a6 murder

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 68 of 76 « First < 18 58 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 > Last »

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#671 19th November 2007, 11:22 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That’s an amusing thought, Hanratty having to pick the landlady out in a reverse identity parade. If the law had been different and Hanratty had to prove his innocence that might well have happened. As it was, though, the prosecution had to prove that Hanratty was guilty and he was presumed innocent until otherwise proven. Many people believed that the prosecution failed to prove their case. Unfortunately for Hanratty the jury didn’t agree.

Grace Jones lived into her 90’s and left Ingledene to her daughter Brenda Harris who also died shortly afterwards. It was next owned by Rita Roberts and, coincidentally, one of the owners of the Rehearsal Club was named Mrs Roberts.

Another coincidence, there is a hotel in Bath Street, Rhyl which has been trading under the name The Ingledene Hotel for many years including the time of the A6 murder.


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#672 21st November 2007, 03:25 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


Hotel Vienna

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following URL gives a bit of Hotel Vienna history post the 1960s.

In 1973, Peter Lowry bought 156, 158, 160 and 162 Sutherland Avenue - and thus launched the Vienna Group.

http://www.vienna-group.co.uk/about.htm

BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#673 21st November 2007, 06:28 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting, but it must have ceased to be a hotel at some point after Peter Lowry bought it because all those addresses are now private houses. Presumably he bought The Vienna from Herr Pichler, or possibly from his estate after Herr Pichler died.

The Broadway House Hotel in Dorset Square is still trading and today is called The Dorset Square Hotel.
Attached Images



Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#674 23rd November 2007, 12:43 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


Homicide Act 1957

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 1957 Homicide Act introduced the concepts of capital and non-capital murder into the English Legal System. The classifications for the more serious of the two were:
Murder in the course or furtherance of theft.
Murder by discharging a firearm or causing an explosion.
Murder while resisting lawful arrest or during an escape from lawful custody.
Murder of a police officer or prison officer in the execution of their duty.
Two murders committed on different occasions.
All others were non-capital.

Pre 1957, all were just murder, which was a capital offence.

Interestingly, mass murder doesn’t seem to be covered by the act. Presumably, killing hundreds of people by causing one explosion on the underground would have resulted in the eight o’clock walk, but killing the masses with one release of poisonous gas meant you could have a lie in.


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#675 23rd November 2007, 09:07 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by BOB
Bit of information for anybody who is considering visiting Rhyl for the first time.

In 1962, Ingledene was number 19 Kinmel Street. In August 1967 the houses were renumbered and Mrs. Jones’s B&B became number 60, which it still is today.

Remember that James Hanratty never actually claimed to have stayed at this specific establishment.

I am intrigued by the idea of a reverse identity parade, with Hanratty trying to pick Grace Jones out from a line of a dozen grey haired, middle aged women.

If his luck was in, he would have asked them to speak, and Mrs. Jones would be the only one with a Welsh accent.

Bob


Hiya Bob.

I visited Kinmel Street about 5 years ago for a look-see, but that was before I realised that the house numbers had changed. However, Ingledene was easy to recognise from the photo in Foot's book. It appears to be no longer a b&b, otherwise I might have checked in for a night just for the atmos. It's in a rather seedy and run-down part of Rhyl, real 'knotted hankie on the head' territory if you hark back to the fifties and early sixties. Perhaps JH stayed there on an earlier visit to Rhyl - we'll never know now. I have to be very honest and say right here that Grace Jones was very ill-advised to get involved in the case. As we all know, she was torn apart at the trial by Graham Swanwick QC. All well and good for Foot and Woffinden to claim dirty tricks on the part of the prosecution, but that was their job after all. It was JH's decision to change his alibi, after all, and Swanwick & Co went to town.

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#676 26th November 2007, 06:25 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


The Rhyl Alibi

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Graham

It's interesting that developments in the Rhyl alibi weren't introduced at the appeal.

Bob


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#677 26th November 2007, 08:19 PM
hawkes
Police Constable Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 20




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

this is an interesting case. i havent read through all of the thread but considering JH did it then i think the likely scenario as to what happened that day was - JH needed to get somewhere quick. perhaps he was after committing a crime and needed to get far away. being somewhat of a car thief, he quickly thought of what he had to do. however, despite having broken into some cars he was never an experienced driver. he saw the car in the cornfield. he chose this car because it was out of sight of bystanders and away from the road. he still had his gun which he used to commit the previous crime. he then forced gregston to drive for him and couldnt release his companion as she would go to the police. he was at this stage very edgy and accidently shot gregston when he turned too quick. the rest happened as storie said.

it would be interesting to find out if another crime such as a burglary or a shop robbery happened in that area on the same night. dont know if the police looked into that but you would imagine so.


hawkes
View Public Profile
Send a private message to hawkes
Find all posts by hawkes

#678 27th November 2007, 09:06 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkes
he still had his gun which he used to commit the previous crime


Hello Hawkes

Yes, it is a very interesting case. What was the previous crime committed by Hanratty with the murder gun?

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#679 27th November 2007, 09:14 AM
richardn
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: surrey. u.k.
Posts: 444




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,
Hanratty was not certified as insane or reported to be a sexual offender.
That being the case I fail to understand how he after shooting MG at point blank range would then decide that he was so sexually aroused that he would insist Valerie joined him in the back of the car so that he could rape her.
why the back of the car when there was the open space outside?
Another point to raise.
Why on earth was Hanratty dressed in a smart suit and tie walking around with a large gun and ammo reserves on a warm august evening ?
Two simply points in a very complex case.
Regards Richard.
PS. Although my main intrest is the 'Ripper case' I have a fascination with two others that being Ruth Ellis, James Hanratty, proberly because like the whitechapel murders they are cloaked with mystery.


richardn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to richardn
Find all posts by richardn

#680 27th November 2007, 09:21 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Richard

Hanratty had had mental health problems in earlier life, but that said it is still difficult to understand his actions on the night and he certainly was acting outside of his normal criminal activities.

It is not so unusual that he was dressed smartly. People did wear suits in those days, and Hanratty prided himself on his smart appearance, again as very many people did in those days, much more so than today.

Kind regards,
Steve

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 69 of 76 « First < 19 59 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 > Last »

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#681 27th November 2007, 09:38 AM
richardn
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: surrey. u.k.
Posts: 444




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Steve,
I certainly agree with you on the dress code of that period, at the time of the incident i had just left school and was working at Hepworths [ mens tailoring] and i measured many a inside leg [ what a occupation] especially for italian suits which were the rage.
Back to Hanratty, it was not the suit that concerned me, but the gun in question was a large one for as the gunman mentioned he was not used to guns and he felt like a ' cowboy'.
It just seems strange that along with the weapon, he also had spare rounds in his pocket.
What was he expecting a gunfight at the 'Ok Coral'?
Regards Richard.


richardn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to richardn
Find all posts by richardn

#682 27th November 2007, 10:12 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409


Hepworths

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Richard

I remember Hepworths very well!

I bought several tailor-made suits from various Hepworth’s stores in the 1970’s. As I remember it, Hepworths was the more rather more upmarket of the popular High Street tailors. Burtons was the entry-level, is that right? And there was Alexander in between. I can’t remember what I paid but I did actually own a tailor-made brown striped suit from Hepworth’s not unlike Hanratty’s and I even paid extra for special styling. I can’t remember exactly what styling, but I do remember ordering the trousers with a front pocket for pound notes in those days before everyone used credit cards. I wore that suit when I got married.

I fully take your point about the size of the gun and the quantity of ammunition he was carrying. With the bullets rattling like marbles in his pocket it’s difficult to understand just how he managed to escape notice on his travels that day. You would have thought someone would have remembered him as he got on or off the train from Paddington to Taplow or wherever. During the day, too, he must have been rattling as he walked, not to mention as he was leaving The Vienna , assuming he had the gun and the ammunition at this point.

Of course, if he was transported to the cornfield by someone else, that would explain an awful lot ……

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#683 27th November 2007, 10:28 AM
richardn
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: surrey. u.k.
Posts: 444




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Steve,
Yes Hepworths was rather up-market, but the cloth was of a high standard, when I started part of the package was a free made to measure suit which i remember well ,i wore it on many a date during the swinging sixties.
I also got married in 1970 with a Hepworth suit which cost me a weeks wages about thirty five pounds then.
You are right about your thoughts on the gun and ammo, and the weapon being picked up on route is a intresting one for conspiracy theories.
Regards Richard.


richardn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to richardn
Find all posts by richardn

#684 27th November 2007, 11:48 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Richard

I have to say that I have always found it difficult to accept that Hanratty had the gun and ammunition with him on the Monday night when he stayed at The Vienna. If at that time he was in possession of a gun, which would seem to be the case, then I think he must have kept it in a left luggage locker, possibly at Paddington Station. Louise Anderson’s flat was very close to Paddington, so this would be a convenient place for Hanratty to leave the gun, and to retrieve it when he planned to use it.

Assuming that he arrived in the cornfield on foot, having taken a train there for whatever reason, which is the only reasonable assumption to make, then he could have collected the gun at Paddington. You might still have expected that the bullets rattling in his pockets would have been noticed as he boarded and got off the train.

Louise herself made it clear to the France family that Hanratty hid his gun in their airing cupboard, but I don’t think he would have done this, and by this time Louise was going out of her way to blacken Hanratty’s character any way.

If Hanratty did not take the gun and ammunition to The Vienna, then there is the question of how the cartridge cases came to be subsequently found there.

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#685 27th November 2007, 11:55 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409


Louise Anderson's Flat

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the block of flats where Louise Anderson lived, and where Hanratty used to stay from time to time.
Attached Images



Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#686 27th November 2007, 05:19 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hawkes,

Like Steve, I'm intrigued about your mention of a 'previous crime' carried out by JH with a gun. Any further details? I don't think JH's prime intention that night was to nick a car - had he wanted one, why would he have walked a long way to a remote field just for a Morris Minor when he could have pinched a fancier car on or close to the main road. I reckon he'd been on a failed burglary mission, felt frustrated and annoyed, and held up MG and VS probably just to vent his anger on someone and act the big man.

Steve,

You're right about dress code. The word then was 'sharp', and I expect JH looked just that in a Hepworth's suit. I could only afford Burton's...

And I agree with you about the gun and ammunition. I don't think he had them at The Vienna. He was a great one for using left-luggage lockers, and it's known he stored lots of hot goods in them (and also used them to discard unwanted stuff).

Richardn,

Agree with you about JtR and Hanratty, but Ruth Ellis?? She was caught red-handed, never denied what she'd done, more or told her defence to let her hang, and took what was coming to her.

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#687 27th November 2007, 05:25 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by BOB
Graham

It's interesting that developments in the Rhyl alibi weren't introduced at the appeal.

Bob


Bob,

Probably because JH's defence found no real, corroborative evidence other than Grace Jones, who in my opinion what either mistaken or trying to get in on the action for whatever reason. She was rubbished at the trial. Paul Foot in particular fought tooth and nail to establish the 'Rhyl Alibi', but I don't think he ever did. There has been no evidence that definitely and inarguably places JH in Rhyl at the the critical time. I think JH concocted the Rhyl Alibi when he realised that his original 'Liverpool Alibi' wasn't sustainable, and used vague memories from previous visits to Rhyl to pad it out. I don't think Sherrard ever believed the Rhyl Alibi (but I could be wrong, of course).

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#688 27th November 2007, 05:38 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
I don't think Sherrard ever believed the Rhyl Alibi


Graham

I think you are quite right that Sherrard and the defence team were never totally convinced about the Rhyl Alibi. Whether or not they thought he was lying about it is one thing, but they were certainly aware of how changing horses in midstream would damage his case and how badly it would look in the eyes of the jurors.

Hanratty had certainly been to Rhyl a short time previously and, as you say, amalgamated memories from that trip into his alibi story. In all probability the Rhyl witnesses believed they had seen Hanratty at the time of the murder, and in all probability they were just simply wrong!

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#689 27th November 2007, 06:40 PM
hawkes
Police Constable Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 20




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hello Hawkes

Yes, it is a very interesting case. What was the previous crime committed by Hanratty with the murder gun?

Kind regards,
Steve


hi steve

i was just postulating here that he may have committed a crime before the killing such as robbing a shop or something. he would have used the gun in this crime.

of course, this is just speculation. i dont know whether there were reports of a crime in that area on the same day that could have been committed by hanratty or whoever shot gregson.


hawkes
View Public Profile
Send a private message to hawkes
Find all posts by hawkes

#690 27th November 2007, 06:49 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Hawkes

There has never been any suggestion that Hanratty used a gun for anything other than 'target practice' before entering the cornfield. I would think it pretty certain that had there been any other crimes committed in the area every opportunity would have been taken to check if they linked to Hanratty.

Certainly there were no reports of any stick ups as far as I am aware. Remember, 'gun crime' was much, much rarer in the 1960's than it is today.

Kind regards,
Steve

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 70 of 76 « First < 20 60 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 > Last »

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#691 27th November 2007, 07:00 PM
hawkes
Police Constable Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 20




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
I don't think JH's prime intention that night was to nick a car - had he wanted one, why would he have walked a long way to a remote field just for a Morris Minor when he could have pinched a fancier car on or close to the main road. I reckon he'd been on a failed burglary mission, felt frustrated and annoyed, and held up MG and VS probably just to vent his anger on someone and act the big man.


my own opinion is that the road was too busy - too many people around. so he saw the car in the field and went there where there would be no witnesses. i agree with you that it could have been a failed burglarly mission. but still, he could have got the train home.


hawkes
View Public Profile
Send a private message to hawkes
Find all posts by hawkes

#692 27th November 2007, 07:08 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

He could have got the train and gone back into London, but his London friends were expecting him to be in Liverpool that week. He could also have taken the train to Liverpool as per his original plan.

What he actually did was to hijack the Morris Minor and get the driver to take him very, very close to his family home in North London. Perhaps at this point he was thinking of visiting his parents and his brothers, he hadn't seen them for a while. It could also be that he realised that if he asked to be dropped off in that area it wouldn't be long before the police knocked on the Hanratty family door to ask if Jimmy was home, and he had that gun, too, which he would not have wanted to take to his parents' house.

So he decided to carry on to Bedford .....


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#693 27th November 2007, 07:18 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkes
my own opinion is that the road was too busy - too many people around. so he saw the car in the field and went there where there would be no witnesses. i agree with you that it could have been a failed burglarly mission. but still, he could have got the train home.


Hi Hawkes

The Morris Minor was parked just inside the gate, only yards from the road, and would have been visible to any passing car, the driver and/or passenger would have been able to see it quite easily, and to see Hanratty stood with the gun in his hand. He needed to get into the car as quickly as possible once he had made up his mind what he was going to do.

Although it was a cornfield, there are actually cottages close by and the residents, had they been looking in that direction, would have been able to see the Morris Minor, and again they would have been able to see Hanratty standing by the car.

KR
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#694 27th November 2007, 08:12 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by richardn
Hi Steve,
Yes Hepworths was rather up-market, but the cloth was of a high standard, when I started part of the package was a free made to measure suit which i remember well ,i wore it on many a date during the swinging sixties.
I also got married in 1970 with a Hepworth suit which cost me a weeks wages about thirty five pounds then.
You are right about your thoughts on the gun and ammo, and the weapon being picked up on route is a intresting one for conspiracy theories.
Regards Richard.


Hello Richard

This post about a Hepworths suit costing a week's wages of £35 got me thinking about prices back then and when I got back home from the office this evening I looked in my diary from 1975 and there was the receipt for the deposit on a suit I bought from Hepworths in March that year. This might interest you and bring back a memory or two:

The receipt is for a suit costing £49.00 (which was nearly a week's earnings for me at the time.) It is on blue paper with 'Hepworth Tailoring' in the top left corner. The order number in the first column is 7344, the next column is for 'Description - Garment Type' and the salesman has written 'VS'. It is invoice number S 00602-5, the salesman's name and staff number are D. Roxburgh 7400A and on the back of the invoice there is a wonderfully dated 'PERSONAL MESSAGE FROM OUR MANAGING DIRECTOR' which reads as follows.

'In thanking you for your custom I would express the sincere hope that this purchase will give you every satisfaction.

'We set the highest possible standards both for our merchandise and our service. In this respect our Branch Manager acts as my personal representative, not only to help you choose your clothes in the future, but to pass on to me any constructive suggestions which you may wish to make to him.

'Yours sincerely (looks like J Rowley) Managing Director.'

Those were the days!

Not wanting to wander too far off-topic, the suit was a dark brown with white pinstripe and not dissimilar to Hanratty's !!!

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#695 28th November 2007, 08:58 AM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


Crimes in Dorney Reach

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi hawkes

Yes, the police did look for break-ins in the area, including at the houseboats moored on the nearby Thames. All to no avail.

They were concerned that the gunman had taken the weapon and ammunition whilst committing a burglary near by and that this would make the victim reluctant to come forward. Consequently, the authorities guaranteed immunity from prosecution to anybody saying that the revolver had been stolen from them in such circumstances.

The gun was a 1940 ex service .38 Enfield. The assumption was that it was one of the thousands brought back into the country after the war as souvenirs. Ballistics evidence at the trial said that it was well maintained and oiled.

I too have always been mystified as to how the gunman concealed the weapon whilst on the tube etc. Acott realised that the murderer’s clothes would probably have traces of blood on them – but what about gun oil? We must assume that none was found on the recovered Hepworth’s trousers.

I also agree that Hanratty probably kept the revolver in a locker at Paddington station. His “accidental” journey there instead of to Euston provided an excuse in case the police had traced somebody who saw him at the westbound station on the Tuesday morning.

In my view, Paddington is within walking distance of the Vienna – but Euston is a tad too far to contemplate on foot. If this was also true for Hanratty, then he would have left the hotel with the intention of either getting a taxi or going to the nearest tube station. As he would probably have passed Warwick Avenue underground station on his journey to Paddington, his claim to have accidentally walked to that mainline station seems highly suspicious.

Bob.


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#696 28th November 2007, 09:50 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bob

The lack of gun oil could be explained if Hanratty had kept the gun in his jacket pocket, the jacket of course was never recovered. But a big gun like the .38 Enfield would have been easier to carry and to conceal in a trousers pocket rather than the jacket.

One other mystery, that none of the witnesses, Valerie Storie included, noticed the distinctive stripe in Hanratty’s suit, could be explained if Hanratty was not wearing the Hepworths suit at the time of the murder. It is possible that he owned another set of clothing which he kept in a left luggage locker, maybe at Paddington, changed into when he collected the gun, and disposed off after the crime. This would also explain the lack of forensic evidence in the car, lack of blood on Hanratty’s clothes, etc.

Regarding the confusion between Paddington and Euston, I have posted before that this is one of the most unlikely aspects of Hanratty’s story. Without a shadow of doubt he would have known the difference between Paddington and Euston. Paddington Station is a mile from The Vienna Hotel and Euston Station is about three miles. Hanratty occasionally stayed at Louise Anderson’s flat in Sussex Gardens which is less than half a mile from Paddington Station, and the infamous Number 36A bus stopped at Paddington Station.

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#697 28th November 2007, 03:59 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


Hanratty's Suits

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Steve

Couldn't agree with you more. If Hanratty was guilty, then he must have had a fourth suit to add to the Hepworths, dark blue and green ones that were known about.

Still can't get my head round how he concealed the gun whilst travelling on the train, tube and bus - even in the trousers of his fourth suit.

He would have reduced his chances of being caught with the weapon by leaving it in the car in Avondale Crescent.

On the subject of the Hepworth's suit, it seems pretty pointless removing the labels from a made to measure outfit. The dimensions of the garments would surely make it easy to trace to the buyer.

Bob


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#698 28th November 2007, 04:32 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Bob

There is always the possibility that the police were correct and that he stole the gun and ammunition locally. The victim of this crime could well have not wanted to come forward. This was such a high profile case and the public opinion was very much against anyone involved in the murder, so it would be understandable for someone who supplied the gun, even supplied it unwillingly, to come forward with any information.

Hanratty had enquired about a gun from Donald Slack, also known as Fisher, in Ealing and another scenario is Hanratty picking up the gun on his way west towards Slough. Ealing is en-route! Slack/Fisher would never have owned up to supplying the gun.

If Hanratty acquired the gun and ammunition on the day of the abduction at Dorney it would explain quite a lot of things. It wouldn’t of course explain how the cartridge cases came to be found in The Vienna Hotel long after the murder and long after Hanratty’s overnight stay there.

Yes, I agree entirely that it would be pointless removing the labels. The police would have been able to track down the tailor who made the suit from the type of cloth, and then track down the customer from the tailor. But of course this would never have entered Hanratty’s head.

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#699 28th November 2007, 08:42 PM
hawkes
Police Constable Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 20




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

sorry if this has been mentioned before but i was wondering if peter alphon is still alive and if he ever gave an account of why he admitted to the murder ?


hawkes
View Public Profile
Send a private message to hawkes
Find all posts by hawkes

#700 28th November 2007, 08:45 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even though gun-crime was indeed relatively rare in those days, it wasn't difficult to obtain a gun - legally or otherwise. My dad had an old .25 revolver laying in a drawer for years and years until he decided to hand it in. And of course, as someone said, there were thousands of ex-service weapons almost for the picking. I've often wonder if Charles France's suicide may have had something to do with his obtaining the gun for Hanratty, or perhaps being instrumental in doing so. Donald Slack, as far as I recall, satisfied Acott that he hadn't supplied JH with a gun.

I still reckon that JH had burglary, not armed robbery, in mind when he went down to the Slough area that evening. He probably saw himself as a classic stick-up man, complete with the outlaw-type kerchief over his face that he wore when he arrived at the cornfield - maybe his idea was to ring the bell of some big house, shove the gun in the face of whoever opened the door, and get stuck in, as it were. And yes, I agree with you, Steve, that for whatever reason his hopefully-profitable evening came to nothing so, resentful and frustrated, he decided to get a lift back home and perhaps make a bob or two out of his unwilling companions in the Morris. And it all went wrong.

Cheers,

Graham

PS: regarding suits. I left school in 1963, a long-haired scruff if ever there was one. My dad decided I needed an 'interview suit', so he dragged me off to Birmingham. I can remember trying to convince him that we should go to Zissman's or Cecil Gee for a 'sharp' Italian suit (still fashionable) or, even better, a Beatles suit - tapered trousers, no lapels, cool.... Nah, we ended up at Burton's and I got some dark baggy sackcloth effort for about £6 which embarrassed me every time I wore it. Ever since, I've avoided suits wherever possible...

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 71 of 76 « First < 21 61 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 >

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#701 28th November 2007, 08:50 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkes
sorry if this has been mentioned before but i was wondering if peter alphon is still alive and if he ever gave an account of why he admitted to the murder ?


Hello Hawkes

Yes, Peter Alphon is still alive, living in North London, and reluctant to discuss the A6 murder case!

KR
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#702 28th November 2007, 08:58 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steve,

I know we've been down this road before, but are you absolutely sure that Alphon is still alive?

Hawkes,

It's almost certain that Alphon was involved purely via what I would say is almost-incredible coincidence, and Alphon being Alphon he saw the main chance! He publicly 'confessed' to the A6 murder only after Hanratty was dead, and it's a matter for speculation as to whether he actually made any money out of his 'confession'. Personally, I think he did, probably one or more out-of-court settlements with newspapers. He probably lived well at the expense of Jean Justice and Jeremy Fox for a time, too. A real chancer if ever there was one.

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#703 28th November 2007, 08:59 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
I've often wonder if Charles France's suicide may have had something to do with his obtaining the gun for Hanratty, or perhaps being instrumental in doing so.


Hello Graham

My own point of view is that France's involvement was more after the fact than before it, in that he helped dispose of the gun rather than procure it.

KR
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#704 28th November 2007, 09:02 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
Steve,

I know we've been down this road before, but are you absolutely sure that Alphon is still alive?




Yes, Graham, 100% - PM me & I'll tell you why!


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#705 28th November 2007, 09:12 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hello Graham

My own point of view is that France's involvement was more after the fact than before it, in that he helped dispose of the gun rather than procure it.

KR
Steve


Hmmm.

France was a life-long petty crook, though apparently never a violent one, and according to legend he taught JH a lot he knew about housebreaking, fencing, etc. He was also, it seems, a devoted family-man, which doubtless conflicts with his 'professional' life, but the evidence would support that contention. I rather feel that for someone like France to take his own life indicates a rather deeper involvement, such as, for example, putting JH onto someone from whom he could get a gun, than just disposing of it afterwards. France could well have been charged as an accessory to murder, more likely for helping JH to get a gun that helping him dispose of it. Perhaps he thought that sooner or later the police would trace the gun back to him. But in all honesty, until the Met release his last notes and letters, we'll never know.

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#706 28th November 2007, 09:29 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Graham

I hear what you are saying but maintain my own viewpoint on this, and agree that we need more information to be released as soon as possible. All this time after the murder with virtually all major participants no longer alive (Miss Storie excepted) there can be no justifiable reason not allow the full documentation into the public domain.

KR
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#707 28th November 2007, 09:39 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hi Graham

I hear what you are saying but maintain my own viewpoint on this, and agree that we need more information to be released as soon as possible. All this time after the murder with virtually all major participants no longer alive (Miss Storie excepted) there can be no justifiable reason not allow the full documentation into the public domain.

KR
Steve


Hi Steve,

If it still exists, of course. Charlotte France passed a number of Charles' letters to the Sunday Times, which published only one of them. The rest of his writings were apparently taken away by the police. France's younger daughter gave a moving statement concerning her dad in that TV documentary, but Carole France has vanished without trace and I'd suspect Charlotte has passed away. Maybe the police are still covering themselves even after 46 years.

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#708 28th November 2007, 10:09 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Graham

With all the publicity and interest in this case you can understand the Met being circumspect, don't you think?

KR
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#709 28th November 2007, 10:25 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hi Graham

With all the publicity and interest in this case you can understand the Met being circumspect, don't you think?

KR
Steve


I do, Steve. Over the years I've always had the impression that the police knew a hell of a lot more about this case, its background and its implications than they ever revealed. I wonder if they'll abide by the 50-year rule and release all their documents in 2012?

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#710 28th November 2007, 10:28 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Will we still be alive in 2012?

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 72 of 76 « First < 22 62 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 >

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#711 28th November 2007, 10:50 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Will we still be alive in 2012?


I flippin' hope so!

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#712 29th November 2007, 12:26 AM
larue
Sergeant Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 60




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
But a big gun like the .38 Enfield would have been easier to carry and to conceal in a trousers pocket rather than the jacket.




hi Steve. have you ever tried this?

atb

larue


larue
View Public Profile
Send a private message to larue
Find all posts by larue

#713 29th November 2007, 12:34 AM
larue
Sergeant Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 60




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
All this time after the murder with virtually all major participants no longer alive (Miss Storie excepted) there can be no justifiable reason not allow the full documentation into the public domain.




hi Again.

yes, one would think this to be so, however, this may well not be the case.

consider: with the lack of any hard evidence against jh, the police/dpp would have trumpetted any additional evidence that came into their posession, so, surely anything they are witholding, cannot logically be 'prosecution' evidence, as it were. that only leaves 'defence' evidence. what if a piece of that 'defence' evidence categorically proved jh's innocence??? what value the dna test then?

isn't it only the guilty that have things to hide?

atb

larue


larue
View Public Profile
Send a private message to larue
Find all posts by larue

#714 29th November 2007, 09:50 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by larue
hi Steve. have you ever tried this?

atb

larue


Hi Larue

No, I haven't, but in about 1987 I owned an NEC 9A mobile phone which was about the size of a gun - ladies used to ask: 'Is that a phone in your pocket or are you pleased to see me?'

KR
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#715 29th November 2007, 09:52 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by larue
hi Again.

yes, one would think this to be so, however, this may well not be the case.

consider: with the lack of any hard evidence against jh, the police/dpp would have trumpetted any additional evidence that came into their posession, so, surely anything they are witholding, cannot logically be 'prosecution' evidence, as it were. that only leaves 'defence' evidence. what if a piece of that 'defence' evidence categorically proved jh's innocence??? what value the dna test then?

isn't it only the guilty that have things to hide?

atb

larue


Hi Larue

Very good point!

KR
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#716 29th November 2007, 10:21 AM
larue
Sergeant Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 60




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hi Larue

No, I haven't, but in about 1987 I owned an NEC 9A mobile phone which was about the size of a gun



but hopefully not as lethal... as for the ladies, well, that is just too much information.

back in the dim and distant, i have tried to carry a 7.62mm nagant* in the trousers, a la james cagney. not easy, or comfortable. as a revolver of that calibre weighs heavy, a belt and braces might be in order.


*this was in the usa, and not for any nefarious purpose, i hasten to add!!!!


atb

larue


larue
View Public Profile
Send a private message to larue
Find all posts by larue

#717 29th November 2007, 10:40 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Larue

In view of your personal experience of carrying a firearm without a holster how do you think Hanratty managed to conceal the gun and a large amount of ammunition for a full day and whilst travelling on a train?

KR
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#718 29th November 2007, 11:39 AM
richardn
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: surrey. u.k.
Posts: 444




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,
I know very little about firearms but i believe the weapon used at the scene was a .38 calibre smith and weston ex service revolver proberly from world war two.
This was the same type of gun that Ruth Ellis shot David Blakeney with in 1955, in order to fire it one had to **** the weapon before another round could be discharged, it also required a pull of 9.5 poundage to fire a round.
My point is this being the case the words according to Valerie the killer said after the shooting was 'He moved to quick made me nervous' would indicate a shot being fired on instinct .
But as two shots were fired it could indicate a calculated killing for the killer would have to **** the hammer again before a second shot could be fired.
May have got that all wrong but worth a post.
Regards Richard.


richardn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to richardn
Find all posts by richardn

#719 29th November 2007, 11:39 AM
granger
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 317




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hi Larue

In view of your personal experience of carrying a firearm without a holster how do you think Hanratty managed to conceal the gun and a large amount of ammunition for a full day and whilst travelling on a train?

KR
Steve


Surely it wouldn't be the most difficult task, even for Hanratty. Carrier bag, holdall, attache case, overcoat pocket drapped over arm etc etc!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by granger : 29th November 2007 at 11:44 AM.


granger
View Public Profile
Send a private message to granger
Find all posts by granger

#720 29th November 2007, 11:50 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409


Enfield

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Richard

The murder weapon was an Enfield .38. I think the police might have put out a statement saying the gun was a Smith & Weston at the time the gun was found. As we know they sometimes put out deliberately inaccurate information to help themselves when interviewing suspects.

KR
Steve

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 73 of 76 « First < 23 63 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 >

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#721 29th November 2007, 11:54 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by granger
Surely it wouldn't be the most difficult task, even for Hanratty. Carrier bag, holdall, attache case, overcoat pocket drapped over arm etc etc!


Hi Granger

According to all the information we have, the gunman wasn't carrying anything at the time of the abduction, and he wasn't carrying or wearing an overcoat. It was a warm summer evening in August so there would have been no need to take a coat. He appeared by the car wearing only a suit - he was smartly dressed.

According to Nudds, Hanratty left the hotel with luggage and a radio, so these were deposited somewhere at some point during the day. In all probability the luggage was left at Paddington and the gun collected at the same time.

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#722 29th November 2007, 11:57 AM
richardn
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: surrey. u.k.
Posts: 444




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Steve,
Thanks for clearing that up it throws that theory in the dustbin.
But although not belonging to this thread the Finger pressure required and the cocking of the hammer is relative to the Ellis case for many reasons.
Regards Richard.


richardn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to richardn
Find all posts by richardn

#723 29th November 2007, 12:44 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


The Gun And Suites

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steve

The police considered the possibility that the gunman stole the weapon and ammunition during a breakin in the Dorney Reach area just prior to the abduction. It reality, this is highly unlikely - Valerie would have noticed the five or six boxes of ammunition.

Hanratty's Hepworth's outfit was a three piece suit. My reading of Miss Storie's statements is that the assailant was wearing a dark two piece suit.
This may explain why she didn't notice the distinctive stripe and why no traces of gun oil were found on the recovered Hepworth's trousers or waistcoat. Another possibility is that Hanratty was innocent.

Hanratty and Alphon appear to have tied their ties in totally different ways. If Valerie Storie had noticed the type of knot used by the killer we would all be a bit wiser.

Bob


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#724 29th November 2007, 01:06 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409


Guns and Suits

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bob

Miss Storie was aware that the gunman had bullets with him, they sounded like marbles she said.

Unless Hanratty had an accomplice who was holding onto additional ammunition and disposed of this additional ammunition at the same time as disposing of the gun, then he must have had the five boxes with him in the Morris Minor.

I am afraid I cannot accept your ‘other possibility’ that Hanratty was innocent. He was the gunman, there is no doubt (to use Miss Storie’s words) because of the DNA evidence and because of the certainty of Miss Storie herself, the only witness to the events that night.

Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#725 29th November 2007, 01:09 PM
granger
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Somerset, UK
Posts: 317




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hi Granger

According to all the information we have, the gunman wasn't carrying anything at the time of the abduction, and he wasn't carrying or wearing an overcoat. It was a warm summer evening in August so there would have been no need to take a coat. He appeared by the car wearing only a suit - he was smartly dressed.

According to Nudds, Hanratty left the hotel with luggage and a radio, so these were deposited somewhere at some point during the day. In all probability the luggage was left at Paddington and the gun collected at the same time.

Kind regards,
Steve


Hi Steve.

I still think it would have been very, very simple for Hanratty to have concealed the gun and ammo. Just because Valerie Storey said the abductor wasn't carrying anything at the time of the kidnapping, doesn't mean to say he could not have disgarded the bag, or whatever, sometime before arriving at the car.

Going over in defence of Hanratty, I do find it rather strange that he would have worn a suit had he fully intended trudging over fields, and carrying out the odd burglary on the way. He was obviously a man who liked to look smart, and possibly very proud of his suits, so would he not instinctively dressed down to carry out any criminal acts which he knew may damage, or even dirty his clothes. Maybe his wardrobe did not run to casual clothes!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by granger : 29th November 2007 at 01:22 PM.


granger
View Public Profile
Send a private message to granger
Find all posts by granger

#726 29th November 2007, 01:37 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Granger

Yes, he could have dumped a bag when he took the gun out of it and that would explain the gun oil question, but the police should have found a bag in the cornfield.

People didn't really wear casual clothes to the same extent in those days, did they? You were either a blue-collar worker or a white-collar worker, and going casual for most men simply meant not wearing a tie.

Or am I remembering the early 1960's incorrectly?

I agree with you that Hanratty was proud of his appearance, and I cannot see him trudging though a field either.

I have to say, though, that he could just as easily have approached the car from the road - it was parked just inside the cornfield - and when you go that area you can see there are paths across the fields, ramblers' paths, and he could have approached the car using one of these paths. If you don't know they are there it can look as though someone is walking across the middle of the field!


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#727 29th November 2007, 01:50 PM
larue
Sergeant Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 60




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hi Larue

In view of your personal experience of carrying a firearm without a holster how do you think Hanratty managed to conceal the gun and a large amount of ammunition for a full day and whilst travelling on a train?

KR
Steve



a very good question. i cannot answer it with any accuracy, but i can provide a bit of background information aboot the gun. [ see below ] a .38 revolver is quite a bulky item. and has lots of sharp bits too. most uncomfortable when stuffed in the waistband. too far out, and it becomes butt heavy and will fall out. [ very embarrasing ] too far in and it will try to slide down the trouser leg. [ no rude comments please ] no, in my honest opinion, having tried it, the waisband thing is pure hollywood bs. that leaves pockets or a bag. with a bag it is easy, with pockets less so. the bulge and weight would ruin the cut of the jacket, hence the development of the shoulder-holster. the ammunition would weigh quite heavy too. then there is the prospect of being caught in posession... altogether a risky business.

as i remember, vs said the gunman just appeared, with gun in hand. nobody could be that dumb as to walk aboot with a gun in his hand. he must have conceled it somehow.

as far as i can recall, without consulting books etc, is that the gun was a .380 enfield. the most likely candidate would be a number 2, as this type was extremely common, numerous and fairly easy to get hold of, if you knew the wrong people. it was/is a double action, which means it does not need to be cocked before being fired. [ as would a single action ]. were the weapon a single action, the wound in gregsten's head would have been very different, as both bullets were fired from an almost identical position. not possible if the gun had to be re-cocked between shots.

atb

larue


Type Service pistol
Place of origin United Kingdom
Service history
In service 1932–1963
Used by United Kingdom & Colonies, British Commonwealth,
Wars World War II, Korean War, British colonial conflicts, numerous others
Production history
Designer RSAF Enfield, Webley & Scott
Designed 1928
Manufacturer RSAF Enfield
Produced 1932–1957
Number built approx 270,000
Variants Enfield No 2 Mk I*, Enfield No 2 Mk I**
Specifications
Weight 1.7lb (765g), unloaded
Length 10.25in. (260 mm)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cartridge .380" Revolver Mk IIz
Caliber .38/200
Action Double Action revolver (Mk I* and Mk I** Double Action Only)
Rate of fire 20–30 rounds/minute
Muzzle velocity 570ft/s (170m/s)
Effective range 15yds
Maximum range 200yds
Feed system 6-round cylinder
Sights fixed front post and rear notch
Attached Images


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by larue : 29th November 2007 at 01:59 PM.


larue
View Public Profile
Send a private message to larue
Find all posts by larue

#728 29th November 2007, 01:58 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409


The Gun

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Larue

It kind of puts it in perspective doesn't it? Fascinating information, thanks for posting it.

Ten inches long and 1.7 lbs in weight - difficult to believe that he lugged that around with him together with five boxes of bullets all day until the evening without being noticed !!!


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#729 29th November 2007, 03:07 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


The Gun

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Surely in Dorney Reach, Hanratty had the gun plus at least six bullets in his pocket. The boxes of ammunition were probably in a locker at Paddington at this time.

He could have carried the revolver and boxes of ammo to the 36A bus in a bag.

But on the day of the abduction and going from Avondale Crescent back to Paddington (or wherever), how on earth did he conceal the weapon?

Maybe the mysterious fourth suit was specially made with this in mind.

From what I understand, Hanratty went for tight fitting, snazzy Italian style suits.

Bob.


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#730 29th November 2007, 03:18 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Bob

Whoever the gunman was, he had to have the gun and the boxes of ammunition with him at the time of the abduction. The time scales involved are too short, the car was discovered in Avondale Crescent on the day of murder, the gun together with sixty rounds of ammunition on the 36A bus the next evening and had to have been left there at some point during the day.

It doesn’t make sense for Hanratty to go somewhere else to collect more ammunition to dump under the back seat of a bus. What makes more sense is for Hanratty to put the gun and the ammunition in a left luggage locker, or to toss it into the Thames.

The only explanation is that Hanratty relied on someone, Dixie France maybe, to dispose of the gun and the ammunition. With this scenario it is just possible that more bullets were disposed of than the gunman had with him in the Morris Minor.

If not, the fact has to be that the gunman had gun and bullets all along until disposing of them in the bus.

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 74 of 76 « First < 24 64 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 >

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#731 30th November 2007, 08:18 AM
larue
Sergeant Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 60




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by richardn
Hi Steve,
But although not belonging to this thread the Finger pressure required and the cocking of the hammer is relative to the Ellis case for many reasons.
Regards Richard.



hi Richard

why do you say this? i hope you do not mean that a woman is not strong enough to **** and fire a pistol? don't let this finger pressure thing fool you. i have seen an 'itty bitty' woman empty an .44 colt python magnum in less than 2 seconds.


atb

larue


larue
View Public Profile
Send a private message to larue
Find all posts by larue

#732 30th November 2007, 08:34 AM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


Concealing The Gun

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The current discussion about how the gunman concealed the weapon is fascinating. Maybe Danny La Rue can provide a few pointers.

The following could be considered as possibilities to explain the issue:

- He was taken to the cornfield in Buckinghamshire.

- The killer got rid of the revolver at an address before abandoning the car in Redbridge. This may explain why he went to this part of Essex after the murder.

Bob


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#733 30th November 2007, 07:14 PM
hawkes
Police Constable Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 20




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i dont think it would have been that hard to conceal a gun in your pocket. He could have put it in his jacket pocket and carried the jacket around until he got to the field. it was afterall a warm day.


hawkes
View Public Profile
Send a private message to hawkes
Find all posts by hawkes

#734 30th November 2007, 10:50 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bob,

There's been plenty of speculation down the years that the A6 killer might have been taken to the cornfield and dropped there, for a specific purpose.
However, if you believe that, then you have to consider the theory that someone arranged for Gregsten and Storey to be abducted, with the consequences we all know.

With regard to toting a gun, surely the waistband of the trousers is the favoured place (fingers crossed and trusting to luck and all that...).

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#735 1st December 2007, 10:24 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


Concealing The Gun

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Graham

I don't believe that the killer was taken to the field. I was trying to generate ideas from the forum members that would tie up the loose ends - i.e. how did he conceal the gun?

So far:

We know that the weapon was well maintained and oiled.

We assume that no traces of gun oil were found on the trousers or waistcoat of the Hepwth's suit.

The revolver is quite bulky and difficult to conceal for long periods.

Valerie's description of the killer suggests he was wearing a two piece suit, Hanratty's Hepworth's outfit was three piece.

Which of these four points has a low probability, and then what scenario accounts for what we know and what we think is reliable to assume?

The answer may simply be that he carried the gun in a jacket pocket of the Hepworths suit, which we know was never found - the oil traces being lost with the garment.

Bob


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#736 1st December 2007, 11:18 PM
tali
Sergeant Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 30




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusive dna evidence proved hanaratty as the murderer 100% imho, can't see need for debate about this that or the other


tali
View Public Profile
Send a private message to tali
Find all posts by tali

#737 1st December 2007, 11:25 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DNA did provide proof, quite right, but if you don't want to discuss the case please feel free not to!


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#738 1st December 2007, 11:49 PM
richardn
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: surrey. u.k.
Posts: 444




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Steve,
I agree that DNA does go a long way in proving Hanrattys guilt, i dont believe many of us are in opposition on that .
Not one hundred percent conclusive, but at least it gives Miss storey some closure to a case which has ruined her life not only physically also the doubt on her positive identification that had hounded her by the media was finally eased.
It is the mystery of the Hanratty case which intrests us all, the motive behind it , the stupidity of it, and the fact that a man now proven Guilty should protest his innocence to his family right to the end.
He clearly either could not confess to his loved ones such a futile crime, or he used their trust to give himself a fighting chance to escape the gallows.
Proberly the latter.
No pity for the guy, but a lot for his family,and Gregsons family, and all the other people lives he ruined. none more then Valerie who i have the greatest respect for a born fighter.
Regards Richard.


richardn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to richardn
Find all posts by richardn

#739 2nd December 2007, 12:17 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Richard

DNA was the final nail in poor Jimmy Hanratty’s coffin!

He was guilty for sure, but otherwise had a raw deal from the establishment. The system of the day was stacked against him, he shouldn’t have hanged on the available evidence and his appeal should not have been dismissed so readily. Today we would take into account his mental state, his evident learning difficulties, and today we would take more time to consider the overall situation before passing sentence.

Hanratty was guilty of the A6 murder and at the same time a victim of the attitudes and system of his own time.

Kind regards
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#740 2nd December 2007, 12:46 AM
richardn
Inspector Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: surrey. u.k.
Posts: 444




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Steve,
I cant agree with the term 'Poor' regardless if he had disabilities or not, he saw fit to fire multiple shots into both victims, and before the shooting of Valerie commited rape on the poor woman.
If this character was guilty , which according to recent findings he was , he should have paid the ultimate penalty. regardless of loopholes that may have saved him .
'Be quiet I am finking' it seems he was 'Finking ' how to save his own skin right up to the noose..
Regards Richard.

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 75 of 76 « First < 25 65 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 >

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#741 2nd December 2007, 01:25 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Richard

You are quite right, ‘poor’ is the wrong word. ‘Sad’ would have been more appropriate.

For sure he was bad, possibly mad, and certainly sad.

I go along with the ultimate penalty point of view, I just think there was insufficient evidence to be 100% certain that particular penalty was justified.

Kind regards
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#742 2nd December 2007, 09:32 PM
larue
Sergeant Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 60




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkes
i dont think it would have been that hard to conceal a gun in your pocket. He could have put it in his jacket pocket and carried the jacket around until he got to the field. it was afterall a warm day.


hi hawkes
eminently possible. the simplest methods are usually the best

atb

larue

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by larue : 2nd December 2007 at 09:38 PM. Reason: spelling mistake


larue
View Public Profile
Send a private message to larue
Find all posts by larue

#743 2nd December 2007, 09:37 PM
larue
Sergeant Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 60




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by richardn
Hi Steve,
I agree that DNA does go a long way in proving Hanrattys guilt, i dont believe many of us are in opposition on that .
Regards Richard.


hi richard

not many perhaps, but i am one of them. i am yet to be convinced of hanratty's 100% guilt or his 100% innocence. this fence i'm sitting on don't half hurt my butt!

atb

larue


larue
View Public Profile
Send a private message to larue
Find all posts by larue

#744 2nd December 2007, 09:47 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Larue

Thanks for your knowledgeable input about the gun, and don’t worry about sitting on the fence. I’ve said before that the DNA is proof-positive only at this point in time and who knows what further evidence might be presented in the future. Unlikely, I think, but who knows?

One further thing does bother me about the gun, though. We know it was very possible for Hanratty to have obtained a gun for this crime, used it and then disposed of it, and it has been suggested that the reason Hanratty got the gun was to embark on a new career as a stick-up man. If that was the case, why did he not get another gun straight after the murder? He believed himself to be in the clear for the A6 murder, he had an alibi and no-one suspected him.

He didn’t get another gun and he didn’t do any more stick-ups.

The only logical explanation could be that either he himself was appalled by what he had done, or that he decided to allow a passage of time before pulling another stick-up job.

Kind regards,
Steve


Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#745 3rd December 2007, 02:13 AM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steve,

I'm not sure that JH thought he was in the clear after the murder. I think at best even he was aware that his 'alibi' wouldn't stand up to serious investigation, which is why he changed it half-way through the trial. For what it's worth, my feelings are that it probably took some time for the realisation of what he'd done to sink in - not that he was ever really unaware of the enormity of his crime. I really do feel that he went into some kind of 'denial-mode' (for want of a better expression), and that had his defence been (a) better prepared and (b) in possession of all the evidence that the prosecution had to hand, he may well have been committed to Broadmoor. Not for one moment would I ever place any blame at the feet of Sherrard and Company, it's just it seems the Establishment had almost pre-judged Hanratty and there could only ever be one outcome at his trial. If Justice Gorman's thoughts were ever committed to paper (and I'm sure they were not), I rather feel that he saw little or no reason for a guilty verdict. It was a monstrous crime, no doubt about that; but was it premeditated? I'd say not. I seriously believe it was the action of a man who had lost control of his faculties.

My feelings are that he knew he was 'on the run' as soon as he drove away from Deadman's Hill, and that his consistent pleading of innocence was something to do with his defence-mechanism - and I'm not a psychologist by any means. It is also possible he needed to maintain his innocence for the sake of his parents, irrespective of Leonard Miller's 'take' on this aspect of JH's psychology. We've all done things we'd just as soon not have done....

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#746 3rd December 2007, 12:54 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


Hanratty's Guilt?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Larue

I am 99.999% sure of Hanratty's guilt, but 100% certain that Alphon didn't do it.

That leaves 0.001% chance in my mind that the culprit was A.N. Other.

Cheers

Bob

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by BOB : 3rd December 2007 at 12:55 PM. Reason: Forgot to sign.


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#747 5th December 2007, 06:52 PM
jimarilyn
Police Constable Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 24




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

For what it's worth, and for many reasons I am 100% convinced that Peter Louis Alphon killed Michael Gregsten. I know that on this particular message board that puts me in a very small minority. One thing that history has taught us is that you can't place your faith in the Establishment, far too often they have ulterior motives and hidden agendas. I for one don't believe for a second that James Hanratty went into denial (as one person on this board has time and time again suggested). I believe that Jimmy Hanratty did go to Liverpool on the morning of the 22nd as he had always maintained. He obviously had stolen goods on his person which he wanted to sell and when he couldn't get any joy from his efforts to find Carleton or Tarleton (or Talbot ?) street/road, he opted for Rhyl Fairground instead, where he knew a certain Terry Evans (whom he had met one month before) could be located. Terry Evans would know of fences who would buy Hanratty's stolen jewellery. When Hanratty was unable to find Evans over the course of the next 36 hours or so he decided to try Liverpool again and returned there early on the 24th. He sent the Frances (whom he had been lodging with) a telegram from Lime Street on that same evening and returned on the overnight train back to Euston and arriving at the France's home around 9am (Friday 25th).

There were plenty of witnesses to corroborate James Hanratty's movements from Monday evening (21st) to Friday morning (25th). Great efforts were made to discredit these witnesses or humiliate and ridicule them (as in the case of Mrs Grace Jones). I sincerely believe that James Hanratty changed his alibi halfway through the trial because he knew he was completely innocent of this horrific murder. He had maintained this Liverpool alibi ( which was largely true ) because he never imagined he would ever find himself in such a position, framed for something he'd never done. He thought the real culprit would be discovered or own up. When it dawned on him that this wasn't going to happen he had to tell the full story of his Liverpool/Rhyl alibi. In my opinion the only thing James Hanratty could be considered guilty of in this whole affair was naivety. A petty car thief/burglar doesn't become a cold blooded murderer. It's obvious to me that this was a pre-meditated murder and no coincidence that the parties/victims involved were carrying on a clandestine love affair that greatly offended other interested third parties.
Had James Hanratty been the murderer, I believe he would not have gone to his grave pleading his innocence and begging his family to clear his name. His loved ones knew him inside out and would know it and feel it if they sensed he was lying. The catholic priests who were with him near the end were convinced of his innocence. Had he been guilty of murder James Hanratty would have wanted to clear it with God, his maker. Many things point to James Hanratty's innocence but they are too easily overlooked.


jimarilyn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to jimarilyn
Find all posts by jimarilyn

#748 Yesterday, 12:04 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimarilyn
Hi,

For what it's worth, and for many reasons I am 100% convinced that Peter Louis Alphon killed Michael Gregsten.


Hi jimarilyn

Your comments about Hanratty’s alibi are interesting but you don’t say why you are 100% convinced that Alphon was the A6 murderer. What are your ‘many reasons’ for being so certain?

KR
Steve



Steve
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Steve
Find all posts by Steve

#749 Yesterday, 12:26 AM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jimarilyn,

You're just repeating the Foot/Woffinden line regarding JH which, on analysis, offers no concrete support for JH's innocence. If you haven't read Leonard Miller's book, it'd be worthwhile to do so. JH changed his Liverpool alibi when he saw it was insupportable, but so, as it turned out, was his Rhyl alibi. There is simply no reliable evidence that he was in Rhyl at the critical time.

I'm intrigued when you say you are "100% convinced" of Alphon's guilt and, like Steve, I'd be more than interested in seeing some of your reasons for saying so.

I'm the person who has claimed, and continues to do so, that JH went into some kind of denial of his crime. He wasn't the first and won't be the last. He had fairly severe learning and social difficulties which I don't suggest is a be-all reason for his denial of murder, but in my opinion it does suggest that he had problems facing social responsibilities, which I think is well illustrated by how he lived his life. Denial of what he did was his last chance. No, I don't think JH had a fair trial; yes, I do think the police withheld evidence from the prosecution; yes, the judge himself was surprised at the verdict.

When I first got interested in this case I was convinced that JH was innocent and that PLA was the killer, but the more I read the more I began to realise that the evidence put forward to link PLA with the A6 crime was at best tenuous. His connection with the case was almost certainly purely coincidental; if it wasn't, then a conspiracy suggests itself. And I don't believe there was a conspiracy. Yes, JH was convicted primarily on identification evidence, which is always subject to question, but to my mind at least virtually all doubts were lifted by the DNA. Note I say virtually all. To prove PLA's guilt would require a lot more concrete evidence than has so far been presented.

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#750 Yesterday, 01:30 AM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Graham (and Jimarilyn)

I find it difficult to think of Alphon as the A6 murderer. Yes, he was the first suspect, but if Mr Acott had believed there was a case to be made, Alphon would have been tried & convicted of the crime. He wasn’t tried, let alone convicted, and the A6 murder became a useful source of income for Alphon. I have visited some of Alphon’s ‘abodes’ and have a feeling for his lifestyle and I cannot see Alphon as a gunman who would commit murder & rape. He had no history of such crimes (OK, nor did Hanratty) and there has been no such crimes from Alphon since. Added to this Miss Storie’s situation that the gunman was still around, it is just not a tenable theory that Alphon was the gunman!

KR
Steve

[larue]

Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Forums > Ripper Discussions > Shades of Whitechapel
James Hanratty: Guilty ?
User Name Remember Me?
Password


Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts Search



Search Forums


Show Threads Show Posts
Advanced Search

Go to Page...

Page 76 of 76 « First < 26 66 71 72 73 74 75 76

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

#751 Yesterday, 02:08 PM
BOB
Sergeant Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 36


Bedford Prison

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following URL is an interesting article about the gaol where Inmate 3220 met his end in April 1962.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/prisons/story/0,,467176,00.html#article_continue

I have an A3 photocopy of a feature on the prison from the 29th November 1992 edition of Bedfordshire on Sunday. The article has two pictures of the Hanging Shed, one showing the outside – the other is of the interior.

Unfortunately, I haven’t got a clue how to include it in a posting.

Technophobic Bob.


BOB
View Public Profile
Send a private message to BOB
Find all posts by BOB

#752 Yesterday, 06:10 PM
jimarilyn
Police Constable Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 24




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hi Stevie,

It would take ages to list all my reasons (and expand upon them) for being convinced of Peter Alphon's guilt. Just to mention five in brief :-.

1) His behaviour in the immediate aftermath of the crime.
2) His inability to drive a car properly.
3) His confessions ( veiled and unveiled ) to the murder.
4) His familiarity of the Slough area.
5) Pages 54/55 of Louis Blom-Cooper's book.


jimarilyn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to jimarilyn
Find all posts by jimarilyn

#753 Yesterday, 06:13 PM
jimarilyn
Police Constable Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 24




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
Hi jimarilyn

Your comments about Hanratty’s alibi are interesting but you don’t say why you are 100% convinced that Alphon was the A6 murderer. What are your ‘many reasons’ for being so certain?

KR
Steve


hi Stevie,

It would take ages to list all my reasons (and expand upon them) for being convinced of Peter Alphon's guilt. Just to mention five in brief :-.

1) His behaviour in the immediate aftermath of the crime.
2) His inability to drive a car properly.
3) His confessions ( veiled and unveiled ) to the murder.
4) His familiarity of the Slough area.
5) Pages 54/55 of Louis Blom-Cooper's book.


jimarilyn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to jimarilyn
Find all posts by jimarilyn

#754 Yesterday, 06:40 PM
jimarilyn
Police Constable Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 24




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham
Jimarilyn,

You're just repeating the Foot/Woffinden line regarding JH which, on analysis, offers no concrete support for JH's innocence. If you haven't read Leonard Miller's book, it'd be worthwhile to do so. JH changed his Liverpool alibi when he saw it was insupportable, but so, as it turned out, was his Rhyl alibi. There is simply no reliable evidence that he was in Rhyl at the critical time.

I'm intrigued when you say you are "100% convinced" of Alphon's guilt and, like Steve, I'd be more than interested in seeing some of your reasons for saying so.

I'm the person who has claimed, and continues to do so, that JH went into some kind of denial of his crime. He wasn't the first and won't be the last. He had fairly severe learning and social difficulties which I don't suggest is a be-all reason for his denial of murder, but in my opinion it does suggest that he had problems facing social responsibilities, which I think is well illustrated by how he lived his life. Denial of what he did was his last chance. No, I don't think JH had a fair trial; yes, I do think the police withheld evidence from the prosecution; yes, the judge himself was surprised at the verdict.

When I first got interested in this case I was convinced that JH was innocent and that PLA was the killer, but the more I read the more I began to realise that the evidence put forward to link PLA with the A6 crime was at best tenuous. His connection with the case was almost certainly purely coincidental; if it wasn't, then a conspiracy suggests itself. And I don't believe there was a conspiracy. Yes, JH was convicted primarily on identification evidence, which is always subject to question, but to my mind at least virtually all doubts were lifted by the DNA. Note I say virtually all. To prove PLA's guilt would require a lot more concrete evidence than has so far been presented.

Cheers,

Graham

Hi Graeme,

For your information Leonard Miller's book was the first book re. the A6 murder that I read. I still have a copy of the book.


PS : If CCTV cameras had been as prevalent in Rhyl in 1961 as they are today perhaps they could have proved James Hanratty's being in Rhyl on 22nd/23rd of August.


jimarilyn
View Public Profile
Send a private message to jimarilyn
Find all posts by jimarilyn

#755 Yesterday, 08:02 PM
Victor
Sergeant Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi all,

I notice that nobody has commented on the recent "discreditting" of low copy number DNA techniques that hit the press a month or two ago. Admittedly I still tend to believe that JH did it (~95% sure) and that he should not have been hanged on the evidence presented, but that shadow of doubt has crept in.
__________________
Victor
______________________________________________

"Tonight you presume too much..."


Victor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Victor
Find all posts by Victor

#756 Yesterday, 08:15 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,892




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Jmarilyn,

Alphon was a manipulator, chancer and con-artist par excellence. He was first linked with the A6 crime when the police put out a general request to hotels, b&b's, etc., asking if they had a guest displaying any peculiar activities, such as staying in his room all the time. The manager of the Alexandra Court felt that Alphon (in his guise as Frederick Durrant) was a suspicious character and contacted the police. Alphon saw an opportunity to, literally, profit, and he strung the police (and others) along. He came pretty close to being accused of the A6 crime when he was placed on the i.d. parade, but fortunately for him Valerie Storey failed to select him. Once he was out of the police reckoning, he really went to town, stringing (amongst others) Jean Justice for all he was worth, and living the high life as a result. There is no doubt that he made a lot of money out of the A6 Case, and at the same time made himself into a minor (if malevolent) celebrity. If you ever saw the BBC TV interview filmed in Paris you'd know that he made total mincemeat of the inept interviewer, didn't speak with a cockney accent, and was extremely articulate, which JH certainly was not. I rather suspect that had the person who abducted Gregsten and Miss Storey been as smoothly articulate, then she'd have noticed.

IF cctv cameras were in place in Rhyl - but they weren't. Without exception not one of the witnesses who claimed to have seen JH in Rhyl at the crucial time produced incontrovertible evidence. At best, they may have been recalling seeing JH during a previous visit to Rhyl.

Interesting that you read Miller's book first. This was an introduction to the A6 Case from the 'other way around'.

Cheers,

Graham


Graham
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Graham
Find all posts by Graham

#757 Yesterday, 08:28 PM
Steve
Inspector Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Coast of England
Posts: 409




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by BOB
The following URL is an interesting article about the gaol where Inmate 3220 met his end in April 1962.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/prisons/story/0,,467176,00.html#article_continue

I have an A3 photocopy of a feature on the prison from the 29th November 1992 edition of Bedfordshire on Sunday. The article has two pictures of the Hanging Shed, one showing the outside – the other is of the interior.

Unfortunately, I haven’t got a clue how to include it in a posting.

Technophobic Bob.


Hello you Technpobe!

I can scan your feature and post it herefor the benefit of Casebook Members if you like. If you would like me to do this please PM me, I'll give you my office address to send it to and return it back to you afterwards.

KR
Steve

[larue]

phew!!!! finished

happy reading guys

[larue]

Jimarilyn

The full transcript is available at the Court House in Bedford where the trial took place.
Kind regards,
Steve

hi Steve

according to the person i have corresponded with at Beds. CC, the evidence of Nudds on 5th day, is missing, but his evidence from when he was recalled later is there.

interesting thing...

my contact also said, that the firm of stenographers who produced the transcript may have a residual copyright in it. [ larue goes into puzzled mode. copyright, in a public trial????? ] can somebody please explain?


atb

larue

[larue]

I wonder what Hanratty would have made of computers?

a quick and easy profit, one would guess


i still have my first lappy. 1996 ibm thinkpad 365e. works as well today as when new. though it has no soundcard, usb etc etc, and runs w95.

my second is a dell inspiron 5100. better spec than the ibm, 4 years old and still going strong. as we speak it is busy in the living room digitizing the 'infamous murders' show from last night that included details of the a6 murder case.

the last one i bought was for my son. an acer from pc planet or somesuch. just under a year old, and yes, you guessed it, the screen is failing and the dvd player don't work so good. pc planet's advice re the dvd problem - i kid you not - pick it up and shake it

later

larue

[larue]

Trying to visualise in one's mind (however difficult that might be) what happened in the confines of the back seat of that car while Michael Gregsten lay dead ( or dying ) leads one to speculate that someone's fingerprints, hairs, fibres or whatever must have been left there. If anything was ripe for future DNA detection that Morris Minor was.

hi jimarilyn

this is a very interesting point, especially in view of this extract from the trial transcript;


There were other aspects of Hanratty’s behaviour in court which
impressed those who saw him. When Valerie Storie identified him,
and indeed throughout her evidence, he sat impassively, his face a
mixture of puzzlement and concern. When Mrs Jones, from Rhyl,
stepped into the witness box his mother noticed that his nose began
to bleed —as it always did, she recalls, when he became excited.


makes it even more incredible that nowt was found in the car

this also tallies with michael hanratty's statement, that james always colored with embarrasement when faced with his wrongdoings, yet all through the trial showed no signs.


atb

larue

[jimarilyn]

Hi Larue

I too had heard about this illuminating remark of Michael Hanratty's. If anyone knew James well it had to be his younger brother Michael. There was only 2 and a half years difference in their ages. They grew up together as youngsters, socialised in later years and James taught Michael how to drive a car. I'd say driving a Morris Minor would prove a doddle to James Hanratty.

I would love to have been a fly on the wall in that Bedford Courtroom and been able to witness all the interactions and behaviour and reactions of all the people involved. Can anyone provide me with an infallible Time Machine perchance ?

[jimarilyn]

Hi Larue

Forgot to say so in my last post but much gratitude is owed you for the very fine effort of restoring all those extremely interesting (and seemingly lost forever) posts from the previous A6 forum. Spent a couple more hours earlier today catching up on them. Well done