed
to do that. At the end of Southview, as youhaveseen, is a footpath. On this footpath
he met KennethClements, who, while walkinghis dog, with his family, his children
and grandchildren close behind, was shot. The family scattered and Ryan, for
whateverreason, turned round and went back into Southview.
As he returned to Southview, he wasfacedwith a police patrol car beingdriven by
PC Brereton. He sprayedthis car with bullets from severaldifferent angles, finally
killingPC Breretonwith a shot to the back of the neck. I think the damage to the car
speakslouder and gives more details than I could possibly give with words (Fig 5).
The sizeofthe holes in the car indicatethat he wasusingthe Kalashnikov assault rifle
and not the Beretta.
So Ryan continued then back down Southviewtowardswhat could be termed the
main road. As he did so, two people were driving up Southview in their Volvo. He
shotthem. He then fired at an ambulancethat had been calledto Southview, possibly
by Mrs. Jackson or by the mother of the daughter that had been injured. One of the
occupants of the ambulance was injured in the arm. He reached the main road. He
then turned round and went back up Southview. What was he doing? He was going
backwardsand forwards. As he did so, he fired into the garden of Mr. Abdur Khan.
Mr.Khanwasweeding the flower bed. He wasshotand fatally wounded. He thenfired
at another passer by,causinginjuries to the arm and leg. Bynow, Ryanhad come out
ofSouthview, shot Mr. Clements, turned round, come back down, shot PC Brereton,
the Volvo, ambulance, the other passer by, Mr. Khan, and now he is going back up
Southview. Why isn't he running away?
Atthis moment Mrs. Jackson'shusband wasdriven intoSouthviewby Mr. White.
The car immediately cameunder fire, once againbythe Kalashnikov and came to rest
againstPC Brereton'scar. Mr. Jackson, though injured, had the presence of mind to
pretendto be dead as Ryancame up to the car and looked at him. He escaped further
206 Medico-Legal Joumal57/4

tt

-
Fig. 5. Photograph ofdamage to police car.

injury. Mr. White, unfortunately died instantly.

At this moment, Dorothy Ryan arrived at Southview in her car. She ignored attempts
to stop her and accelerated into the road and parked her car behind Mr. White and
PC Brereton's cars. Imagine the scene in Southview that greeted her at that moment.
Houses, including her own, were on fire. She must have seen the injured people on
her way into Southview. She must have seen the bodies. both in Mr. White's car and
in the police car as she passed them. She knew that it was her son who was causing
this devastation because, after running past the two cars (in which Mr. Jackson was
still lying dogo) , she was heard to shout "Michael. Michael! Stop it!" Other witnesses
report her as saying "Don't shoot me" - then there were shots and a scream.
I do not want to dwell on any particular person's injuries in this whole event, but
I think those present on Mrs. Ryan deserve some discussion. She had gun-shot wounds
to the front of her leg and abdomen and two wounds to her back. The wounds to the
leg and the abdomen were fired from in front and from a distance, but the wounds to
the back were close range (Fig 6). One is clearly seen, the other hidden by a fold of
clothing. Dorothy Ryan was first crippled and then executed by her son.
His mother dead, Ryan left Southview for the last time by the footpath. over the
playing fields, passing. as he did so, the body of Mr. Clements and his dog. We should
ask ourselves: had he deliberately stayed in Southview until his mother arrived? I think
he probably had. As I said earlier, it is not uncommon for spree killers to include
members of their fumily amongst their victims. Whether this is because the members
of the family are the cause of their distress or because the killer does not want his
The Hungerford Massacre 2m

Fig 6. Photograph a/injuries to the back a/Dorothy Ryan.

nearest and dearest to suffer the consequence of their actions is not clear. Whatever
the reason. as Ryan left Southview seven people lay dead or mortally wounded and
seven lay injured.
He went into the playing fields at the back of Southview. A lady in Clarks Gardens
berated him for the noise he was making. He shot her. She was hit in the leg and
survived. His route continued along the hedge by the playing fields and then down.
along the footpath. into the memorial gardens. He shot Francis Butler in the leg and
then shot him again as he lay on the ground. At this point Ryan was carrying two rifles:
the Kalashnikov and the carbine. and he had the hand gun. He abandoned the carbine
here; it was still jammed when it was found. So he then had the 9mm Beretta and the
Kalashnikov, He had not fired the carbine at all during his time in Hungerford.
On leaving the recreational ground. he saw a taxi being driven by Marcus Barnard
along Bulpit Lane, Mr. Barnard's taxi was seen. shot at. and Mr. Barnard died. At
this point Ryan was seen to throw down his rifle - it must have been the Kalashnikov,
remember. because he had got rid of the carbine already - and walk off. After a few
paces. he stopped. he turned round. he picked upthe Kalasnikov and he set off again
along Priory Avenue.
He fired at another car. shattering the windscreen and causing minor injuries to the
driver. The same cannot be said for John Storms. a washing machine engineer. He
did not know the Hungerford area and he was directed to Priory Avenue along Hillside
Road. He stopped at the junction and he saw a man with a gun. The man crouched
down. pointed the gun at him and fired. Mr. Storms was hit in the face. Quite sensibly.
208 Medico-LegalJourna157/4

at this point he hid, crouched down in the bottom of his cab. He heard two further
bangs, felt the car rock, but he was not hit again and he survived.
Mr. and Mrs. Wainwright had come to Hungerfordfor the day to visit their son.
Theircar passedRyan immediately afterhe hadshotMr.Storms. He shotat themtoo.
He injured Mrs. Wainwright and he killed Mr. Wainwright. Ryan then walked off,
reloading his pistol.
At aboutthistime, Rosemary HendersonwasdrivingalongHillsideRoadtowards
Priory Avenue. Shesawa man inthe roadpointinga gun at her. Shethoughtthiswas
curious, but continuedto turn, andfeltsomethingin her hand - it wasa 9mmbullet
fired from the Beretta. It was hot. She dropped it to the floor of her car. When she
got home and looked her car had three holes in it. A lucky escape by any account.
KevinLance, though, wasnot so lucky. He was shot and injured in his arm as he
drovehis vanalongPriory Avenue. Eric Vardy andStephenBallweredrivingintheir
van,and,just at themomentthatMr. Ballnoticed a man(itmusthave beenMr.Lance)
holdinghis arm and running up 'Iarrants Hill, there wasa bangand the windscreen
shattered. Therewerethree morebangsin quicksuccession. Mr.Vardy twitched. The
van ran across Priory Avenue into the hedge on the far side of the road. Mr. Vardy
had been hit and he died later in hospital.
Ryanthen continuedup 'Iarrants Hill, across Orchardpark, firing at peopleinthe
houses as he went, and on reaching Priory Road he turned left towards the John
O'GauntSchool.Sohisroutehastakenhim fromtheWarMemorialground - killing
Mr. Barnard, injuring someonein a car, injuring Mr. Lance and others and killing
Mr. Vardy - up 'Iarrants Hill, acrossthe back, reachingPriory Road.He getsto the
topandhe turnsleft. He seesa red Renault5 goingpast andfiresat it - oneshotfrom
thehandgun. Thecar continues onfora shortdistance. Theoccupant ofthecar,Sandra
Hill, a younggirl of about 22/23, had been shot through the chest and died.
Downthe hill he went, until he reached the corner here. At the corner lived Mr.
andMrs. Gibbsat60 PrioryRoad. WhyRyan should choosetheirhouseis notknown.
It has been suggested that he wasfrightenedbythe arrivalofa policehelicopter. I do
not think that is proven; nor is it borne out by his behaviourat that time. Ryan shot
at andthen kickedin their frontdoor. A womanshouted"What the helldo youthink
youare playingat?" Shotswere heard and a fewminuteslater Ryan leftbythe same
route. Surely not the behaviour of someone seeking refuge. Victor Gibbs died
instantly. Myrtlediedinhospital,having undergone emergency surgery. Photographs
of the scene showthat Mr. Gibbs had been draggedout of the way of the cupboard.
Did Ryan wantsomethingtoeat or drink?Is that whyhe wentintothat house?Wedo
not know.
After leaving60 Priory Road, he shot at and injuredthe occupantsof both62 and
71 Priory Roadbeforesetting off againin the direction of the school.
Ian Playle,his wifeand twosmallchildrenweredrivingalongPriory Roadin the
oppositedirection. Ryan sawthemand firedonce, apparently withoutstopping, and
he thenwalked alongthe road. Onewitness describeshimas shrugging his shoulders
after firingtheshot. Perhapsbecausethecar did notswerve or stophe thoughthe had
missed. He had not. Ian Playlediedlater in hospitalfroma singlewound to hisneck.
Ryan's final victim was a William Noon, an elderly man, who was visiting his
grandchildrenwho livedat 109 Priory Road, closeto the John O'Gaunt School. He
The Hungerford Massacre 209

had heard the firing. He had heard the warnings broadcast by the helicopter advising
people to take cover. When he got to 109.his grandchildren were playing in the garden.
Quite sensibly. he scooped them up and took them in through the back door. As he
entered the house. he was struck twice: first in the shoulder and then in the eye. He
survived.
Thomas North witnessed this shooting. He saw Ryan running along the road. He
saw him point his gun and fire at 109 Priory Road. As he ran past Mr. North, Ryan
pointed his gun and said "Bang!" He did not shoot him; he just said "Bang!" He did
have some bullets left because immediately afterwards he turned and fired at another
house.
Then he sauntered into the school. the John O'Gaunt School where he had been a
pupil. a pistol in his right hand. his Kalashnikov swung jauntily over his left shoulder.
The time was 13.45. The 58 minutes were over.
The area was containd by the police and attempts at persuading Ryan to surrender
began. At one point a rifle. the Kalashnikov, with a white rag tied to it was thrown out
of the first floor classroom window. At 18.52 a single muffled shot was heard, and
at 20.06 the police entered the classroom and found Ryan dead. (Fig 7)

FiR. 7. Photograph ofJohn 0 'Gaunt School. The illuminated windowsofthe upper right second
floor classroom where RWIII was discovered C{III he seen.

In the course of that afternoon. 17 people. including Ryan. died and 15 were injured.
His route around Hungerford is a distance of no more than two miles - a very easy
walk. Why up and down Southview? Why such a circuitous route? The school.
perhaps. is understandable - he knew it. Apparently. totally random movements.
210 Medico-Legal Joumal57/4

My interestin theseeventshad begunearlier in the day. AsI wasdriving in London

on the morning of the 19th,the BBCgavea brief traffic report. The gist ofthat report
was that the A4, A338 and the area around Hungerford should be avoided for the
foreseeablefuture. The unusual feature wasthat theydid not saywhyas theyusually
do. There is usually a disarticulated articulated lorry, or something. The absenceof
a reason and the fact that Thames Valley is my patch made me prick my ears up and
set me wonderingwhat wasgoingon. The eveningnewson myjourney hometoldme
everything. It was filled with the events in Hungerford and the death toll began to
mount.
It wasnot until eight o'clockthat my 'phone rang. A very quiet voicefrom Thames
Valley Police asked me if I could help. The police, I find, are always very polite. I
agreedthat I could and saidthat it soundedif theyneededhelp. The latestnewsreport
had said that sevenor eighthad been killed, and I checkedthis withthe officerso that
I knew what I was dealing with (wasthis going to take all night, or was it going to be
delayeduntil tomorrow?). "Sevenor eight, sir? No. More like sixteenor seventeen."
It wasa very longjourney up to Hungerford that night; it is nearly 80 miles from my
house. The newswascontinuous, but it wasso far behind my informationthat it was
no longer relevant, at least to me. Beethoven,at that time, was infinitelypreferable.
I had arranged tocall into the police from the emergencytelephonejust bythe exit
for Hungerford. This I did. AsI waitedfor myescort, in the silence of the Berkshire
evening, the possibility that the events I knew had happened seemed unbelievable.
As I sat in my car in the Berkshire countryside, in the quiet of the English summer
evening, I began to think that I had made a mistake; that I had dreamt it; that I was
sitting on the motorway, about to look very silly when someone came to talk to me
in a minute. Once, as a very tiredjunior doctor, I dreamt that I had admitteda patient
during the night. I had a verydistressingtimethe nextday, lookingfrantically around
the ward, knowing that this ill patient was desperately in need of my attention.
However, thesethoughts weredisturbedby the arrival ofa policecar,andthenbegan
the journey into the surreal atmosphereof Hungerfordthat Augustnight. The media
were there in force. Televisionlights were on all street comers. There were little
groups of people - some being interviewed, somejust talking. Cars were parked in
random places, some of them covered with tarpaulins, some of them coveredwith
blankets. Toadd to the unreality, thepolicestationwasbeingrebuilt. Therewerewires
hanging from the ceilings, there were half-demolished walls, there wasplaster dust
everywhere - notthe perfectplace from whichto try and organisean operationsuch
as this.
My job that eveningwas to certify Ryandead and to try and confirm his cause of
death. I wastakento the school. WhenI arrivedthere, I wastoldthattherewasa slight
hitch. Ryanhad said or hinted, or otherwise given the police to believe that he had
wired himself up to a fragmentation grenade. The police, naturally, believed him.
Theyhad to. Equally, as I pointedout, if theygavehima bigtug andthis grenadewent
off, there wasnot goingto be verymuchfor me to do a sensiblepostmortemon. After
a certain amount ofdiscussion, it wasagreedthat I could havea quick look, but I was
not to touch. As I havesaid, the police can be very polite, but I had no intentionthat
night of doing any touching until I was told that Ryanwas safe.
Here is what I saw. Ryanwasdead, (Fig 8) sitting in that second floor classroom
The Hungerford Massacre 211

of the John O'Gaunt Primary School. Behind my back, as I took this photograph, was
a noticeboard. The door was immediately to my right. The 9mm Beretta was tied to
his wrist by a lanyard. There were two head wounds. In his right temple was a small
calibre entry wound with surrounding bruising and peppering of the skin. (I shall
discuss that later.) A ragged exit wound was present in the left temple. Embedded in
this notice-board. to Ryan's left, was a 9mm bullet. I casual: \ asked if Ryan was known
to be right-handed. The reply I received was short, sh:Jrp .md inconclusive! Having
seen him.I gratefully left the room while he was moved ..JIlt! -earched - an act of not
inconsiderable courage, considering Ryan's comments about the grenade and the
effects of such grenades.
However, no grenade was found, and when he was declared safe 1 was able to go
in and examine him again. I was able to confirm that he had died as a result of a single,
close contact wound from a small bore weapon in the right temple; a wound that was
entirely consistent with self-infliction. A'i it was now 2.00 or 3.00a.m. on 20th August,
post mortems were arranged for the next day and I set off home.
I performed the majority of the post mortems on 20th and 21stAugust. On the two
final victims who died in hospital I did the post mortems on the 24th. I cannot speak
highly enough ofthe police scientific officers, the photographers and the other people
who, together with members of staff from the Royal Berkshire Hospital. made the
daunting task of documenting all of the injuries relatively easy. Tom Warlow, the
firearms expert from Huntingdon, also attended the post mortems. He examined with
me all of the bodies. He had also seen them all at the scene. To say that his help and
expertise were crucial would be to understate the matter. We settled quickly into a

FiK. 8. Photograph ofRyan in the classroom.

212 Medico-Legal Joumal57/4

routine. A routineis essentialfor anymajor incident. The processofidentification,

X-rays, photographs, documentation of injuriesand the postmortemexamination of
each victim ran smoothly.
There was only one major hiccup that I can remember. My secretary, who is a
dynamic woman, had come with me to type the reports as I dictatedthem. She had
set herself up in the comer of the mortuary with the word processor. At about
examinationsix or seven, after about 10hours of work, somebodysuddenlypulled
the plug out of the wordprocessor. Now Pam is only fivefeettall, but grownpolice
officers hid at that moment, until powerwasrestored and the records werefoundto
be intact, which fortunately they were. I could not have coped with a justifiable
homicide at a time like that!
Thepost mortem features: in many ways the pathology of the injuries of Ryan's
victims was routine. As you might expect, there were two main types of injuries
present:thosecausedby the Berettaandthosecausedby theKalashnikov assaultrifle.
The Kalashnikov is a mediumvelocityrifle; it is not a high velocityrifle. It can have
single shot, semi-automatic or automatic settings. Both weapons use clips of
ammunition, allowingfor repeatedshots withoutreloading. The Kalashnikov, with
its automatic capability, could fire up to 30 rounds per second.
Those, then, are the weapons. These are the injuries they caused. First, Ryan
himself. The woundto his right templeshowedburning and peppering of the skin.
This is caused bythe flashthat comesout of the end of the barrel ofa gun. The flash
is usually about four inches long, and this showsthat the gun must havebeen close
to his head at the time he pulled the trigger. It could not have been caused by a
policeman downon the ground.It couldnothave beencausedby a policeman standing
at the door of that classroom. This burningis importantbecauseit confirmsthat this
wasa suicidal act rather than a shootingby the police. Also, the templeis one of the
so-calledelectivesitesfor suicidalshooting. Theexitwoundon theother sideis very
different, it is ragged andirregularandit haseverted edges. Thischange in shapefrom
the roundentrytothe ragged exitis causedby thebulletstriking bitsofbone,beginning
to tumble and travelunevenly. From these featuresI wasable to say, withoutdoubt,
that Michael Ryan committedsuicide.
Sheila Mason died from a single shot through her nose. The shot wasfired from
directly in front of her andexitedthroughthe back ofher head. Her husbandRonald
wasshot severaltimeswiththe pistol - typicalsmall, 9mmentryholes. He wasalso
shot with the Kalashnikov. The differencein woundsize wasclearly seen.
Butthis case also demonstrateshowessential it is to havegood X-ray facilities in
shootingdeaths.I was verylucky at the Royal BerkshireHospital - X-ray staffthere
weremarvellousand put up withmycomplainingand myfoibles as we searchedfor
bullets and bullet fragments. This bullet lying in the maxillary sinus of Mr. Mason
had enteredat his leg (Fig9). It hadtravelledthe lengthofhis bodyand settledthere.
I would neverhave found thisbulletwithout X-rays; therewerenowounds to thehead,
there was nothing to suggestthat the bullet had reached that point. And of course
bullets wereessential to establishthat Ryan wasthe murderer. Everybodyknewit,
butwehadtoproveit. Wehadto matchbulletmarkings withthegunsandbullets were
very important to find.
X-rays are also usefulin demonstrating the softtissuedamagecausedby thesehigh
The Hungerford Massacre 213

velocity bullets. This is one of two

rifle wounds that were present on
Mr. Khan, shot as Ryan started to
go hack up Southview for the third
time. The bullet travelled from the
outside 10 the inside. across the
front of his leg. The X-ray of this
injury Shl IWS two features. It shows
fracturing of the femur and the
large size of the defect in the leg
muscles. This hole is caused by the
bullet passing through the tissues
but it is much bigger than the
bullet. It is not simply an effect of
the bullet forcing its way through.
The bullet did not actually touch
the femur. It passed through the leg
and the shock waves and the force
of the bullet passing through the
leg was sufficient to fracture the
femur without touching it. These
are particular features of the higher
velocity injuries - and remember
Fig. 9. Skull x-ray showing retained large this is not a high velocity rifle. it is
calibre bullet a medium velocity rifle.
Adjacent to the fatal wound to the back of the neck of Roger Brereton was a peculiar
oblong hole. This is caused by the central core of a bullet. Bullets generally are not
solid. They have a central heavy weight, lozenge shaped. and they are covered with
various metals (copper. commonly) to give them their shape. Firing bullets through
the metalwork of cars strips off this copper cladding. Most of the bullets we found
were simply these lozenge shaped bits of metal, the cores.
George White, the man who had taken Mr. Jackson home to his injured wife, was
shot three times, the major injury being to his head. We have seen the destruction to
soft tissue caused by these higher velocity bullets. This is the effect of one of those
bullets striking a hard object: extensive destruction - the whole skull is shattered.
I said earlier that Dorothy Ryan was shot first through the leg and the abdomen.
She was shot with the Beretta, a 9mm gun, of relatively low velocity. The bullet struck
the bone. causing the fracturing. Let's also look again at the injuries to her back. I
have shown you the burning on her clothing; (Fig 6) there was also burning around
the skin wound. That gun was no more than four inches away from her back when it
was fired. She was lying face down. Her son came up and shot her deliberately not
just once but twice through her back. They are deliberate. close contact shots.
designed to kill.
Marcus Barnard was also struck by a single shot from the Kalashnikov as he drove
his taxi. Once again the destructive effects of this bullet can be seen. The entry hole
is just on the forehead and the bullet has destroyed the left side of his head.
214 Afedico-LegaIJournaI57/4

In contrast, Douglas Wainwright was shot in the back and in the back of the head
by the small calibre weapon - hardly any obvious destruction. Equally as fatal,
admittedly,but the destruction is much less.
I mentionedearlier about the strippingoff ofthe copper claddingfrom the bullets
as theypassed through the car bodies. This also caused showersof metalfragments
to be thrown into the car. The hand of Mr. Vardy driving his van from the Nursery
College, showedthis typicalpatterningof these multipletiny showers ofmetalbeing
blown in by the bullets.
Sandra Hill, I have said, was one of the most unlucky girls. There was a single
woundon SandraHill on her rightshoulder. It passedthroughher chestandlacerated
one of the main arteries in her chest and exitedjust below her left arm. It is quite
possible that she never knew what hit her.
Victor and Myrtle Gibbs suffered many 9mm injuries. An X-ray taken of Mrs.
Gibbs in hospital showeda 9mm bullet still within her. Wewere able to recoverthat
at post mortem and send it to the laboratory for comparison with Ryan'sgun.
Those, then, are a few ofthe injuriesthat werepresent.The angles, ranges, calibres
of each of the shots was determined as best we could. It was, I must admit, a pretty
harrowing experience.
Are there any clues why Ryan behaved as he did? None that I know of. Many
theories are beingput forward. Mine is that whenhe came across SusanGodfriedin
SavernakeForest it triggered something. Wedo not know why he wasthere, but he
wasarmed, as he oftenwas. Perhaps the attemptedrape surprised him as much as it
surprised anybody, and when it failed he killed her out of revenge, out of hate for
women in general or out of fear.
That death havingoccurred, Ryanwastrapped. He returned home, fillinghis car
up with petrol en route. When it was found, his car contained survivalequipment.
Had he loaded this up to try and make his escape?When he got back in his car, did
it fail to start? Remember, he had driven his car very hard. Perhaps the engine was
too hot, or it wasfloodedand did not start, so he shot it up. Did the Masons, his next
door neighbourscomplainaboutthe noise, complainabouthim shooting,so he shot
them too?That is one possibility. From then on, the outcome as far as Ryanand his
mother wereconcernedwasinevitable. The only imponderablewashowmanyother
people were going to die as well.
On 6th August 1987, two weeksbeforeHungerford The Sun ran an article on mass
murderers, listed the number of their victims and arranged them in a 'league table'.
I do not know if Ryanread The Sun. It is possible that he did. If so, did this article
influence him? Wewill never know.
Letmejust readtoyoua reportofthepleain mitigation fortheMelbourne massacre,
when seven people were killed, 19 people were injured. This is the plea after a
conviction for sevencounts of murder and 19 counts of causing severe injury. The
lawyersaid: "My client wasa walkingtime bomb at the time of the massacre, after
being expelledfrom military college. After his car broke down, he went to drink in
a bar andbecameevenmoredepressedwhenhis sexualadvances tothe barmaidwere
rebuffed." There was obviouslymore, but is this the reason for mass murder? If so
howcan societyprotect itself?Howcan the policedetectand stopsuchrandomacts?
Are there any conclusionsthat can be usefullydrawn from this incident?My first
The HungerfordMassacre 215

wasgoingto be that suchan eventwillalmostcertainlyhappenagain. AsI wrotethat,

my wife called me downstairsto watchthe televisionand there I sawthe pictures of
the effects of a gunman up in Tyneside, with a shot-gun in a quiet street, shooting
randomly. He does not come into myclassificationof multiple murderers - he only
killed one. He wouldprobably have gone on to kill more if that policeman had not
stoppedhim. He wouldalmostcertainlyhavekilledmore if he had useda Kalashnikov
rifle rather than a relatively low powered shot-gun.
There are many reports from the USAof individuals who havekilled two or three
and injuredmanymore and whoare killed by the policeor whostopbeforetheyreach
the magicnumber of five, and perhaps I will haveto redefinemultiple murder in the
years to come - we shall see.
A member of Ryan'sfamily promised that his ashes would be scattered and that
nothing would remain of Michael Ryan. His body is gone, his ashes have been
scattered,but manythingsremainto remindus ofhis presenceand ofhis last day. The
events in Hungerford in August 1987 were unpredictable, unpreventable, but not
unrepeatable.I am sorry to end on such a pessimistic note, but I fear that I am going
to be provedright in the yearsto come. Let us hopethat we are not in the wrong place
at the wrong time.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for your attention.
THEPRESIDENT: Ladies and gentlemen, because of the time wetook earlier on,
there will notbe verymuchtimeto ask questions beforewehavecoffee. Butif anyone
has questions could they put them quickly to the speaker.
ANDREW JACKSON: I am a student.I am slightlysurprisedaboutyourcomments
relatingto the school. You inferthatwereit notforthe summerholidays MichaelRyan
may havechosen that as his target. I say I am slightly surprised considering that all
the deaths occurred amongstpeople who wereolder. Certainly in relation to the first
killingofMrs. Godfriedat the forest,the childrenwerenot killed. I do notknowwhat
age Mr. Clements' family were, but if children were present they were not killed. It
was the father that was killed. Again, I do not know whether or not children were
playingin the gardens.One wouldpresumethattheymaywellhavebeen. No children
were killed. Whyis it, then, that you say he wouldhavechosen the school - or may
well have done?
DR. SHEPHERD: I think because lunchtime playtime in a school presents a large
bodyofpeople.Ryan undoubtedly shotat a numberofchildren.I havenotdocumented
everyinjury. A numberof childrenwereshotat and wereinjured. Asluck wouldhave
it - and I will phrase my answer that way - most of the people he saw and fired at
wereadult. I am not sayingthat he wouldhavechosen children. What I am sayingis
that in a playground - and we must all have seen them - wouldbe 60/70 children
playing.Wouldhe haveignored them or wouldhe havefired at them?I do not know.
I merely raise it as something that I see in reports from the States as becoming not
uncommon - the choosingofa schoolas the place for a mass murder. I feel - I have
young children myself - that it is a worrying development.
THEPRESIDENT: Thank you very much.