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:
Scene of the Crimes: Was Whitechapel really any worse than other areas of London? - by DrummondStreet 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Diary Quirks - by Iconoclast 5 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Anne Graham Interview - October 1995 - by DirectorDave 6 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Anne Graham Interview - October 1995 - by Sam Flynn 6 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Anne Graham Interview - October 1995 - by David Orsam 6 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Mike Barrett Interview - September 1995 - by Sam Flynn 6 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: Too Sensible & Competent - (16 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (15 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (7 posts)
Maybrick, James: Mike Barrett Interview - September 1995 - (6 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (3 posts)
Maybrick, James: Anne Graham Interview - October 1995 - (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
  #3821  
Old 11-27-2016, 06:04 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,298
Default

After his acquittal, Mancini joined a travelling fair for a short time as 'The Infamous Brighton Trunk Murderer' - actually, there were two trunk murders in Brighton at the time, the other one being completely unexplained.
He confessed to the murder of Violette Saunders only in 1976, but as he'd been acquitted at trial in 1934 no further action could be taken. Apparently he behaved himself following his acquittal.

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3822  
Old 11-27-2016, 06:32 AM
ansonman ansonman is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherlock Houses View Post
I agree, the Bedford jury certainly weren't at the head of the queue when it came to intelligence and trying to sort fact from fiction. One of them even had to drop out due to his dislike of the mention of blood, would you believe it ? That left 11 fairly dim-witted male jurors with the grave responsibility of determining a man's innocence or guilt. I can't escape the impression that Justice William Gorman must have thought to himself before sending the jury out to deliberate once more..,..."Your life Mr Hanratty, unfortunately is in the hands of these 11 dim-witted, property owning burghers outraged that a murder should occur in their precious County of Bedfordshire. And they don't even have a clue about what reasonable doubt means."
Absolutely Sherlock.

I think the lesson that Sherrard must have learned from this can be summed up as "keep it simple".
Beyond reasonable doubt, Hanratty should not have changed his alibi because that introduced more confusion for the jury. Even better, Hanratty should have said he spent the night with his dear old mum. That would have been much more comforting for the jury. They would have understood that. Perhaps.

Ansonman
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3823  
Old 11-27-2016, 08:31 AM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
He confessed to the murder of Violette Saunders only in 1976, but as he'd been acquitted at trial in 1934 no further action could be taken.
Well he could have been charged with perjury. Sussex police re-opened the file in 1976, but the DPP stated that independent corroboration of Mancini’s claim was essential. He wrote to the Chief Constable of Sussex: “My opinion therefore is that there is insufficient evidence available or likely to become available to prosecute Mancini.”

Shortly after Mancini confessed to the News of the World Steven Knight met him and after a couple of years correspondence interviewed him for 3 days. Graham - you've suggested in previous posts that Hanratty went into denial, and this is what Mancini told Knight had happened to him.

Quote:
Mancini: "I found that I could lower the safety curtain in my mind."

Knight: "Quite soon after?"

Mancini: "That same night. I could lower this safety curtain and it would blank it out completely. What had happened was blanked out as though I'd drawn fire curtains across my mind for that period and I couldn't see."
Sherrard said he saw Hanratty every day and I think it is reasonable to deduce that, like Birkett, he did try and help his client prepare for his evidence.

For example, Sherrard asked Hanratty why he had lied about his alibi and then said: “Just explain it in your own words.” I think this indicates that a response had been rehearsed. But as the answer that came out was gobbledegook, I think Hanratty forgot what had been prepared.

Of course the description ‘gobbledegook’ is only my opinion, so I reproduce below the answer he gave so anyone can make their own assessment.

Quote:
"My Lord, at this stage I read in the papers that the police wanted to interview me in a murder which took place. One article I remember reading stated that this man Ryan might have shared the same hotel as the murderer for that trial. That was in one paper. That was before I went to Liverpool, my Lord. On the first occasion when I rang Superintendent Acott he was thoroughly interested to know my whereabouts on the 22nd and 23rd of August. I was a little bit confused myself with seeing my name in the papers knowing that my mother, father and brother were looking for me. I knew in myself that I did not commit this crime so I tried to help in every way I could to help Superintendent Acott when he asked me where I was on the 22nd and 23rd of August. At that stage I knew I was only wanted for interviewing, not for the actual A6 murder charge which I eventually found out later or the truth would have been told straightaway. I know I made a terrible mistake by telling Superintendent Acott about these three men, but I have been advised that the truth only counts in this matter, and might I say here every word of that is the truth."
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3824  
Old 11-27-2016, 10:33 AM
moste moste is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Vancouver Island British Columbia.
Posts: 457
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherlock Houses View Post
All perfectly valid questions Moste. Like other posters I could add a lot more to the list, however that will keep for another day. As has been pointed out on numerous occasions on this forum there are so many inexplicable anomalies in this case. So many mysterious actions and incidents that have you scratching your head. You just couldn't make them up.

With reference to question 8 on your list, it must be pointed out that Pugh of the Liverpool police wasn't acting on behalf of the defence in mid-October, he was given his assignment by his Liverpool Chief. The defence team were kept completely in the dark by Acott about the existence of Mrs Dinwoodie for a further 7 weeks. A very obliging and considerate man dear old Basil.
quite right SH
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3825  
Old 11-28-2016, 05:03 AM
JPR1975 JPR1975 is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 7
Default

In relation to the Sion Jenkins emails over the weekend.

I read his book (in collaboration with Bob Woffinden) "The Murder of Billie-Jo" this summer whilst on holiday and a great read for anyone interested in the case.

JPR
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3826  
Old 12-02-2016, 08:51 PM
moste moste is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Vancouver Island British Columbia.
Posts: 457
Default We're all good friends by comparison

I accidently wound up on a JTR thread .
I was interested in a particular poster who has been on the A6 Forum on rare occasions.
Somehow I found myself on' New Vicar/Druitt source found'
Well, the nastiness between Abby Normal and a chap called Jonathan H.
I just cant tell you!
How the people on the A6 threads managed to get themselves banned, it must have been pretty heavy .

Last edited by moste : 12-02-2016 at 08:53 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3827  
Old 12-03-2016, 02:01 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moste View Post
I accidently wound up on a JTR thread .
I was interested in a particular poster who has been on the A6 Forum on rare occasions.
Somehow I found myself on' New Vicar/Druitt source found'
Well, the nastiness between Abby Normal and a chap called Jonathan H.
I just cant tell you!
How the people on the A6 threads managed to get themselves banned, it must have been pretty heavy .
Your post deserves a response.

What's going on at the moment on this whole Casebook Forum is difficult for me to understand, as Admin seems to be taking no action against people on some (not just the one, Moste) JTR threads who hurl genuinely vile abuse at one another in a fashion which makes us A6 debaters appear like choirboys (and girls).

There is also the question of the weird Pierre who seems almost to have taken over JTR discussion, yet he is allowed to continue posting even though he winds other posters up like a clock.

In the pre-crash days, things really did get nasty on the A6 threads, as some of us well remember, until the Admin of the day banned some individual posters and eventually shut down the entire A6 forum. In my case, I had the temerity to send a post for the attention of another poster containing just two short words....no, not what you're thinking, either! Something very innocuous. I got a 6-month ban for that!

No-one is more aware than I how easy it is to get truly worked up when defending one's beliefs and arguing one's case, and although there's some 'banter' on the A6 at the moment it hasn't reached the heights (or the depths) of what we're seeing elsewhere on Casebook. And I hope it doesn't.

Incidentally, does anyone remember years ago there was an independent A6 website? I can't remember what its title was or the name of the webmaster, but I think it disappeared through under-use. At least I've not been able to locate it again.

Stay cool!

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3828  
Old 12-03-2016, 05:35 AM
Derrick Derrick is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 585
Default

There was some debate on another thread yesterday about whether or not Hanratty actually claimed the hanky was his or it could be identified by some monogram or such like device.

No he didn't claim this in court. It is a myth.

But the hanky, or at least the nasal fluid on it, is James Hanratty's, the DNA testing proves this - this though doesn't connect him to the murder in any way, shape or form.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3829  
Old 12-03-2016, 10:17 AM
ansonman ansonman is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 144
Default

OneRound,

Before we returned to this thread you asked Derrick for his take on how it happened and why. That's a tough call and I haven't got much to contribute to that.

I would, however, like to look at things another way by asking what were the similarities between Hanratty and the murderer?

What do we know about the murderer? Very little. For a start we don't know what he looked like. It's all very well for Graham to say of SV's identification of Hanratty "she know him when she saw him". That simply will not wash. She knew the airman when she saw him. Only she didn't. No, by picking out the wrong man, her witness evidence is fatally flawed yet deadly. What we do know about the assailant is as follows:

He was wandering about in a cornfield on the night of the murder.

Whether by accident or design we don't know

He owned and/or used a gun

He had a cockney accent

He smoked

He didn't get bored easily

Here is a guy who was prepared to be driven around in a car for hours, for no apparent reason and no apparent objective. He also sold almanacs for a time.

He had spent some time in prison

He was a sadistic, ruthless bastard who was prepared to murder, rape and attempt to murder in relatively quick succession

He found it difficult to start and to drive a car

That's about all we know about the man, I think.

Now for Hanratty, what do we know about him?

He wasn't known to wander about in fields

Hanratty's preference was to focus on houses suitable to burgle and cars suitable to thieve

He did not smoke

He could drive cars

Essential requirement for car theft

He got bored easily

Hanratty was a man who like to move about a bit, albeit in an unlawful manner. He got fed up of cleaning windows and preferred crime and socialising to the mundane.

He did not carry or use a gun

He spent time in prison

For petty theft. There were never any recorded charges or claims of violence on people, or sexual attacks on women.

He had girlfriends, all of whom described him as a normal, nice guy

Never a hint of nastiness, let alone someone who had the inclination, desire and ability to murder and rape.

And so to my mind the only similarities between what we know about the murderer and Hanratty, is that they both:

Were males, with cockney accents who had spent time in prison

They must have been in the company of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of men living in the vicinity of the crime.

For my money, not only is there no evidence to link Hanratty to the crime but there are no meaningful characteristics to link him to the murderer.

Alphon scores slightly higher on the similarities scale but not nearly enough for him to be the man, in my view. A nutter? most certainly. A sadistic, ruthless bastard? I know not.

Ansonman
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3830  
Old 12-04-2016, 03:26 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ansonman View Post
OneRound,

Before we returned to this thread you asked Derrick for his take on how it happened and why. That's a tough call and I haven't got much to contribute to that.
...

Ansonman
Hi Anson,

Yeah, it is a tough call but also, I believe, a fair one in view of Derrick's belief in Hanratty's innocence based upon as he put it 'all the facts of the case'.

I would like to hear Derrick's take. I assure him and all I would give it serious consideration.

I'll respond to the main thrust of your own post a bit later today.

Best regards,

OneRound
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 07:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.