Extensive searches were carried out in the vicinity of Soho shortly after the discovery of the crime. Lodging houses and boarding houses were examined. Any discarded clothes were also investigated as the killer might have thrown away any bloodstained clothes. Second-hand clothing shops were told to keep a look out for such. Some women came forward with what little they knew and were assured police protection as the number of officers in the district was increased. It was found that many such women lived in danger of threats of violence. As Sharpe noted, ‘Soho was turned upside down’. Yet he was pessimistic about the outcome, writing, ‘with so little to go on we were pretty well doomed to failure from the word “go”’.

It seems certain that a stranger killed her. Joan said ‘Leah Hinds has not had at any time complained to me of being frightened of any person or anyone ill treating her’. Her mother, who saw her a few days before her death, recalled, ‘She seemed perfectly happy and did not complain of being afraid of any person.’ The motive was probably the little money she had on her person, the police stating ‘It is reasonable to assume that robbery was the motive.’ After all, the handbag was empty and only two pence could be found in the room. The possibility of revenge by a former pimp was not seen as serious because there was no evidence of any quarrels or disorder in the room. The police conclusion was as follows:

The circumstances of the case rather indicate that her assailant was a chance acquaintance who accompanied her home for the purpose of robbery. The ferocity with which he attacked the unfortunate girl suggests he is a dangerous homicidal man.

George Killik, a Danish ex-jockey and an alleged diviner with mysterious powers of visions, was shown photographs of the deceased by a newspaper. He claimed: ‘I see another girl who is in danger of her life.’ He thought the killer was a poor man, though once rich, who was thin, with large hands and dressed shabbily. Although not a London resident, he occasionally visited the city.

Leah’s estranged husband reported to the police as soon as he knew of the murder. He was resident in Margate and had a strong alibi for the night of the murder as he was with friends and had been seen by tradesmen on the following morning. King, too, can probably be eliminated as a suspect as he was at a nightclub on Little Denmark Street from 11.15 pm to 3.30 am. In any case, he seems to have been on excellent terms with her, despite disliking her calling.

Soho and the girls and women who worked the streets became increasingly frightened after this murder. Sharpe wrote ‘This was Soho’s fourth murder within six months, the papers were talking of a new Jack the Ripper’. This was despite the fact that the Ripper’s victims had their throats cut and were mutilated.

Although Mrs Cotton’s inquest had begun on 21 April, it was adjourned and the inquests on both her and Mrs Hinds were concluded at Westminster Coroners’ Court on 9 June. Neither was conclusive. Both were cases of murder and had been committed by an unknown killer. No one was ever convicted of either crime, nor that of Mrs Martin in the previous year.

It is tempting to conclude that a serial strangler was at work here. After all, the women all lived within a short distance at each other and were all killed within six months. All were strangled. Two were prostitutes. All the murders occurred indoors. The press certainly thought this was a series, but it was uncertain whether any of the women knew one another. Mrs Hind’s mother said, ‘So far as I know, she was not acquainted with the victims of the previous murders.’ On the other hand, some street women, friends of Mrs Hinds, said that she knew the other two victims. Apparently ‘Rightly or wrongly, rumour attributed them to some known hand, especially if that hand had already struck more than once.’ It was said, ‘While some of Scotland Yard’s chiefs are inclined to think that the affairs are in no way related, it is pointed out that the possibility of one man being responsible for them all cannot be ruled out.’ It was not only the press which thought so, because Detective Inspector Edwards, who had investigated the Mrs Martin case, thought that the papers of this case ‘might be of assistance in the cases of Jeanett Cousins and Constance May Smith alias Leah Hinds at present under investigation’.

In the case of Leah, it was concluded, ‘There is nothing to show, however, that there is a connection between any of these cases’. Retired and active senior detectives agreed. Ex-Chief Inspector Walter Dew wrote in a newspaper article that such killings occurred periodically among women ‘of a Bohemian character [who] invite strange men sometimes to their rooms or flats’ and were not part of a series. He thought the killers were ill-tempered men who attacked their victims ‘without any or little provocation’. He thought that the police would be sure to catch the guilty men and that, if not, they might know who was responsible but lack the evidence needed to convict.

Similarly, Sharpe wrote as follows:

The murders of French Fifi and Jeannette Cousins remaining unsolved drove us to redouble our efforts to solve the further crime of Soho, but it is unlikely it ever will be solved. I don’t think there was any connection between those killings or that they were in any way connected with any vice ring or other organisation. In my opinion: French Fifi was murdered for the money in her flat by someone she had picked up, and Leah Hinds for the same reason. Jeanette Cousins was killed by someone she knew and the motive was one which I believe I know but which I think it best not to mention.

The culprits were never found. Sharpe wrote: ‘Despite the most exhaustive enquiries no evidence could be found upon which even suspicion could be attached to any known person and it is unlikely that the crime will ever be solved.’

Sharpe was best placed to know about these crimes. Therefore, his verdict should hold good, unless other evidence comes to light. At time of writing, the police files on the two latter murders are still partially closed (despite the fact that over seven decades have passed) and until they are fully opened, we are no nearer the truth than the public were in 1936. The only consolation was that, after the death of Leah, there were no more known unsolved killings in this part of London for the rest of the decade.