a6 murder

[jimornot?]

pom-pom hat

Hello Graham,
.............

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).

Tony

Hi Tony et al

This was news to me, so thanks. Surely this can't be argues away as yet another coincidence and that attendant identified the number plate and mentions a seemingly insignificant hat that actually existed?

Did this attendant see the woman alongside the driver?


these little snippets help to make this site all the more worthwhile. And, I agree with earlier postings, we must all be free to argue (politely) and do our best to later mind-sets if possible. Me? Still on the fence but I am falling towards the innocent side as I cannot reconcile all these coincidences, that the case was so weak Acott had to lie, that there were so many witnesses to hanratty being in Rhyl (albeit that the identification of him from a single photo was suspect) etc etc. I accept the DNA is damning though and I wonder if it wasn't for that, if Hanratty would have been pardoned by now. But the DNA result does exist........


all the best

Viv

[burkhilly]

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

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


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.


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.

Thanks for your response.

I know that some DNA matter lasts for many years - but DNA obtained from skin, sweat etc must evaporate quite early on. Skin for instance becomes dust, therefore can DNA still be obtained from skin after a certain length of time has passed?

[Graham]

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

Well, I've read the appeal and I have to say I missed the Birstall supposed-sighting.

Seems there were quite a few people out and about that morning taking car numbers at random....

Cheers,

Graham

PS: if you can have a go at Limehouse regarding 'hanged' and 'hung', then please be advised that it's 'neither...nor', not 'neither...or'. Don't let it happen again or it'll be detention for you.

[Rob63]

Something which has baffled me is why the Police didn`t try to ascertain who supplied the gun to the assailant. The gun must`ve had a serial number (unless it was ground off) so it would`ve been reasonably easy for the firearms boys to track it. A revolver with that much ammo is quite a haul especially when it is involved in a case of this seriousness. Does anyone know if this was followed up by the Police or did they simply ignore this line of enquiry?

[Victor]

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

Hi Viv,
It depends upon how much "evidence" was splattered in the car - if the bullets and viscera went out the drivers window then there might not be anything left. There's something about a throw or blanket being placed over the drivers seat after the body was removed, and most of the medical evidence suggested that there wouldn't be anything on Hanratty's suit.

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

If it was a conspiracy then there is no motive to repeat it, that is true. And that sentence starts with "If".

I agree that the change of alibi did nothing to help Hanratty's cause.

It's direct evidence that Hanratty is a liar, that can't be at all helpful.

I am still persuaded that he stayed at Ingledene because of the green bath evidence

He said the house had a green bath in the attic, but didn't mention the double-bed in the same room - a glaringly obvious anomaly that everyone would point out - nor did he mention he slept in that bed.

and the fact that with , there is logic to why he would not have eaten in the main dining area

That logic only works IF he slept in the bath-room, which he didn't mention. It also works against suggestion that he slept in one of the other rooms.

and why he would have stayed in the room with the green bath.

Because the rest of the house was full...And he never mentions sleeping in the bath-room.

It also point's to Grace Jones' dishonesty. She's happy to pocket the cash for the extra guests and basically lie to the taxman.

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

You could also say the exact opposite...If he was innocent he would not have to be concerned about leaving physical evidence of his movements.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Something which has baffled me is why the Police didn`t try to ascertain who supplied the gun to the assailant. The gun must`ve had a serial number (unless it was ground off) so it would`ve been reasonably easy for the firearms boys to track it. A revolver with that much ammo is quite a haul especially when it is involved in a case of this seriousness. Does anyone know if this was followed up by the Police or did they simply ignore this line of enquiry?

They did. Baz asked Hanratty about Donald Fisher (IIRC)?

[Victor]

Thanks for your response.

I know that some DNA matter lasts for many years - but DNA obtained from skin, sweat etc must evaporate quite early on. Skin for instance becomes dust, therefore can DNA still be obtained from skin after a certain length of time has passed?

Hi Burkhilly,

Reg has posted some links on the other thread. One of them specifically mentions mummies (with mixed success) and routinely getting profiles from blood spots on card that have been stored at room temperature for over 40 years.

Skin does dry out and break down into dust, but I don't know of any specific expermental data showing how long the DNA remains detectable. Animal cells have no strong cell wall like plant cells, so are more susceptible to disintegration. If the cells can be kept from drying out - like for example being wrapped in cellophane - then the disintegration can be delayed.

KR,
Vic.

[jimarilyn]

Hi Victor,

I'm going to turn the tables a little here and do a Victor on yourself. I thought it might be a little fun also to do this.

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?

My guess would be that the killer (if he was an experienced driver) would not suddenly become a bad and clueless driver regardless of what had transpired shortly beforehand.

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

I trust that you can provide examples of this Victor ? I would be very interested to know who you have in mind.

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.

If the seat was blood splattered (with no throw-over or blanket on it) then MG's blood would definitely have gotten onto the murderer's trousers. On this basis alone Hanratty could not have been the murderer as the conspicuous pin-stripe trousers he was wearing during the murder week (and for weeks thereafter) were completely blood free.

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

The A6 around 3.30 in the morning would have been very quiet indeed with next to no traffic travelling along it.


regards,
James


PS. Talking about traffic, recently the traffic was terrific approaching the Trafford Centre

[Tony]

Well, I've read the appeal and I have to say I missed the Birstall supposed-sighting.

Seems there were quite a few people out and about that morning taking car numbers at random....

Cheers,

Graham

PS: if you can have a go at Limehouse regarding 'hanged' and 'hung', then please be advised that it's 'neither...nor', not 'neither...or'. Don't let it happen again or it'll be detention for you.

A very good early afternoon to you Graham,

The weather is terrible here today and I fear for my regular Thursday night out with the boys.

I remember back to my school days and I hated detention, mainly because I was in it every Monday and Friday so rather than that I have written out five hundred lines. Would you like me to send them to you Graham or are you prepared to accept my word that I have done them?

I have other interests in life apart from this forum and one of them happens to be the history of the place in which I have lived all my life. I have masses of old photos and documents relating to around here. Most go back over a hundred years but some are more recent and if you look at photos of almost any street in England in the early sixties you would hardly see a car. Indeed it was quite rare, around here at any rate, for anybody to actually own a car.

If you were a petrol station attendant you would know all your regular customers possibly by name. If someone turned up crunching gears and possibly stalling it when trying to set off again you might well make a note of the registration whilst waiting for your next customer. I don’t suppose John Douglas had any axe to grind with anyone and he simply reported to the police what he saw.

As for William Lee he actually wrote the number down and said the driver wore a pom pom hat. And hey presto it turns out that there was just such a hat in the boot of the murder car. That is on hell of a coincidence if he was wrong about the car. I don’t suspect William Lee had any axe to grind with anyone and he did exactly what John Douglas did; he reported the matter to the police.
Both honest upright citizens.

Mr Acott on the other hand did have an axe to grind with someone: James Hanratty. And what did this honest upright policeman do about their statements? Did he tell the defence? Did he hell.

Tony

[Victor]

Hi Victor,

I'm going to turn the tables a little here and do a Victor on yourself. I thought it might be a little fun also to do this.

Hi James,
Fantastic, just what I want, some sensible discussion of the points.

My guess would be that the killer (if he was an experienced driver) would not suddenly become a bad and clueless driver regardless of what had transpired shortly beforehand.

Are you implying that emotional state never has an effect on performance?

I trust that you can provide examples of this Victor ? I would be very interested to know who you have in mind.

How about Ayrton Senna, or Dodi and Di's driver? I'm sure the RAC and AA websites would have further information for those who are interested in pursuing the argument.

If the seat was blood splattered (with no throw-over or blanket on it) then MG's blood would definitely have gotten onto the murderer's trousers. On this basis alone Hanratty could not have been the murderer as the conspicuous pin-stripe trousers he was wearing during the murder week (and for weeks thereafter) were completely blood free.

I agree that if you can demostrate those 2 qualifiers then your summary would be correct. Now you have to prove that the seat was blood splattered and there was no throw or blanket.

The A6 around 3.30 in the morning would have been very quiet indeed with next to no traffic travelling along it.

regards,
James

Yes it would, but afterwards when he was dumping the car...there are witnesses who confirmed the display of a lack of driving skill at the time.

PS. Talking about traffic, recently the traffic was terrific approaching the Trafford Centre

terrific as in "full of terror"?

KR,
Vic.

[Tony]

Mrs Grace Jones. Vic's post 3230

Hello Vic,

I am sorry mate but I take exception to your comments on Grace Jones.

This lady ran a boarding house in Rhyl she was not some sort of master criminal. Yes she bent the rules by not signing in a person whether or not it was Hanratty for the purpose of this post. And yes I imagine she pocketed the cash and avoided the tax. Not the Great Train Robbery by any stretch of the imagination and in my book good luck to her. The bloke got his bed and breakfast he was happy with the deal why involve the taxman?
She was probably a very nice old lady who behaved in exactly the same way as every other boarding house owner in every seaside town in the sixties.

Anyway it happens in every walk of life. How many times have I heard from the most surprising of people, doctors, accountants and yes even a tax inspector: “Is there anything we can do about the VAT? Would cash solve the problem? I’ve lost count. The whole country must be populated by criminals.

Just for your own piece of mind and in case anybody on here is from the Revenue I have never waived the VAT or accepted cash payments from anyone. Phew had to get that in.

It is not the first time you have called Grace Jones a criminal or dishonest liar and I personally find it unpalatable.

Sorry mate, that’s just how I feel.

Tony.

[jimarilyn]

Hi Victor,

Are you implying that emotional state never has an effect on performance?

In this particular case, the killer appears to have been very self-possessed and calculating to the point of actually having the steely nerve and composure to kill a man, subject a woman to the ordeal and humiliation of rape, order her to remove MG's body from the car and then while she lay on the concrete beside MG's body calmly fire several bullets into her (after asking her how to start the car and engage gears etc.,). Such a calculating, non-stressed and emotionless person would probably have no problem driving the car away from the murder scene...........unless of course he couldn't drive a motor car.

How about Ayrton Senna, or Dodi and Di's driver? I'm sure the RAC and AA websites would have further information for those who are interested in pursuing the argument.

What are you trying to say about Ayrton Senna ? Where is your proof that Senna was driving while stressed ? As for Henry Paul, isn't it common knowledge that he was well over the drink limit and not in a fit state to drive ? Where is it stated that he was under stress ?

I'm not sure at all that the RAC and AA websites would have any such information Victor.

I agree that if you can demostrate those 2 qualifiers then your summary would be correct. Now you have to prove that the seat was blood splattered and there was no throw or blanket.

It was you who suggested the blood splattered seat scenario Victor.

Yes it would, but afterwards when he was dumping the car...there are witnesses who confirmed the display of a lack of driving skill at the time.

Which witnesses are these ?



regards,
James

[Victor]

Hello Vic,

I am sorry mate but I take exception to your comments on Grace Jones.

Hi Tony,
I am sorry, I can understand your feelings, but I have not said anything that is incorrect. She was breaking the law by not declaring all of her income, and it is criminals like that, which incidentally includes Al Capone - he was only convicted of tax offenses, that increase your and my taxes.

This lady ran a boarding house in Rhyl she was not some sort of master criminal.

I completely agree, she was a small-time crook.

Yes she bent the rules by not signing in a person whether or not it was Hanratty for the purpose of this post.

No, she broke the rules, she didn't just bend them.

And yes I imagine she pocketed the cash and avoided the tax. Not the Great Train Robbery by any stretch of the imagination and in my book good luck to her.

I can't avoid saying this..."If she jumped off a cliff, would you follow?"

Yes her crime was not great or partricularly significant, but it is still a crime.

The bloke got his bed and breakfast he was happy with the deal why involve the taxman?

...because it is the law of this land, it might not be as significant as murder or rape, but it serves to put more police on the streets, pay for the NHS, local services, &tc.

She was probably a very nice old lady who behaved in exactly the same way as every other boarding house owner in every seaside town in the sixties.

She probably was, but she was also breaking the law, and so where all the other boarding house owners who didn't declare all their earnings, and it is specifically because she broke this law that there is no record of Hanratty's alleged stay. If she had declared everything then we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.

I understand that this is sounding very harsh for such a minor offense, but it is her fault that we have no physical evidence either way.

Anyway it happens in every walk of life. How many times have I heard from the most surprising of people, doctors, accountants and yes even a tax inspector: “Is there anything we can do about the VAT? Would cash solve the problem? I’ve lost count. The whole country must be populated by criminals.

Ken Dodd...

I don't challenge that lots of people break the law in this way, but it is still breaking the law.

Just for your own piece of mind and in case anybody on here is from the Revenue I have never waived the VAT or accepted cash payments from anyone. Phew had to get that in.

No worries from me.

It is not the first time you have called Grace Jones a criminal or dishonest liar and I personally find it unpalatable.

Sorry mate, that’s just how I feel.

Tony.

I cannot help the negative stigma that you infer from my factual statement. To some extent I agree with you, she did not commit a major crime, but she did commit a crime.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Hi James,

In this particular case, the killer appears to have been very self-possessed and calculating to the point of actually having the steely nerve and composure to kill a man, subject a woman to the ordeal and humiliation of rape, order her to remove MG's body from the car and then while she lay on the concrete beside MG's body calmly fire several bullets into her (after asking her how to start the car and engage gears etc.,). Such a calculating, non-stressed and emotionless person would probably have no problem driving the car away from the murder scene...........unless of course he couldn't drive a motor car.

The evidence says otherwise, even down to the killing of Gregsten being because MG turned round quickly and surprised the killer.

What are you trying to say about Ayrton Senna ? Where is your proof that Senna was driving while stressed ?

Ayrton Senna was killed whilst participating in a very competitive motorsport. Proving he was stressed is another matter.

As for Henry Paul, isn't it common knowledge that he was well over the drink limit and not in a fit state to drive ? Where is it stated that he was under stress ?

I believe he was drinking to relieve his stress, it would take a thorough examination of the evidence to confirm, and I'm not prepared to expend the time to do that.

I'm not sure at all that the RAC and AA websites would have any such information Victor.

5 mins quickly checking theaa.com gave me lots of links to rospa.co.uk and others, but again I'm not willing to commit to lots of research to prove the point.

It was you who suggested the blood splattered seat scenario Victor.

I didn't suggest it, I said "It depends upon how much "evidence" was splattered in the car - if the bullets and viscera went out the drivers window then there might not be anything left. There's something about a throw or blanket being placed over the drivers seat after the body was removed, and most of the medical evidence suggested that there wouldn't be anything on Hanratty's suit."

Which witnesses are these ?

Skillet, Trower, Blackhall, Hogan all testified about noticeably bad driving.

KR,
Vic.

[jimarilyn]

Hi Victor,

The evidence says otherwise, even down to the killing of Gregsten being because MG turned round quickly and surprised the killer.

This "evidence" is what VS stated the murderer stated was the reason why he shot MG.

Ayrton Senna was killed whilst participating in a very competitive motorsport. Proving he was stressed is another matter.

But what about the hundreds of occasions he drove on a racetrack without incident/accident. He died due to human error on his or another person's part.

I believe he was drinking to relieve his stress, it would take a thorough examination of the evidence to confirm, and I'm not prepared to expend the time to do that.

What is your basis for believing that Henry Paul was stressed out ? He was under the influence of too much alcohol while driving. Are you making this up as you go along Victor ?

I didn't suggest it, I said "It depends upon how much "evidence" was splattered in the car - if the bullets and viscera went out the drivers window then there might not be anything left. There's something about a throw or blanket being placed over the drivers seat after the body was removed, and most of the medical evidence suggested that there wouldn't be anything on Hanratty's suit."

I think you need to re-read the 3rd paragraph of your post 3215.

Skillet, Trower, Blackhall, Hogan all testified about noticeably bad driving.

You're very much mistaken here Victor. John Skillett and Edward Blackhall testified to witnessing bad/careless driving of a Morris Minor. James Trower and Paddy Hogan however never testified to any such thing.


regards,
James



PS. Re. Your tendency to pick people's posts apart unnecessarily... If I was so inclined Victor, I could argue the toss with you from now until the cows come home (now where did they wander off to I wonder ?) but that would be so tiring, time-consuming and counter-productive not to say a complete turn off to other contributors. The thread would then get bogged down and there'd be hardly any advance.