a6 murder

[Sara]

The other REALLY interesting thing about James's post is the witness statement that there was a man and a WOMAN in the car when it was seen. There is only one other woman playing a prime role in the drama besides Storie, of the people we know of, and Alphon claimed at one point to have been with her just before the cornfield scenario! This tentative identification fits of course with what some of us suspect - and with what Blue Moon told us was the motive behind the murder. Very intruiguing!

[burkhilly]

Thanks for the welcome Tony.

I don't know as much about this case as many of the other posters, however I've always found the case interesting and after reading books, articles and seeing a couple of TV programmes was convinced that JH was innocent......and then came the DNA test, which we're led to believe was conclusive. After this evidence was produced, I kind of thought "duped" by JH and his supporters, and forgot about the whole thing.

I then came upon this thread about three weeks ago and am now on page 270 of reading through the posts. I'm now sitting on the fence with regards to if JH is guilty, mainly because I'm totally lost with regards to the DNA evidence, in terms of possible contamination due to the poor storage and what they actually use to get the DNA. I've asked Reg for some info on DNA so am now looking forward his response.

I do indeed come from Liverpool, where we had the famous Cameo Murders in 1949, leading to the conviction of two men, one of whom hanged for the crime. Both the convictions were quashed as "unsafe" in the courts some years ago. Another facinating case IMO.

I don't generally go in for this type of thing (like Jack the Ripper - boring) - but occasionally, a crime just grips a person and you want to know everything about it. Despite both the Cameo Murders and the A6 Murder happening before I was born (just after the A6 murder), I am facinated by both.

Regards.

[Victor]

Hi Burkhilly,
I'll have a go at answering your questions...

1. When they use matter to identify DNA, how "fresh" does the matter need to be? In particular I'm thinking of the famous hankie which seems to have been handled by everyone in the Courtroom, however, the DNA identified on the Hankie is only JH. Clearly mucus lasts for a long time, but sweat and tiny skin samples evaporate - or do they?

They can get DNA profiles from mummies, so thousands of years old is OK.

2. Can you explain to me the broken vial which contained liquid related to JH's trousers. What was this? What was the process?

No-one knows for definite. It has been speculated that this vial contained a "wash" or rinse of Hanratty's trousers, therefore it may have some of his sperm in it, but it'd be a minute quantity if any.

3. To get things clear in my mind, am I correct that the broken vial and the knicker fragment were kept together in the same box, and the vial got broken at some point? However, the knicker fragment was in a cellophane wrapper, inside a paper envelope.

They were found in the same box in 1991 (IIRC) but there's no indication of when the vial was broken, and there was no water damage to the paper envelope.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

I have highlighted a passage of your post above concerning how the cartridges appeared in the hotel room three weeks after the crime and I had exactly the same idea as you but hardly liked to express it.

I don't necessarily accept that the cartidges were 'obviously placed in the room before the murder' but according to the accepted version, they were. My original point was, why would someone be so careless as to leave them there, having taken so much time to ensure no forensic evidence was left in the car?

Hi Julie,
I think your question is chronologically challenged. He would have carelessly left the cartridges quite some time before taking time to clean the car. A car which had at least some of Gregsten's blood in it which may have forced him to clean up at least a bit.

I also asked whether the cartridges were checked for finger prints.

Someone recently posted a link where recent research has allowed fingerprints to be taken from cartridges, so I assume that this wasn't possible in 1961\2.

Also, if they were fired into a cusion at the hotel as a practice shot (as has been speculated) why didn't anyone hear the gun going off and why wasn't the damaged cushion produced as evidence?

This came from one of Alphon's "confessions", which he later contradicted by saying that the first time he fired a gun was at Gregsten in the car.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

It's quite obvious (from VS's own testimony) that the gunman was unfamiliar with cars and how to even start one up let alone engage the gears. Much crunching of gears and erratic driving would have been on the cards over the course of the following few hours while the gunman was teaching himself how to drive.

regards,
James

Hi James,

Do you think it's also possible that the killer was panicked\flustered and that it was this that caused the bad driving rather than an unfamiliarity with driving?

It's generally accepted that even the best drivers can make stupid mistakes when stressed.

I would even go so far as to say that it would be expected that the killer would make mistakes of the sort seen whilst getting away from such a horrendous crime scene, especially if he's sitting in a bloodsplattered drivers seat.

For him to have made a getaway without drawing more attention to himself shows considerable driving skill in the circumstances.

KR,
Vic.

[Rob63]

I doubt whether anyone fired a shot from the revolver in the hotel, the noise would`ve reverberated around the building. Even firing into a cushion doesn`t silence a revolver as it has a small gap between the cylinder and barrel where gases can escape. The only effective silencer for a revolver was tried in WW2 and this was a thick rubber sheath which enveloped the whole gun and was only good for one shot as the bullet blew a hole in the sheath and therefore ruined any future damping effect, the idea was dropped after this became evident.

[Graham]

Hi James,

John Douglas, a petrol pump attendant at a Birstall garage, made a mental note of the registration number of a blueish-grey car which had stopped for petrol about 12 noon on 23rd of August. The registration number was that of the Morris Minor (847 BHN).

Can you please advise the origin of this information, which isn't in either Foot or Woffinden?

Cheers,

Graham

[Limehouse]

Hi Julie,
I think your question is chronologically challenged. He would have carelessly left the cartridges quite some time before taking time to clean the car. A car which had at least some of Gregsten's blood in it which may have forced him to clean up at least a bit.


Someone recently posted a link where recent research has allowed fingerprints to be taken from cartridges, so I assume that this wasn't possible in 1961\2.


This came from one of Alphon's "confessions", which he later contradicted by saying that the first time he fired a gun was at Gregsten in the car.

KR,
Vic.

Hi Victor,

It seems to me carelessness seems to have plagued this case. Hanratty was careless enough to leave the cartridge cases in his hotel room and the hotel staff were so careless in their cleaning they didn't find them for weeks. Then , the forensic team were careless enough not to find any of Hanratty's DNA at the scene of the murder. The police were also careless in losing the piece of paper that John Kerr had written Valerie's first description of the murderer on. Hopefully, this carelessness didn't result in an innocent man being hung and a dangerous criminal going free.

[Tony]

Hi James,



Can you please advise the origin of this information, which isn't in either Foot or Woffinden?

Cheers,

Graham

Hello Graham,

As James is off line at the moment and you and I are on may I answer the question on James’behalf?

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)

Before :
THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES
LORD JUSTICE MANTELL
MR JUSTICE LEVESON
Between :
REGINA Respondent
- and -
JAMES HANRATTY deceased
by his Brother Michael Hanratty Appellant

Mr Michael Mansfield QC and Mr Henry Blaxland QC
(instructed by Bindman and Partners) for the Appellant
Mr Nigel Sweeney QC, Mr Mark Dennis and Mr David Perry
(instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown


130. The seventh ground of appeal concerns the fact that (not disclosed to the defence) there were other reported sightings of the Morris Minor car during 23 August 1961 in different parts of the country and evidence that a different light grey Morris Minor had been parked directly opposite where Mr Gregsten's car was recovered. This evidence consists of the following:
i. At 6.30am on Wednesday 23 August, William Lee saw a grey Morris Minor being driven by a man wearing a woollen pom-pom hat on the A6 near Matlock in Derbyshire. He wrote the registration number down as 847 BHN which was the registration of Michael Gregsten's car in the boot of which there was such a hat (although there is no evidence that the murderer otherwise was seen wearing it).
ii. At 12 midday on the same day, John Douglas, a petrol pump attendant at a garage at Birstall, north of Leicester, made a mental note of the registration number of a bluish grey car as 847 BHN occupied by a man and a woman. The man spoke with a southern accent which sounded to him as coming from Somerset.
Hope this helps, Tony

[Tony]

Birstall Sighting.

Graham,

You would not be able to find that information in Foot or Woffinden because they quite simply did not know about it. Neither did Sherrard or Hanratty.
Funnily enough Mr Acott knew but decide to keep it to himself.

Wonder why that could possibly be?

Tony

[Victor]

Hi Victor,

It seems to me carelessness seems to have plagued this case. Hanratty was careless enough to leave the cartridge cases in his hotel room and the hotel staff were so careless in their cleaning they didn't find them for weeks. Then , the forensic team were careless enough not to find any of Hanratty's DNA at the scene of the murder. The police were also careless in losing the piece of paper that John Kerr had written Valerie's first description of the murderer on. Hopefully, this carelessness didn't result in an innocent man being hung and a dangerous criminal going free.

Hi Julie,

There was loads of carelessness, and also an institutional preponderance at treating the defence as the enemy and telling them as little as possible.

I can't agree with the highlighted one though, because in 1961\2 DNA wasn't as understood as it is today. Also it isn't carelessness to not find something that isn't there - IF Hanratty cleaned before he ran off.

Tony is going to be after you now...he maintains that it's "hanged" and not "hung"

Your last five words have greater significance than you might imagine...it's been mentioned before that the lack of further crimes this hideous might be indicative of Hanratty's guilt.

And what about how careless Hanratty was...giving a false alibi, not signing a log book in Rhyl (if he was even there) or leaving any other physical evidence of where he claimed to be, losing his Hepworth's jacket, not finishing off Storie...

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Funnily enough Mr Acott knew but decide to keep it to himself.

Hi Tony,

Baz specifically knew or the police knew?

KR,
Vic.

[Tony]

Hi Tony,

Baz specifically knew or the police knew?

KR,
Vic.

Vic,

Baz.

[Tony]

Hanged!

Hi Vic,

I attempted to put the shortest post ever by typing in just ‘Baz’ but you have to post at least 5 characters.

Yes Limehouse please not use the word hung ever again in relation to capital punishment. It is allowed in the butcher’s shop however.

And a word of warning if you might accidentally mention DNA rather than forensics or anything of a similar nature Vic will swoop. I know for I have been swooped on many times by that old rascal.

I, on the other hand, only have a hang up on ‘hung’.

Does that make any sense at all Vic?

Tony.

[jimornot?]

I can't agree with the highlighted one though, because in 1961\2 DNA wasn't as understood as it is today. Also it isn't carelessness to not find something that isn't there - IF Hanratty cleaned before he ran off..............


.... Your last five words have greater significance than you might imagine...it's been mentioned before that the lack of further crimes this hideous might be indicative of Hanratty's guilt.

And what about how careless Hanratty was...giving a false alibi, not signing a log book in Rhyl (if he was even there) or leaving any other physical evidence of where he claimed to be, losing his Hepworth's jacket, not finishing off Storie...

KR,
Vic.

Hi Vic

Do you think it IS possible to have completely cleaned the car of all incrimibating DNA evidence. I just can't see how it can be done and I think Graham alluded to this previously

It is still a slight possibility that a) the gunman planned to scare off VS & MG and even if the plan went wrong, there would be no need to repeat the crime b) the gunman was horrified at it all going wrong and had no intention ofa repeat performance. It doesn't follow at all that the lack of a similar crime later points to Hanratty's guilt

I agree that the change of alibi did nothing to help Hanratty's cause. I am still persuaded that he stayed at Ingledene because of the green bath evidence and the fact that with , there is logic to why he would not have eaten in the main dining area and why he would have stayed in the room with the green bath. If he was innocent he would not have thought about leaving physical evidence of his movements at the time of the murder.

All the best


Viv