All language subtitles for Fatal.Fraud.S01E10.1080p.WEB.h264-CODSWALLOP_track3_[eng]

(Narrator) Every fraud
begins with a promise.

(Vicky Thakordas-Desai)
She paid for their weddings.

She paid for various trips.

She wanted to look after
them as best as she could.

(Narrator) A quick fortune,
easy money,

or a life transformed overnight?

She would have left
a reasonable estate behind.

It would have been
a sizeable sum of money.

(Narrator) But behind
these illusions lie

calculated deceptions,
carefully hidden in plain sight.

It's not uncommon
for us to see economic abuse

mixed with psychological abuse
or coercive control.

It's relatively easy
with online banking

for someone to help or coerce
someone into transferring

money out of their investments
into another bank account.

(Narrator) Sometimes these
criminals are backed into a corner

and feel their only
way out is to kill.

(Sheila Anderson)
I just felt very, very sad

that somebody would want money
so desperately that you'd

have to end somebody's life.

(suspenseful music)

(distant siren wailing)

(bright music)

(Emma Wilson) My name is
Emma Wilson,

and I'm a fire scientist.

I investigate fires,
usually on behalf of the police,

usually the primary investigator.

So I attend a fire scene
when I'm invited to

to work out where it started,
how it started, and if possible,

to help with who might have
started it, if there is a who.

(tense music)

(Narrator) In the early hours
of December 15, 2021,

a fire was reported in the suburbs
of Newark, Nottinghamshire.

(tense music)

I first got involved in
this case when I was contacted

by Nottinghamshire Police.

I was told that it was
a domestic fire,

that there had been a fatality.

The victim's name was
Elizabeth Vamplew.

(tense music)

I was told that it had been
investigated by a team initially,

but their findings were
inconclusive,

and that they needed a second
opinion in order to be able

to confirm the route that
the investigation should go.

(Narrator) Elizabeth Vamplew was a
77-year-old mother and grandmother,

and a familiar face amongst
the tight-knit community

of her quiet cul-de-sac.

(Sheila) I'm Sheila Anderson.

I was born and Broadnook,
and I came

down here to live in a bungalow
because of my disability.

Elizabeth was a very,
very lovely woman.

When I opened the paper and I saw
that, I was really shocked.

I couldn't believe it.

It was just something that you
don't hear of all the time,

not it like that.

(unsettling music)

My name is Poppy Everton.

I work for Hourglass Safer Ageing.

Elizabeth was a really warm
and caring person,

somebody that was always going out
of her way to support and help

the people around her
and her loved ones.

She was a devoted mother
and grandmother,

really enjoyed spending time
with her grandkids.

That was when she was
at her happiest.

She ultimately loved Christmas,
and her family

often talk about how that time
of year brought her such joy.

Very, very well liked amongst
family, friends,

and the community as a whole.

(Narrator) Elizabeth was
most happy tending

her small but well-kept garden

and spoiling her three
beloved grandchildren.

We also know that Elizabeth would
help with money or gifts

for her family, whether that
be at birthdays, Christmases,

and just making sure that
they felt supported by her.

My name is
Dr Vicky Thakordas-Desai

and I am a consultant
forensic psychologist.

(tense music)

Elizabeth seemed to be
a doting and caring mother.

She clearly loved her children.

She wanted the best for them.

She had supported them
financially.

She paid for their weddings,

she paid
for various trips for them,

and it just seemed
that she wanted to look

after them as best as she could.

(Narrator) Elizabeth suffered
from limited mobility

and required visits
from nurses twice a day.

My name is Peter Joyce,
King's Counsel,

and I was the lead
prosecutor in the case.

Elizabeth was very disabled.

Her breathing was poor.

Her mobility was very poor.

She had to go around
in a wheelchair.

She was put to bed.

She was got up.

She was basically looked after.

She was all but bedbound,
but not quite.

(Narrator) One of
Elizabeth's nurses was

her daughter-in-law,
Karen Vamplew.

(Sheila) Actually, I've bumped
into Karen a time or two,

and I've spoken to her,
and we just said hello,

and she just seemed an
ordinary person like myself.

(Poppy) Karen was an
informal carer for Elizabeth,

so although Elizabeth had
paid carers coming in,

Karen was helping her
with particular things

that she may have
needed support with.

(Vicky) By Karen
regularly checking in on Elizabeth

and being present for her,
it seems that Elizabeth

would have felt a sense of
trust and safety around Karen.

Here was somebody who was
looking after her,

who wanted to ensure her
well-being.

(Narrator) Karen Vamplew
was a 41-year-old

mother of four who was known
to have financial difficulties.

Karen Vamplew was married
to Elizabeth Vamplew's son.

Karen had trouble making
ends meet.

There's no question about that.

(Vicky) Chronic
financial stress can be

very debilitating
for an individual.

So the level of pressure
that she would have been

under to pay off her debts,
to support her family

would have been immense.

(Narrator) At 1:25 AM
on December 15, 2021,

Karen Vamplew called
emergency services

to report a fire
at Elizabeth's home.

(siren wailing)

The version of events given by
Karen was that she had woken up

in the early hours
of the morning,

had become nervous around
her mother-in-law,

and wanted to check on her.

She drove to the property,
said that when she got there,

she had realised she'd
forgotten her keys

and couldn't remember
the number for the key safe.

She said she'd gone
there to look because she

had not had a call from Elizabeth.

(Emma) So she tried
to raise her mother-in-law

by knocking on the door
and the windows,

and could not get any attention.

But she also doesn't describe
seeing, hearing,

or smelling anything else
at that time.

My understanding
is that she was initially

present for a significant
period of time,

when she couldn't find her keys
and couldn't access the key lock,

according to her.

She then says that she goes
back home to retrieve her key,

but that she'd only left the
area for around 10 minutes,

and then returned.

And when she returns,

she opens the front door
to Elizabeth's bungalow

and immediately sees smoke.

She said she'd
found the fire light.

She said that she'd gone in
and pressed an alarm button.

(Emma) Then Karen immediately
contacts the fire service.

(tense music)

(siren wailing)

(Narrator) Fire services took just
five minutes to respond,

arriving at Elizabeth's home
at 1:30 AM.

When the fire service arrive,
Karen has then explained

to the fire crews
and the fire investigator that

her mother-in-law was
a heavy smoker

and had a habit of smoking in bed.

(Narrator) When firemen entered
the blazing property,

they encountered intense heat
and smoke two feet from the floor.

They found Elizabeth crouched
at the foot of her bed.

Elizabeth had to be
rescued by two very brave

firemen who got her out
alive, despite the fact

she was grievously injured.

She was saying something
about cigarettes

to the nurse at the hospital.

(Narrator) Elizabeth was suffering
from burns to 80% of her body

and from the effects
of smoke inhalation.

Elizabeth was recovered
outside by the firefighters

and actually was later taken
to hospital, and died there.

(Sheila) All over the television,
Facebook, social media,

and in the "Newark Advertiser."

And it was in
the "Newark Advertiser" that

I read all about it properly.

I feel very, very sad
that the lady had to die.

(unsettling music)

(Narrator) On December 15, 2021,

77-year-old Elizabeth Vamplew died

after being rescued
from her burning home.

And police immediately
launched an investigation.

(Emma) When I was first told
that there had been a fatality,

I was told that she was
an elderly lady who lived

in an address on her own,

that she had carers
come to help her

on a daily basis in the morning
and in the evening,

and that she was largely bedbound
and needed help to move around.

I was also told that she had a son
and a daughter-in-law who were

part of her family group,
and that her daughter-in-law was

part of her care group
at times, as well.

(unsettling music)

(Narrator) In the initial stages
of the investigation,

police had little evidence
to suggest the fire was

not caused by Elizabeth dropping
a cigarette in her bedroom.

The information that
Karen Vamplew gave

to the fire investigation team
at that initial stage

was that Elizabeth was
a very heavy smoker

and tended to smoke in bed.

However, information
from the carers was

that she did not smoke in her bed.

She smoked once in the morning
and once in the evening.

Elizabeth was quite
canny in some ways,

because she pretended
she didn't smoke, but did,

and hid the cigarette ends
in the kitchen

or smoked outside the door.

But she was also very
careful about smoking

because whenever she
finished her cigarette,

she would put it out under a tap
and hide it away to get rid of it.

(Emma) The information
about smoking in her bed

was only ever received from Karen,
so that was the route

that the initial investigation
team followed,

that she was a heavy smoker.

Their conclusion was that the fire
was most likely the cause

of a dropped lit cigarette
in the bed.

(tense music)

(Narrator) As part of
the initial investigation,

both Elizabeth's son
and daughter-in-law Karen

were questioned by police.

He was very angry that
that had happened to him.

Quite clearly, being at home on
the night of his mother's death,

there was nothing to do with him.

(Narrator) Police were particularly
interested in questioning

Karen about her movements
on the night Elizabeth died.

She said she'd gone there to look

because she had not had
a call from Elizabeth.

Her account was she found the fire

and had gone round by chance
that night.

That was the basic story.

There was CCTV evidence
of her leaving her home.

There was evidence of her
car arriving and being parked

quite near to Elizabeth's home.

There was CCTV evidence of her
running away from the first visit

back to her car...
not walking, running.

There was CCTV evidence
of her getting home

carrying what looked like a towel.

There was more CCTV evidence
of her coming out of her house,

again, about two minutes
later, having changed,

and going back, purporting
then to find the house on fire.

(Narrator) Police also discovered
Karen contacted

the home insurance company
the very day

that Elizabeth had died
in the fire.

Karen contacted the insurers
on the same day

her mother-in-law dies,
and it really just shows

how insensitive she was
to the situation.

But equally, it raised suspicions.

(tense music)

(Narrator) In early 2022,
police decided

to take a more detailed look
into Karen Vamplew's background.

(Emma) I was given
very little detail

about the background of the case.

It helps me to remain unbiased.

Since my initial examination
of the information,

my understanding is that
there was some fraud aspect

to it involving
financial gain of Karen

taking money from Elizabeth.

Karen was hard up, no question.

Karen Vamplew's main interest
in life, it seemed to me,

was actually money for Karen.

(tense music)

Karen needed Elizabeth's
money to make ends meet,

to maintain her lifestyle
with her husband and kids.

(Narrator) Despite having
no previous criminal record,

police discovered that
Karen had been accused

of financial misdealings
in the past.

(Peter Joyce) She'd had a previous
relationship, which had ended,

when it was suggested
that she'd taken money.

And she then dumped
that particular friend

or male friend when that came out.

She wasn't charged
with anything about that,

but she was investigated about it.

(Narrator) Police also discovered

that in the weeks leading up
to her death,

Karen made a number
of cash withdrawals

from Elizabeth's account.

I looked at all
the banking evidence.

I looked at the evidence
of Elizabeth's expenses,

which we saw down the years.

Some of the material
that she'd given to Karen

or money she'd given to Karen
were legitimate, but very few.

(tense music)

My name is Fiona Hotston Moore,
and I'm a forensic accountant

and expert witness.

Typically, when we're looking
at someone like Elizabeth

and they're a bit older

and perhaps spending
a lot of time at home,

we expect to see
fairly modest expenditure.

We would see small amounts
for looking after themselves,

maybe the odd gift
to the family members,

and then regular payments
to their carers.

So it's a very consistent pattern.

(Poppy) When Karen was
interviewed by police

several times,
at a certain point,

it was disclosed that
some of the bills

for Karen and her husband were
actually in Elizabeth's name.

And the reason that
was given for this was that,

ultimately,
the company was potentially

going to cut Karen and her
partner off due to the debts,

potentially,
that had accrued already.

And so they had put this
in Elizabeth's name.

Karen did mention that
Elizabeth was aware of this.

If I was looking at the records
and I noticed that someone was

paying someone else's bills,

then that could potentially
be a red flag.

Why would they be paying them?

It could be out of the
kindness of their heart,

but it could suggest that actually
they weren't aware they were

paying someone else's bills,

or there was a level
of coercion going on.

(Narrator) When police examined
Elizabeth's bank statements,

the number of unusual
cash withdrawals led

investigators to suspect
that Elizabeth had

been the victim of economic abuse.

I think older people,
the most common form of abuse

is economic abuse.

It's often for some
form of financial gain.

So it's not uncommon
for us to see economic abuse

mixed with psychological
abuse or coercive control.

(soft music)

(Peter) Karen was
one of Elizabeth's carers.

Karen played on that to have
access to Elizabeth's finances.

Often the power dynamic when
there are care and support needs

for the victims can be worrying
when that person who's delivering

that care and support
is ultimately somebody

who has their own gain in mind.

And somebody who needs that
level of care and support

is going to be very dependent
on that person

to provide that for them.

And unfortunately, that puts
them in the perfect position

to exploit that power.

Karen was in a trusted position.

She was supporting Elizabeth,

and it is possible
that because she was

helping her in her
day-to-day activities,

that she felt entitled
to something from Elizabeth

and entitled to that money.

(Poppy) Karen admitted
in a police interview

that she felt that
Elizabeth was quite well off,

money wise, in her opinion.

And ultimately,
Elizabeth was in a position

where she owned the bungalow
that she lived in.

She was able to pay
independently for carers,

for a cleaner, for a gardener.

And to Karen, who was

in significant financial
dire straits, ultimately,

this would have potentially
been an area of real resentment.

(unsettling music)

(Narrator) Police discovered
around April 2021,

Elizabeth had approximately
£27,000 in her bank account.

But the balance began
to dwindle soon after Karen

became Elizabeth's nurse.

It's relatively easy
with online banking

for someone to help or coerce
someone into transferring

money out of their investments
into another bank account.

And it's potentially
difficult to trace that

happening until it's happened.

(Peter) It shows a gradual denuding
of the account

of Elizabeth's money and going
down, and down, and down.

And you could see
transactions happening

which clearly for Karen's benefit.

Karen was doing much
of her shopping and things

on Elizabeth's account.

She had access to the card.

We could see where
the money had been spent,

and then you could see
how the account had been,

basically, reduced over the months

from the moment Karen became
a carer with the card.

(tense music)

(Vicky) It is possible
that Karen started

to rationalise in her own mind

that she was entitled
to some of this money.

She was caring for Elizabeth.

She was checking in on her.

She was doing her
day-to-day errands.

So Karen may have felt a sense

of entitlement to those funds.

(tense music)

(Poppy) Hourglass did a piece
of research a few years ago,

and one in four people
that were spoken to

did not think that taking money

from an older relative's
bank account

or precious items from their home
counted as abuse.

And this is, unfortunately,
a societal issue as a whole.

This notion of entitlement that
if you provide care

and support for somebody,
you are entitled to money,

you're entitled to belongings
it's just not true.

You provide care and support
for somebody in your family

because you want to provide
care and support for them.

That doesn't come
with strings attached,

or it shouldn't come
with strings attached.

But ultimately,
people do feel entitled

to some form of gain from that.

And that's where these
situations in domestic abuse

can really escalate
and the risk can really escalate.

(tense music)

(Fiona) In cases
such as Elizabeth's,

we would also look at their
wider financial investment.

So we'd be looking at any ISAs

and savings
and so on that they've got,

and seeing whether those ISAs
and savings were still there.

Or was there evidence that
actually those had

been drawn from as well?

(Narrator) Police also
discovered that

in the days leading up
to her death,

£10,000 was withdrawn

from Elizabeth's individual
savings account, known as an ISA.

(tense music)

(Poppy) This essentially goes

to show the access
that Karen does have,

not only to Elizabeth's account.

But we have to think about

how she may have coerced that from
Elizabeth

and what the conversations may
have been to lead to that,

whether
it's emotional manipulation,

whether it's coercive control
and the level of threat there.

There are lots and lots
of ways that people can use

to essentially manipulate
and exploit older people

for financial gain.

(unsettling music)

(Vicky) Karen was
in a position of trust.

Elizabeth had trusted her
with access to her accounts.

And over time, Karen took
advantage of that trust

and drained Elizabeth's account
of her savings.

This tells me that Karen had
really started to see Elizabeth

as a means to an end.

Elizabeth was
a financial source for her.

It seems that Karen had stopped
seeing Elizabeth as a human being,

and she was reduced
to an object that could

satisfy her own needs and desires.

(tense music)

(Narrator) During their
investigation

into Elizabeth Vamplew's death,
police discovered that

the day before Elizabeth died
in the house fire,

Karen Vamplew accompanied
her mother-in-law to the bank.

(Peter) The bank was saying,
before we authorise funds,

any more payments on the card,

we want to see
the older Mrs Vamplew,

in other words, Elizabeth,
to see whether or not

she was being taken advantage
of by the user of the card.

Elizabeth was bedbound,

and Karen did something
with regard to the phone

that stopped the bank getting
in touch directly with Elizabeth,

like turning off the answering
machine, something like that.

But she prevented the bank getting
directly to Elizabeth

while she, Karen, was
milking the account.

(Narrator) When the bank were
unable to speak with Elizabeth

on the phone, the bank
limited Elizabeth's spending

to just £5 per transaction.

And that's when the bank
put a stop on the card.

And effectively,
that's when the goose stopped

laying the golden egg.

It's also the time, I think,
when Elizabeth first

became really aware
as to just how extensive

Karen's raiding
of her account had been.

(Poppy) On the 14th
of December, 2021,

Karen accompanied Elizabeth
to the bank.

And this is something that
we may see in situations where

that perpetrator
will attend appointments,

whether at a bank, a GP surgery,

with social care, with that victim,

because ultimately,
what this does is,

if that victim is concerned
that something's going on

or something untoward may
be happening,

particularly with their finances,
because Karen went with Elizabeth,

it leaves very little room
for any disclosures

to be made to bank staff,
or to any other professionals

that we see in these
situations, as well.

(tense music)

(Peter) And it's almost certain

that that was the first time that
Elizabeth really understood

just how Karen had been
milking Elizabeth's account,

because there was virtually
nothing left in it.

It was very, very depleted
by her daughter-in-law.

For the first time,
Elizabeth knew just what

had been happening to her money.

(tense music)

(Narrator)
After examining bank records,

police discovered that
in just eight months,

Elizabeth's account balance dropped

from £27,000 to £105.

It's very likely that
during that trip to the bank,

Elizabeth realised how much money
had been taken out of her account,

the vast differences
with what should be in there,

to her knowledge, and
what was actually in the account.

And it may be at that point,

she has become aware that
she has been exploited

by her daughter-in-law, Karen.

And ultimately, in that moment,
you have to consider

the horror, the betrayal,
the concerns about money worries.

Because not only has
this been done

by somebody in a position of trust
and somebody within the family,

so that betrayal is going
to be very much overwhelming.

(Narrator) The trip to the bank was
less than 24 hours before the fire

that would take Elizabeth's life.

There was not really much time
for Elizabeth to react,

and if she was made aware
during that trip to the bank,

the financial economic abuse
that was happening

from her daughter-in-law,
it is quite suspicious

that the incident happened
the following day.

And similarly, something that
we see as a charity,

when there are grandchildren
in a situation,

an older person may not choose
to report to the police,

because ultimately, they do not
want to criminalise the parents

of their grandchildren.

(Peter) The day after
the visit to the bank,

two things happened, I think.

Elizabeth found out
what had been happening,

and the day after,
the money had ceased for Karen.

Elizabeth had ceased
to be of use to Karen.

She was only a burden now in
terms of having to care for her,

and so she killed her.

(dramatic music)

(flames crackling)

(Narrator) With police now
believing that Elizabeth was

the victim of economic abuse
before she died,

fire expert Emma Wilson was brought
in to determine exactly where

and how the fire was started.

The damage at the bungalow
was relatively limited.

It was primarily restricted to
the bedroom that Elizabeth used.

There was some damage
that had come out

into the hallway of the bungalow,

and some smoke damage had
spread to some of the rooms

where doors had been open.

However, information
from the carers was that

she did not smoke in her bed.

(Peter) Elizabeth didn't take
cigarettes into her bedroom.

She normally smoked
at the kitchen door

so the smell would
not invade the house.

She didn't want
the smell in the house,

which was another
feature why you wouldn't

have her smoking in her bedroom.

And she always took
great care to get rid

of the evidence of having smoked.

(Narrator) Emma was also sceptical
of Karen Vamplew's account

that she hadn't noticed
the fire when she first arrived

at her mother in law's home.

So Karen's story
didn't make sense,

because if she had been outside
that front door of the bungalow

10 minutes prior
to her entering it

and alerting the fire service
to a large flaming fire,

I would have expected her
to have heard the smoke detector,

smelled smoke or seen smoke as she
looked through the letter slot,

and, therefore, to have alerted
the fire service at that point

of a fire within the property.

As a fire scientist,
my issue with that is,

there is a difference
in the way that flaming fires

and smouldering fires burn.

Smouldering fires develop
with large amounts

of smoke, but no flames.

They can take a minimum of
10 minutes on the right materials,

but more likely 20, 30 minutes,
or several hours

to develop into a flaming fire.

Whereas a flaming fire, or a fire
started by a lighter or a match,

that continues as a flaming fire
for its entire duration

and only takes minutes
to really take hold.

So there is a big difference
in the timing factors

of those different types of fires.

(Narrator) Emma Wilson
and the forensic team examined

photographic evidence from the fire

to determine if she believed
the fire had been started

by Elizabeth smoking in bed.

The only evidence of smoking
materials that I saw in the images

was in the kitchen.

(Peter) They went into great detail
as to where the fire had started.

I mean, they looked in
the kitchen for things

like cigarettes and the ashtray.

I did ask the initial
investigation team

if they found anything
amongst the debris.

The reason I asked that is because
when something like a lighter

is burnt in a fire, it doesn't
look like a lighter anymore.

All you have are
the metallic parts.

So you have the lighter shroud,
you have the flint wheel,

but you don't have
the plastic bodies.

I asked the initial
investigation team

if they'd found anything
like that,

and they said they had not.

(Narrator) The forensic team
decided to carry out

a series of tests to replicate
the start of the fire

using samples
of Elizabeth's bedding.

(Emma) As part of
their investigation,

they did carry out some
laboratory-based burning tests.

These were small-scale tests
based on fragments of the bedding

and the mattress
recovered from the scene.

The tests that were done,
however, were inconclusive.

This is likely because
there had been a fire.

Firefighters had extinguished the
fire with quite a lot of water,

so the materials
that they used were

no longer in their primary state.

So they were wet,
and they'd probably

suffered from being packaged
in plastic packaging

for a while afterwards, as well.

(tense music)

The conclusion that they reached
was that with those materials,

it did not cause a fire,

but given that they had
been altered

by the addition
of firefighting water,

that they couldn't be sure
that under other conditions,

such as the materials being dry,

that it could not have
caused a fire.

(unsettling music)

(Narrator) Emma Wilson decided
to carry out

more elaborate tests to determine
the cause of the fire.

I made two recommendations.

One recommendation was to carry
out a new series of burning tests,

to use dry materials that were
the same or as similar

as possible to those that
Elizabeth had in her property.

And that meant getting
the same type of mattress,

getting bedding of the same type,
and also washing it,

and making sure that it had
some wear to it

so that it wasn't brand new,

and then setting up a burning test
so that we could see

whether or not, on these dry
materials that were

as close as possible
to the ones Elizabeth had,

whether or not we could start
a fire using a cigarette.

(tense music)

They did all sorts of tests.

They did do tests
with the fire expert.

They did it in a shipping
container with identical mattress,

identical things.

They needed to prove that

Elizabeth hadn't set fire
to the bed herself.

(tense music)

(Emma) We set up a mattress
with the bedding.

We carry out several tests using
cigarettes,

all of the same brand that
Elizabeth smoked.

We would light them and we would
put them in different positions

within the bedding.

That included partial
covering with the duvet.

That included putting
it on the pillow

and on the mattress
with the sheet on it itself.

So we did several tests,
and none of them

initiated even a smouldering fire.

The final test that we
carried out involved

applying a flame
to the corner of the bed,

and that initiated
a fire immediately.

(tense music)

The fire that we lit caused fire
damage in a very similar pattern

to what could be seen
in Elizabeth's bedroom.

(tense music)

It was my opinion
in my review process

that this was not an
accidental death at that stage.

So it means that somebody
set the fire,

rather than it being
a dropped lit cigarette.

(tense music)

I think it was at this point
that the investigation team were

confident that they could say that
this fire was caused by a person

applying a flame to the bedding.

(tense music)

They completely disproved
any idea that a cigarette...

a lit cigarette could have caused
the fire to Elizabeth's bed.

And they proved that the only way
the fire could have been started

was by a live flame ignition.

(tense music)

(Narrator) On September 27, 2023,

Karen Vamplew is re-arrested
and charged with the murder

of her mother-in-law, Elizabeth.

Having spoken to two CPS lawyers,
I think,

it was quite apparent,
having spoken to them,

that they'd come to the conclusion
she should be prosecuted.

I'm bound to say my reaction
was exactly the same.

She must be.

And the fact that Elizabeth

was bed bound
at the top of the bed

and the fire started
at the foot of the bed

clearly meant that someone else
had lit it.

The case was with a lighter.

(tense music)

The report proved that it was
caused by naked flame.

Now, that would not have been,
and could not have been

at the foot of the bed done
by Elizabeth.

So there's one obvious person.

Karen.

(tense music)

(suspenseful music)

(Narrator) In April 2024,
Karen Vamplew stood trial

at Leicester Crown Court

for the murder of her
mother-in-law, Elizabeth Vamplew.

(Peter) It was emotion.

The emotion in the dock was the
defendant looking at photographs

of her children throughout.

The emotion in the public
gallery was her husband.

(Vicky) Karen would have known that

by killing Elizabeth,
that was going to bring

a tremendous amount
of grief and loss

to her husband and the family.

Yet, it seems that she justified
her actions by convincing herself

that the ends justified
the means,

that her husband was going
to inherit the money,

that Elizabeth was old and frail,

and that removing that pain
for her,

it is possible that she
justified all of those things.

(Narrator) Despite pleading
not guilty,

Karen Vamplew did not
give evidence in court.

(Peter) But she didn't
come out at the dock.

She didn't give evidence.

She didn't risk giving evidence
and risk being cross-examined

about the overwhelming case that,
in the end, we had against her

because there was no satisfactory
answer she could give.

She couldn't possibly have
answered

the questions I was going to have
for her,

so she didn't come out.

(tense music)

(Vicky) Despite
the evidence against her,

Karen protested her innocence.

And that can be
for a number of reasons.

It's a method of self-protection
and self-survival.

Again, Karen may also have
had the dawning of realisation

that she's killed a family member,

she's killed a mother-in-law,
and the significant impact

that that's going
to have on her family.

(tense music)

(Narrator) After a
21-month investigation,

the prosecution argued
money was Karen's motive

for killing Elizabeth.

(dramatic music)

(Peter) We could prove
that Karen had

been taking money from Elizabeth.

What I was really interested in
proving was that she killed her.

If you're prosecuting a case,
you don't actually need a motive

so long as you can prove
the killing.

I was proving the killing because
that's what she was charged with.

She wasn't charged with fraud.

That was the motive
for the killing.

(dramatic music)

(Narrator) During the trial,
Elizabeth's financial records were

shown to the jury
to illustrate the depth

of the financial abuse she suffered
in the weeks before her death.

(Fiona Hotston Moore)
In cases like Elizabeth's case,

we would be obtaining the banking
records of the victim

over a number of years,
and we would be analysing them

to see what was their typical
areas that they spent money on,

to try and get a feel for how much
they typically spent in a year,

and in which areas they spent it.

And then we would be
looking for changes

in those trends of expenditure.

So are there now larger
amounts, perhaps,

being withdrawn from the bank
or cash transactions?

And who is making
those withdrawals,

if we can actually tell?

And what might be
the reason for those?

So those would be
the telltale red flags.

(tense music)

(Narrator) During the trial,
the prosecution also

highlighted the number
of inconsistencies

in Karen's version of what
happened the night Elizabeth died.

She told friends different things.

She told her husband
different things.

She told family different things.

She had been lying to all these
people about what had happened,

the order of events,
who'd gone where,

when she'd found the fire,
and so on.

She'd just been lying to her
friends and family throughout.

And they basically felt betrayed.

(tense music)

Karen had spun a web of lies.

Her stories were inconsistent,
her accounts were discrepant,

and investigators would
have picked up on that

and used that to their advantage.

(Narrator) The prosecution
argued that once she had drained

Elizabeth's account
of all her funds,

Karen set fire to Elizabeth's home
because she believed her husband

would inherit half of her
mother-in-law's estate,

thought to be worth around
£150,000.

I think she probably hoped
that her husband would get

a part of his mother's will,
and she, Karen,

would benefit from it,
because she would have left

a reasonable estate behind,
as well.

It would have been a sizable
sum of money for Karen's husband

and Karen's sister-in-law,
which no doubt Karen would

have hoped to have benefited from.

(sombre music)

(Vicky) Karen had
rationalised in her mind

that she needed the money,
and that someday,

her husband was going
to inherit that money.

She needed the money
there and then,

so she... there is evidence
of her using identity fraud

and taking money
from Elizabeth's account

to fund her own lifestyle.

Her actions became desensitised,
and she started to morally justify

in her own mind why taking
money from Elizabeth

at this stage in her life was
appropriate and valid.

So she justified it.

She'd rationalised
it in her own mind,

and therefore very
quickly had accepted

a conclusion that
ending Elizabeth's life

was one of the options.

I think the real motive was,
in fact,

getting rid of the burden
of having to care for someone

when you really didn't want to.

(Narrator) A key piece of
evidence for the prosecution was

the testimony of
fire expert Emma Wilson.

As an expert witness
arriving at court,

knowing that your testimony is

going to be a large part
of the case,

it's going to be a big part
of the jury's considerations,

and it's going to help them make
their decision

on innocence and guilt.

For me, knowing that that's

the reason I'm appearing in court,
there's a nervousness to it.

(tense music)

(Narrator) Emma's testimony
was vital to prove

that the fire could not
have been started

by Elizabeth smoking in bed.

(Peter) Elizabeth never, on
the evidence, smoked in her room.

Secondly, she always smoked
in the kitchen or by the door...

the open door.

She didn't like people to smell
the fact she'd been smoking.

She didn't like people to see
that she'd been smoking,

which was why she'd put
the cigarette out under the tap,

rather than leaving
a sort of smelly ember.

Basically, she hid the fact
that she'd been smoking

from the carers coming
from her sister.

They all knew she smoked, but she
was... pretends that she didn't.

But she didn't take
cigarettes into her bedroom.

(tense music)

(Emma) Considering the
physical evidence that we have,

it's my view that it's more likely

that Karen entered
Elizabeth's bungalow,

went to her bedroom,
ignited a fire on the bed

whilst Elizabeth was in it,
and then left the property,

and closed the door after her.

She then went home, got changed,

and it is likely that she had
some sort of injury

or wound or burn on her arm,

and that's why she had a towel
covering it when she returned,

that when she returned,
she did enter a property that

was filled with smoke and had
a fairly sizable fire within it,

and pressed the careline.

(unsettling music)

It is likely that Elizabeth
became aware of the fire

because she wasn't
found in her bed.

She was found by the
firefighters at the base

of the bed on the floor,

so she had made
some attempt to escape.

(melancholy music)

(Narrator) The prosecution argued
that Karen's movement on the night

of the fire clearly showed
this was a crime

of planning and premeditation.

She went around to Elizabeth's
house when Elizabeth was in bed,

having been tucked up
for the night by the carers

at about 6:00.

And she went round and set fire
to the bed

whilst Elizabeth was in it.

Eventually, when she went
back for the second time,

pretending to find
the fire that she'd lit,

poor Elizabeth had managed,

however disabled,
to get out of bed,

and was lying on the floor
at the foot of the bed.

And that's where she was
rescued by the firemen.

(tense music)

The offence shows a level
of planning and premeditation,

although there's clearly
evidence of a lack

of sophistication within that.

Karen had access to the home

and started
the fire in the home.

So for Karen, she was
intent upon doing this.

She'd planned it.

It was now or never.

She had to take the opportunity,
and that's what she did,

starting the fire,
burning the house down

with Elizabeth in it.

(Narrator) On May 17, 2024,

the jury delivered their verdict.

She was convicted of murder
unanimously by the jury.

No question of a majority verdict.

(melancholy music)

Hearing the verdict, it is
almost like a sense of completion,

because to me
and the evidence that I had,

that is what I would have expected
the jury to get from that.

(Peter) She had to be given
life in prison,

because that's the only sentence
for murder.

And in this case, it was 32 years.

(melancholy music)

(Narrator) Despite
the successful conviction,

the verdict provided mixed
emotions for Elizabeth's family.

(Peter) I went to see
the family and friends.

It was then that it became...

I became aware just how
cross the husband was.

Her husband was very angry,
not at the verdict.

He was very angry that the initial
police investigation had

wrongly arrested him,
because he was nothing to do

with the killing of his mother.

He was livid that
he had been arrested

in the first investigation,
and understandably.

(melancholy music)

(Vicky) There are no winners
in this.

The tragedy of losing a mother
in the way that she was lost,

a grandmother in the way that
she was lost, but equally,

a wife and a mother who
would have been detained

and is detained
for a very long time,

the psychological shadow and
effects of that would...

would be immense.

(melancholy music)

(Poppy) It's very hard to imagine

how Elizabeth's family would have
been affected by this situation.

I think it's very difficult to
think about them having to pick up

the pieces of not only losing
someone that was very dear to them

and a huge part of their family.

But also, who the perpetrator was
and what the motivations were

is going to be really,
really hard to come

to terms with as a family member.

It is almost a double betrayal.

You've lost somebody,
and the person that has taken

them from you is also
within your family.

(melancholy music)

(tense music)

Subtitles by accessibility@itv.com