Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Non-Fiction: Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood - by David Orsam 28 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: PC did not pass Dorset St. in his beat - by John G 42 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: PC did not pass Dorset St. in his beat - by Robert 1 hour and 19 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: PC did not pass Dorset St. in his beat - by GUT 2 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - by Pierre 2 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: PC did not pass Dorset St. in his beat - by Kattrup 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - (32 posts)
Non-Fiction: Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood - (17 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Favorite Films (lists up to participating site members) - (7 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: PC did not pass Dorset St. in his beat - (7 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (3 posts)
Audio -- Visual: Exorcist and JTR - (3 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Social Chat > Other Mysteries > A6 Murders

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #4051  
Old 03-01-2017, 02:00 PM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick View Post

...

The DNA is worthless unless a referential profile for Gregsten is forthcoming.

Del
Hi Del - as you've probably seen, I've already discussed with Ansonman many aspects from your post.

Can I just check your DNA point above. I take it you are referring to another male's DNA being found on the knicker fragment and it being attributed to Gregsten even though no checks were made. Is that right?

This presumption and aspect has always concerned me.

If it wasn't Gregsten's DNA, then it was either from contamination (in which case Hanratty's DNA could also have got there by contamination) or from an unknown individual who was the actual rapist.

Even it it was Gregsten's DNA, I'm not sure that should completely close the door on Hanratty's supporters. I've read that Gregsten didn't have sex with Valerie Storie that evening and hadn't done so for several days beforehand. Assuming that is correct, how then did his DNA get on the knicker fragment? I can think of possibilities (some not very pleasant) but one possibility again has to be contamination.

This once more does not prove Hanratty's innocence which was the original purpose of the Hanratty team wanting to go down this path. It also still leaves the problem of Hanratty's DNA on the hanky. However, it perhaps leads to a case being made that the DNA evidence was not quite as clear cut as originally ruled.

Best regards,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4052  
Old 03-01-2017, 03:01 PM
Sherlock Houses Sherlock Houses is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 422
Default Thinking outside the box....Anyone believe in the power of signs ??

A funny thing happened on the way to.... stop it and start again.

A funny thing happened around 9.20 last night as I was following the updated football scores unfold on Sky Sports News. What caught my eye was that a Peter scored for Clyde in the 74th minute and the next scorer displayed was a Louis, scoring for Shrewsbury. Surely the next goal scorer displayed couldn't be an Alphon or Alphonse as the name is ridiculously rare in this country. And so it proved, and yet when I looked at that next scorer's name I couldn't help but notice that all those 6 letters were contained within the name. Mere coincidence or a sign ?

I think the tv screen looked something like this......................
Attached Images
 
__________________
*************************************
"A body of men, HOLDING THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO NOBODY, ought not to be trusted by anybody." --Thomas Paine ["Rights of Man"]

"Justice is an ideal which transcends the expedience of the State, or the sensitivities of Government officials, or private individuals. IT HAS TO BE PURSUED WHATEVER THE COST IN PEACE OF MIND TO THOSE CONCERNED." --'Justice of the Peace' [July 12th 1975]
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4053  
Old 03-01-2017, 03:41 PM
Sherlock Houses Sherlock Houses is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 422
Default

Serendipitous Divine Providence.
__________________
*************************************
"A body of men, HOLDING THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO NOBODY, ought not to be trusted by anybody." --Thomas Paine ["Rights of Man"]

"Justice is an ideal which transcends the expedience of the State, or the sensitivities of Government officials, or private individuals. IT HAS TO BE PURSUED WHATEVER THE COST IN PEACE OF MIND TO THOSE CONCERNED." --'Justice of the Peace' [July 12th 1975]
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4054  
Old 03-01-2017, 04:18 PM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 725
Default

Another spooky thing ...

In cross-examination Gladys Deacon said she did not know if they drove through Hitchin to Bedford, but she remembered passing an airfield where Hanratty pointed out to her a ‘Spitfire’.

Was he having a premonition of this forum?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4055  
Old 03-02-2017, 01:13 AM
Derrick Derrick is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 568
Default

where is doris stokes when she`s needed eh? oh...yeah she's dead!!!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4056  
Old 03-02-2017, 02:12 AM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 725
Default

Is anybody there?

Mrs D doing her impression of Doris Stokes.
Attached Images
 

Last edited by NickB : 03-02-2017 at 02:17 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4057  
Old 03-02-2017, 11:05 AM
Derrick Derrick is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 568
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
...Can I just check your DNA point above. I take it you are referring to another male's DNA being found on the knicker fragment and it being attributed to Gregsten even though no checks were made. Is that right?
Yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
This presumption and aspect has always concerned me.
Me too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
If it wasn't Gregsten's DNA, then it was either from contamination (in which case Hanratty's DNA could also have got there by contamination) or from an unknown individual who was the actual rapist.
Another individual; unless Gregsten's profile is forthcoming and it can be proved to be his.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
Even it it was Gregsten's DNA, I'm not sure that should completely close the door on Hanratty's supporters. I've read that Gregsten didn't have sex with Valerie Storie that evening and hadn't done so for several days beforehand. Assuming that is correct, how then did his DNA get on the knicker fragment? I can think of possibilities (some not very pleasant) but one possibility again has to be contamination.
Storie said that she and Gregsten had sex in that car on the Sunday before the murder. I am not going to go into the circumstances of how Gregsten's sperm could still be on Storie's knickers after 2 days.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
This once more does not prove Hanratty's innocence which was the original purpose of the Hanratty team wanting to go down this path. It also still leaves the problem of Hanratty's DNA on the hanky. However, it perhaps leads to a case being made that the DNA evidence was not quite as clear cut as originally ruled.
The hanky was Hanratty's, the MtDNA tests proved it. Plus his laundry was being done by Charlotte France.

What the FSS found on the knicker fragment was 1 allele that they attributed to Storie and an undefined number to Gregsten. The FSS also subjected this to MtDNA testing which returned a null. This means that the sample was definitely from semen. Yet Storie is clearly a woman!

So we have a profile from the knickers with a number of alleles that are not associated with Hanratty that are completely unexplained.

Del
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4058  
Old 03-02-2017, 11:24 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 399
Default

Hi Del - thanks for your considered reply.

Although we are not always on the same side of (Ansonman's wooden) fence, we share a very similar concern here.

I find it remarkably odd that the Court of Appeal wanted to go as far as have Hanratty's body dug up for additional testing in an attempt to ensure accuracy but were content to effectively hazard a guess at some other bloke's DNA on the knicker fragment.

Best regards,

OneRound

Last edited by OneRound : 03-02-2017 at 11:24 AM. Reason: typo
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4059  
Old 03-02-2017, 12:12 PM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick View Post

...

The hanky was Hanratty's, the MtDNA tests proved it. Plus his laundry was being done by Charlotte France.

...

Del
Hi again Del,

Whilst not totally damning, the hanky is still pretty damaging for the Hanratty camp, isn't it?

I assume from the reference to the laundry (and some of your other posts) that you believe Dixie France planted the hanky with the gun and bullets on the bus.

With DNA unimagined in 1961, no one could have foreseen it assisting any frame up. So why would Dixie or anyone else have chosen to leave Hanratty's hanky there?

Best regards,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4060  
Old 03-02-2017, 01:04 PM
ansonman ansonman is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 140
Default

Del,

You recently commented:

"The circumstantial evidence presented at trial could be easily explained by inserting Dixie France's name for Hanratty's" and:

"The hanky was Hanratty's, the MtDNA tests proved it. Plus his laundry was being done by Charlotte France".

The night France committed suicide:

"he had written a great deal - the landlady said there were "about 100 pages lying about the room" - but unfortunately it was the police who found him. They took away all these deathbed writings, most of which have never been disclosed to any independent source". (Woffinden).

That's a long suicide note.

Is it reasonable to assume that France believed he would be found by the police before anyone else? (landlady excepted, possibly). I'm assuming it is because he posted a note to Charlotte intimating his suicide, following which she called the police and they found him dead.

Do we know how it was the police were able to find him?

Would it be reasonable to assume that France thought it likely that his writings would be read and taken by the police? In other words, was his diatribe intended for police consumption rather than anyone else? In which case were the writings designed to protect his family rather than tell the real story?

Finally, do we know how it is that a few of his writings have been publicly revealed? Did the police give the entire writings to the family, or just a carefully chosen selection?

Regards,

Ansonman
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.