All language subtitles for The.Wimbledon.Killer.S01.720p.AMZN.WEB-DL.DDP5.1.H.264-RAWR[EZTVx.to]

It's 10:30 in the
morning, a sunny day.

Wimbledon Common is
busy with dog walkers,

lots of men, women, and children.

Hundreds of people use
Wimbledon Common every day.

Women went there jogging and walking.

It was thought to be entirely safe.

Emergency,
which service do you require?

A man out walking with his dog

sees the naked body of a young woman.

She'd been walking her
little boy on Wimbledon Common,

and he was found
clinging to her body,

crying, "Wake up
mummy, wake up mummy."

She was covered in blood.

The only thing that he
felt in his little mind

that he could do to help his mother

was to try and staunch her bleeding.

He was only two years
and a few months.

He has placed a till
receipt on her forehead

as a make-do bandage.

He's clearly distraught.

He's asking for his mummy to get up,

but unfortunately that can't
be the case because she's dead.

The Rachel Nickell case
just hit the headlines.

I don't think I'll ever
forget the image of her

that was circulated at the time.

Beautiful young woman with
all her future ahead of her.

For somebody to have the gall
to do something like that

in broad daylight and in
front of a child is shocking.

Many people must be
asking, is anyone safe

when murders can take
place in broad daylight?

The crime was so horrendous

it began to herald in a
whole new era of fear.

Police
sought to dispel fears

about sex attacks on
women in open spaces

like Wimbledon Common.

He needs to be stopped
before women felt safe again.

I can honestly tell you that
this is the most horrendous

and vicious attack
that I've ever seen.

The inquiry that was
launched was one of the biggest

since the Yorkshire Ripper.

Millions of pounds were spent
trying to capture this man.

No stone was left unturned.

Despite this, no one was convicted

for the murder of Rachel
Nickell for another 16 years.

Most people remember the murder

of Rachel Nickell
on Wimbledon Common.

However, what a lot of
people don't realize,

the perpetrator could
have been caught earlier.

This killer could
have been apprehended

if only there hadn't been a catalogue

of tragic missed opportunities

Could there have been
serious offenses stopped

for want of a better word?

And I think the
answer to that is yes.

To understand how it was
that Rachel Nickell's killer

was free to commit a
whole chain of atrocities,

we need to go back to 1989.

Still into the mid-20s today

across the region
with some light winds

going into the afternoon.

There's a chance of a few light
showers later this evening

moving through the region,

but with high temperatures remaining.

There was a young mother
at home with her children.

The children were having breakfast.

It's
going to be quite a muggy night

with humid temperatures down to
around 14 degrees in the region.

When a man entered
via the rear door.

He was armed with a
back-handled Stanley knife.

He threatened the mother saying
that if she didn't comply,

she would endanger the children.

The mother's natural
instinct would of course be to

protect her children
beyond anything else.

He made her kneel on the bed,

pull her T-shirt over her head,

and then he raped her.

He then left saying that,

"You should really make sure
you lock your back door."

It's almost like he's
saying she's responsible.

The woman immediately
contacted the police,

and she was very brave to
allow herself to be examined.

To come forward as a
woman and be examined

and tell your story and go through it
all again is difficult.

It's very, very difficult.

The forensic officers
were able to recover DNA,

but we had nothing to
compare it against.

DNA profiling back then
isn't like it is now.

There wouldn't have been a DNA
database like there is today.

They weren't even on computer,

so it's completely different now.

It's so much easier
and so much quicker

to match somebody if
they're on the system

and they've been previously arrested.

In 1989, it required police
to catch the individual

and do a match to that individual.

That incident happened
in South East London,

near Winn's Common.

That bit of parkland
is dissected by a road,

and then you have Plumstead Common

on the other side of that road.

The commons of Plumstead
and Winn's Common

form part of what they
call the Green Chain Walk.

Over the next two or three years,

there were a number of
very nasty attacks on women

on the Green Chain, which
was a series of parks

and open spaces linked by footpaths,

popular with dog walkers and joggers

and people out for a stroll.

It's places people can
go for a nice country walk

where you're not in a built up area.

And it's a nice relaxing
place to go and walk.

And of course, it's
an ideal hunting ground

if you're a potential rapist.

At the time, I was living
around South East London.

I was late teens, early 20s.

My dad was telling
me, "You don't go near

the Green Chain Walks without
somebody being with you,"

because of what was going on.

Makes you feel very, very uneasy.

Everybody needs to
look after each other,

so you need to keep an
eye on other people.

And if the worst things happen,

you need to try and attract
attention to yourself.

Shout and scream, kick your
shoes off and run away.

Back then, you didn't
have mobile phones.

The only thing you could rely
on is if you had a panic alarm

or what we used to call back then,

we used to call them rape alarms.

And if it's dark, I'd have
your keys between your fingers

or you make sure you've got
something with you for safety.

Back in 1989, we were really
something in the dark ages

in terms of what the police could do.

There was hardly any CCTV,
so the man responsible

was able, unfortunately, to
carry on and attack other women.

We didn't think it was just
one man who was responsible

for all of those attacks.

But in March 1982, that changed.

In 1992, in South
London near Lewisham,

a teenager, a 17-year-old
was getting off a bus.

It was evening

and she notices a man following her.

We are so aware, as women,
who's behind us.

If there's a guy walking a
bit too close behind you,

it's very unnerving.

He was following her
and then he disappeared,

and then he reappeared
in front of her

and he produced a knife.

He made her undress
and tried to rape her,

and then he punched her
in the face very hard.

The young lady obviously
feared for her life.

She eventually runs
to a friend's house

and does report the attack to police,

and they are able to
take DNA evidence.

The DNA taken from
the 17-year-old girl

could be compared to the
1989 offense near Plumstead.

It revealed that it was
the same individual.

This was a light bulb
moment for the police

because they suddenly realized

that the 1989 incident
had not been a one-off.

And the 1992 incident
was not a one-off.

These were linked offenses,

and there was a probability
that with a gap of three years,

there have been other offences
where they hadn't been able

to recover forensic evidence.

And so they began to
look at other crimes

that had been reported.

They realized then that they had

a serial attacker on their hands.

The individual has now escalated

the level of violence
against his victims.

It's an unnecessary physical
assault on the young woman,

which would then indicate
that he probably enjoys

inflicting pain onto his victims.

And in all likelihood, he
will continue to escalate.

It's now obviously
extremely important

that this man is arrested
as soon as possible.

Operation Eccleston was formed.

A team of officers whose sole job

was to try and track this
man down and put him in jail,

where obviously he belonged.

But the police have no one to go on.

The descriptions were poor.

Obviously events were traumatic.

We had a description of a white male,

medium build, height around 5'8.

The advice is to try and remember

as much as you can about somebody.

But if you were being
attacked by someone,

your first thing is
self-preservation.

To have the height of somebody,

they're not standing up in front
of you nicely and straight.

So it's a guess.

The Eccleston team
have an artist impression

of the Green Chain Rapist
based on the information given

from the actual victims themselves.

That circulation, they
would hope, would then lead

to someone known to the
culprit coming forward

and making an identification.

Unfortunately, that didn't work.

Let's have a reality check here.

You've got a rape inquiry team.

You're talking about
10, 15 officers of that.

If you've thrown a team of,
say, 50 detectives

onto the Green Chain Rapist series,

I'm sure he would've been
arrested much, much quicker.

But the harsh reality is
that's not how it was.

In a fairly short space of time,
another attack happened,

and both these attacks
took place, you know,

late in the evening.

But in May 1992,
there was a complete departure

from this pattern of crime.

A woman was walking along a
footpath in a parkland area.

It's 2:00 PM in the afternoon.

And she has her child
with her in a buggy.

Why would she think in broad daylight

that she would be at any risk?

She was aware of a man
following her who disappeared

and then suddenly he wrapped
some form of ligature

around her neck and
pulled her to the ground.

He punches her several times
very hard, and he rapes her.

It's very unusual for
someone to attack a young mum

out with a pram in broad daylight.

He must know the threat
of attack on the child

will ensure compliance.

DNA linked that attack to
the Green Chain rape series.

She was able to give
a description of a man

around a six-foot mark, which
was of course, very different.

The other victims were
giving a height range

of a man who was 5'7, 5'8.

And this becomes quite
a crucial part of the case

in terms of the police investigation

and the focus on the
height of the assailant.

Sometime later, the woman
changed the description

to a shorter man.

She gave a height
around the 5'7, 5'8,

bearing in mind that she's
been badly beaten up.

A member of her family
was unable to recognise her.

She was in such a, you know, bad way.

It told the police that
they were dealing with

a very dangerous man.

I mean, if he was prepared
to do that to a woman

in front of a child,
what else was he prepared to do?

And fast forward a few months,

you have the Wimbledon Common
slaying of Rachel Nickell.

It was very traumatic,
very unusual.

I had certainly no memory
of anything like that

happening in the UK.

Murdered in broad daylight,

a woman is stabbed
and her son attacked.

The attack happened

in a secluded part of Wimbledon
Common in broad daylight.

A man out walking his dog came across

a woman he believed was sunbathing.

It was difficult not to hear about
the murder of Rachel Nickell.

It was such a high-profile case.

It was on all of the news channels.

Police are hunting for a
man who murdered a young woman

and attacked her 2-year-old
son while they were walking

on Wimbledon Common this morning.

She was sexually assaulted
and her throat had been cut.

When you have a crime like this,

it does bring everybody up
short and everybody thinks,

"Oh, maybe that could
have been me there,

but for the grace of God."

You think you're going to
be safe in broad daylight

right in the open like that.

The level of publicity does create

an enormous amount of pressure
to arrest the culprit.

It is very trying,
very, very challenging.

There was a huge police
response to this crime.

I think, you know, from
Land's End to John o'Groats,

people were saying, "I'm
not going out on my own

while this killer is out there."

No stone was going
to be left unturned

to try and identify and
arrest this individual.

The body of the victim is generally

the main source of evidence.

Adhesive tapings are
placed on the body

and hopefully sticky adhesive
then will lift skin cells,

semen, saliva, and fibers that

may have been transposed
by the culprit.

Rachel's 49 stab wounds were
created by a very sharp knife.

And the depth of those
wounds would indicate

that the knife was thrust
inside the body so hard

that the hilt left marks on the skin.

And so the individual
who created those wounds

clearly meant to kill.

It was a frenzied attack by
a very disturbed individual.

Rachel's son Alex had been
pushed face down into the mud

at one point and dragged by
his feet away from his mother.

And the crime scene manager
had the presence of mind

to comb the child's hair.

The police recovered red
material from his hair.

It was identified as being paint.

The crime scene manager at that time

wouldn't have known the importance

that would play sometime later.

Alex clearly had had
a look at the man

he referred to as the bad man.

We enlisted the help
of child psychologists

in order to obtain the
best evidence from him.

This is a 2-year-old
who's gone through

an unbelievably traumatic experience.

He was, however, able to
give a man's description.

He's seeing a white
man with a white shirt.

This does tie in with
the other witnesses.

One woman in particular
recalled seeing a man

who wore a white shirt.

He was washing his
hands by a stream nearby

and she got a good look at his face.

The woman described the man
as possibly being flat-footed.

He had an unusual gait.

We examined that area and we
found shoe marks in the mud.

Plaster of Paris casts
were taken off those marks

in the hope that one
day we would find a man

who possessed such a pair of shoes

and therefore link them
back to the crime scene.

All of these clues have no use

until we can actually lay hands

on the man who killed Rachel Nickell.

The police are desperate.

They don't really have any leads.

There's no forensic evidence

that connects them with the killer.

Around about this time,

there was an increased
interest in the science

of forensic psychology
across all police circles.

The police started to think

that having a forensic
psychologist on board,

that might be useful to solve
the murder of Rachel Nickell.

So one thing they
did was to introduce

a man called Paul Britton,

who was a forensic psychologist.

They invited Paul
Britton to tell them

what kind of person they thought
would've committed a crime

of this horrendous nature.

The profile that
Paul Briton produced

was that the suspect
would be a white male.

He would be in his 20s.

He probably lived alone.

He would work
in a low-skilled job.

Probably very shy.

He probably didn't
have a girlfriend.

He wouldn't be able to have
a sexual relationship of his own.

He was inadequate in that way.

The man was a loner.

He probably was
interested in pornography.

He would live locally and
would know the area very well.

It was decided to use the
publicity surrounding the case

to find the suspect.

So the police contacted "Crimewatch."

"Crimewatch UK" started in 1984.

It was a whole new
concept in television

because we were showing
people real crimes

and asking people if they could help.

Nick Ross and I were the presenters.

The hope of course of the programme

was to solve serious
crimes that police

hadn't been able to solve themselves.

The first thing of course
"Crimewatch" does is

we reconstructed Rachel's walk

across the common
with her little boy.

And we showed a photo fit of a man

who'd been seen in
the area at the time.

Some information
was released from the profile

provided by Paul Britton.

It was a crime of such magnitude

and everybody knew about it.

Every single call, no matter
how trivial it might seem,

had to be checked and
checked over and looked at.

There may just be one call
that will make the difference,

someone who will provide a name.

Among the calls, we
had people who thought

they recognised the
photo fit we'd shown,

and a name was mentioned,
and that name was Colin Stagg.

Colin Stagg was a
person of interest.

They went to Colin's address.

They found this individual
who lived alone.

During the search of his home,

it was noted by the officers
that one of his bedrooms

was painted black with various,

what they considered
to be occult symbols

on the walls, which was unusual.

There were certain
things about Colin Stagg

that did absolutely tally
with Paul Britton's analysis.

He had some pornographic type,
girly magazines,

collection of knives.

When they asked Colin Stagg
if he could provide them

with the shoes that he
was wearing that day,

he told them that
he'd thrown them away,

which was, in police eyes,
a major red flag.

Colin Stagg is
arrested for questioning.

When Colin was arrested,
he answered every question

and he agreed he'd been on the common

that morning walking his dog Brandy.

But he had left the common,

and when he woke up having
recovered from a headache

that he'd suffered, he
went back up to the common

to discover that it was closed

because the murder had taken place.

He had had a conversation
with a uniformed PC

and that police officer felt that

he'd been acting suspiciously
and had an unhealthy interest

in what was going on.

Is it that the killer will return

to the scene of his crime?

Or was it just the
interest of somebody,

"Why can't I go on the common
where I normally take my dog?"

The forensic psychologist
thought our murderer

might well have committed
other sexual offenses.

He may or may not have
been caught for them,

but he thought that there'd
be a history there somehow.

During the course of the interview,

Colin offered up to the
police the fact that

he had on occasion sunbathed
nude on Wimbledon Common.

And he felt someone
might have seen him.

A short time
after Rachel was murdered,

a woman reported to the police.

She'd seen a man sort
of lying on the grass

and he'd indecently
exposed himself to her.

They supported the profile
provided by Paul Britten

as someone who would
indulge in indecent exposure

or similar offenses.

A light bulb goes on
and they think, "Aha,

look at the profile,
look at the profile.

This is our man."

This is where he's edging towards

being our red hot suspect.

Colin Stagg spent three
days in police custody.

At the end of the three
days of interview,

the police are left with no
physical evidence against Colin.

No blood evidence, no DNA evidence,

no identification evidence.

All they have is
this admission by him

to sunbathing nude on the common.

They have nothing else
against him at all.

So in the end, Stagg goes
before the local magistrates,

pleads guilty for indecent exposure.

He gets a fine, and as
far as he's concerned,

he thinks that's the end of it.

Of course, once
Colin has pleaded guilty

at Wimbledon Magistrates
Court to indecent exposure,

he's named and shamed.

It's in the newspaper.

It was on the news that night,

him coming out of court
looking angry and upset.

And so everybody that has
seen him on the common thinks,

there is Colin Stagg,
convicted sex offender.

A lot of people believe
there's no smoke without fire.

No!

As far as the
newspapers were concerned,

Colin Stagg was public
enemy number one.

The fallout from that is a
woman contacts Scotland Yard.

And she says, "I've been
looking for a partner.

So I've been putting
some advertisements

into a Lonely Hearts column."

Lonely Hearts columns
were where people would put

an advert in a newspaper
for looking for love.

And somebody has
responded, and this person

is a chap who signs
himself Colin Stagg.

The letter he wrote to her

was not an ordinary love letter.

This was highly sexually explicit.

And of course, at Scotland Yard,
their ears prick up

and they say, "Oh, you
know, we really need

to see those letters please."

Part of the profile
provided by Paul Britton

had stated he would have
extreme sexual fantasies.

The letter added to the
suspicion against Colin Stagg.

Subsequently, Colin
received a letter from a woman

calling herself Lizzie
James, who claimed to be

a friend of the lady who Colin

had the unwelcome
correspondence with.

And Lizzie made it quite
plain in that first letter

that she would welcome
such graphic and blunt

and explicit correspondence.

And Colin took that
letter at face value

and he began to
enthusiastically write back.

Lizzie James was a
female police officer.

So they set up a
honey trap basically.

One way or another,
by his responses to this woman,

he'll either rule himself in
or rule himself out of this inquiry.

So there's Colin
sitting at home, lonely,

as famously became known, a virgin.

Starts getting these incredibly
sexually explicit letters.

And every time Colin
responded to them,

they would encourage him to write

even more extreme material.

The correspondence convinced
the investigation team

that Colin Stagg had
violent sexual fantasies.

There was a mention of a knife

and that was obviously the method

used to kill Rachel Nickell.

The team felt he was
further implicating himself

and he may reveal where the
murder weapon was located

and provide evidence that
only the killer would know.

During the course
of the correspondence,

eventually it was agreed
that they would meet

and they met in Hyde Park.

As far as Scotland
Yard was concerned,

they're dealing here with
a pathological killer.

Lizzie James purported
to being involved

in the ritual sacrifice
of a mother and her baby

and having sex afterwards

and that being the only time
she'd ever had an orgasm

and that she could only
be excited by somebody

who had been involved
in something similar.

He just thought she was nuts,

but he was so desperate
for a relationship,

he didn't end it after
she raised that fantasy

'cause he didn't believe it was true.

Colin had let Lizzie know
that he had been arrested

in relation to the
Wimbledon Common killing.

He described being shown
photographs of Rachel's body

and described her lying with
her hands as if in prayer.

The police said that
that was a description

that only the killer would've known.

At one point, she actually expressed,

"Oh, I wish you'd done it.

Then we could be together."

So there was Colin desperate
to have the relationship

and was still not willing to admit
what she wanted him to admit,

namely that he was the killer
because he wasn't the killer.

It was a step too far.

The undercover
officer, Lizzie James,

never elicits a confession
from Colin Stagg,

but the police decided
that there were sufficient

circumstantial evidence to
present the case at trial.

Colin Stagg is rearrested.

Get out of the way.

After
being held overnight

at a police station nearby,
Colin Stagg was driven quickly

into Wimbledon Magistrates Court

charged with the murder
of Rachel Nickell.

Colin was remanded in
custody for 13 months.

As far as the police are concerned,

Colin Stagg has been eliminated
as a danger to women.

He's behind bars.

The risk of the public is
now nil from him apparently.

And the case is solved.

On the other side of London,

the investigation for the
Green Chain rape series

thought that Colin Stagg could
well have been responsible.

The DNA of Colin Stagg was
checked against those on file.

Colin's DNA was not a match
for the Green Chain rapes.

So they were looking
for another suspect.

Then the Green Chain Rapist team

are contacted by the
member of the public

who having seen the artist
impression compiled by them,

felt that he was a very good likeness

of her neighbour, Robert Napper.

Robert Napper presented himself

to the officers as a
quietly spoken individual,

someone who didn't openly display

any sign of mental illness.

Really nothing unusual about him.

Obviously to their mind,
didn't fit the behavior

of someone who would be
responsible for those crimes.

And seeing him in the
flesh, so to speak,

assessed him in excess of six feet.

He was about 6'1, 6'2,

which of course didn't
match the height profile

provided by the victims.

Police asked him to provide
a DNA sample for comparison.

He said he would, and the
officers made an appointment

and Robert Napper didn't turn up.

Sometime later, and another
request made for him to attend,

again, to give a DNA sample,

and again, he didn't attend.

When they looked at his height,

they decided, no, he's too tall.

And he was eliminated
from the inquiries.

It's easy in hindsight
saying, "Well, why didn't you?"

Well, that is a tough call for me.

And the fact that you don't get DNA

and you don't go chasing
the guy for it is wrong.

You know, Napper should
have been chased.

His address should have been sat on.

Soon as he comes out, you're nicked.

In October 1992,
the police get a call

from the manager of a print shop.

And they said a man has
been in requesting copies

of note paper with the
Met Police logo on it.

You know, to copy that is an offence.

The man was arrested.

It was Robert Napper.

His address was then searched.

A handgun was found with
200 rounds of ammunition,

a crossbow, and an A-Z
of the streets of London.

The A-Z contained dots, markings.

X's on various locations
in woodland areas

in the South East of London.

At the time, the police
don't pay much heed to this.

He said that these were just
areas that he was visiting

or he was going for a walk in.

That was his reason
for marking the A-Z.

Robert Napper was
subsequently charged

for the possession of a
firearm and the ammunition.

In 1992, it was not standard practice

to take DNA from everyone
who was arrested.

His offense was nonsexual.

So they don't take any DNA
evidence from Robert Napper,

which meant they couldn't link him

with the evidence they had
from the Green Chain rapes.

Were the officers
involved in the arrest

and search of the firearms
on the rape inquiry team?

Probably not, so you're
not getting the link.

So much was paper-based back then

that you haven't got the
manpower to check everything

that somebody's done,
and for that person

to have the knowledge of
what's going on in the area

to be able to link everything.

In July 1993, police
receive a call from a neighbor

of a young woman who
lived in Rutherglen Road

who would often leave her
curtains open at night.

It's a row of houses,

which back onto the Green Chain Walk.

And the neighbor says that this man's

been sort of lurking in
the area, a Peeping Tom,

and she's concerned about this.

Police arrived, spoke to the man,
searched him.

The person turned out
to be Robert Napper.

The detective who apprehended
Robert Napper at the time

did make a note that his
behavior was suspicious

and that perhaps this should
have been looked into further.

But it wasn't.

There hadn't been an attack

on the Green Chain
Walk for over a year.

Operation Eccleston
had been closed down.

And so therefore that
information remained locally

and wasn't actioned any further.

Opportunities were missed
to stop him in his tracks

before he did any more harm.

The luck of the devil.

On the morning of
November the 4th, 1993,

the boyfriend of a young
mother who lived in Plumstead

came home after a night
shift to her flat.

And he was met with
a horrendous scene.

There were clothes
all over the place.

At first he thought
there might have been

a break in or something.

And then he found the
body of his girlfriend,

Samantha Bissett, sitting
upright on the sofa

and her arms were sticking out
of what looked like clothing.

And his girlfriend had a
young daughter, Jasmine,

and he went to look for her
and found her under the duvet.

Clearly thought something
awful had happened

and didn't look any further
and called the police.

The first day at work,

I was sent to Thamesmead
Police Station

on the Bissett murder inquiry.

You arrive at the police station

and all you know is you've
got a female victim.

You don't know anything else.

And it just comes in
little bit by bit by bit.

And obviously 22 years old,
you're seeing stuff that

is quite shocking to realize

what one human being
can do to another.

Samantha had been cut from

pretty much her
abdomen to her throat.

The way he left
Samantha was disgusting.

Absolutely disgusting.

He obviously had no respect at all.

They discovered the body
of her daughter, Jasmine,

and she had been sexually molested.

Good evening.

Detectives say it's
the most vicious murder

they've ever had to investigate.

Samantha Bissett
was brutally murdered

along with her 4-year-old
daughter, Jasmine.

It's a double murder,

but the circumstances
of what's been done

to Samantha is truly horrendous.

The police had a very urgent need

to find out who'd done this.

Is this the work of a serial killer?

Has he struck already and
is he going to strike again?

Police want
to question a number of men

seen in the area on the
night of the murders.

Their fear that the
killer might strike again

cannot be overstated.

In a murder investigation,

you're looking for
fingerprints, fibres, any blood,

DNA left by the suspect.

Unfortunately in this case,
there was no DNA found.

There were fingerprints at the scene

which were all accounted for.

The best evidence we found
was a training shoe mark

in blood at the scene.

But we have nothing
to compare it against.

She was a young woman as we were.

And you feel a connection
to her age group,

or it could have been us or,
and her family as well.

You just, because you're
in the middle of it,

you feel for everybody involved.

The whole team was
focused on one thing.

They desperately, desperately
wanted to catch him

and wouldn't stop
until they caught him.

Paul Britton was
called in to do a profile

concerning the Bissett murders.

He felt it wasn't the same.

Rachel Nickell was a blitz attack

over a very short period of time.

This killer had taken his time.

He had been with Samantha
well over an hour.

And he felt it wasn't the same.

The senior investigating
officer decided

to rerun the fingerprint
search again.

It was a fingerprint on the
headboard of Jasmine's bed.

And that turned out
to be the perpetrator.

The fingerprints were run
through the police indices

and they matched Robert Napper.

All of us got a phone
call to say they've got him.

As soon as we
identified Robert Napper

as the suspect for
the Bissett murders,

his police file was pulled.

When we saw the photograph
of him, one of the team

immediately said,
"That's the Green Chain Walk rapist."

It fits the photo fit.

The Bissett team revisit
his previous arrest

for the firearms offense.

Personal items have been taken
during the course of the search.

One of those items was an
A-Z with markings there on.

When they examined that A-Z,

they can see the markings matched up

with the Green Chain
rape series locations.

He's not gonna go
straight for murder.

And the rapes were a buildup to that.

Realized there was
a lot more markings

than the crimes they had before them.

So the question is,
what else has he done?

Is he responsible for
other unsolved crimes,

including the murder of Rachel
Nickell on Wimbledon Common?