Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

a6 murder

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A6 murder course.

    Hello Viv,

    You asked me about the time I attended night school classes on the A6 case; well it was a long time ago I can tell you that much.

    If you have read some of my earlier posts you will know I have been most interested in this case since about 1971. Well one evening I was driving towards Glossop in Derbyshire and I had the radio on it was tuned in to Radio Manchester but in those days radios were not what they are today and reception was very poor. The year would be about 1981. It was a sort of talk radio show that was on and I wasn’t really taking a lot of notice but then I heard the presenter mention the A6 murder case. I had to stop the car to get better reception and the presenter said that Manchester College of Adult Education would be running a twelve or thirteen week course on the murder and it was starting in a couple of weeks and if you wanted to go on it you would need to enrol quickly as nearly all the places were already filled.

    Next morning I rang the College and enrolled and went along to pay my fees.

    Anyway a couple of weeks later I went to the first lesson. I was really looking forward to it but decided to go early so that I could sit at the back out of the way. I suppose there were about twenty of us and there was a tutor and he had an assistant. I expected to just sit there and listen to what he said.
    After about five minutes I started to ask questions and it quickly became a discussion between me and the tutor. I don’t think any of the others had much idea about the case but they all seemed very interested.
    During the third lesson some of the evidence was being discussed, and I can’t now remember just what, and I asked the tutor about something he had never heard about. He asked me where I had got the information from and I said Foot’s book and as I had it with me I showed him.
    He had the original first edition hardback whereas I had the paperback with a July 1972 postscript. The tutor asked to see it and asked if he could borrow it until the next week which he did. He gave it back to me and said he had photocopied the postscript pages.
    At the end of the lesson he asked me to call in at his office. He asked me why I was attending the course as he thought I had an equal knowledge of the case as he did. He said he had almost completed a book on the case but doubted whether it would be published due to the libel laws. He told me he was going to name the man behind the crime and the man who had committed the murder. It was definitely not James Hanratty he said. He was very passionate about the case and had run the course a couple of times in the past and he said it was always well attended. But he assured me that his book would be published one day and to look out for it.
    He told me the course would be solely based on Paul foot’s book and so after our discussion I decided that I would gain nothing from the rest of the course and did not go back.
    One thing though about five or six years later at Christmas I was in a pub in Manchester having a drink with a few mates and I spotted the tutor in the other room. He obviously recognised me and gave me a nod and a wave. Now this guy was not Bob Woffinden and I doubt very much if he was Leonard Miller but I have never seen the publication of any other book on the case and I never saw the teacher again. So what became of him and his book I do not know. Maybe he is on this thread.

    Tony

    Comment


    • OK point taken, I phrased that badly.

      I'm not going to bother re-wording it though because it's sort of right.

      If Hanratty had proved he was somewhere else then he would have been innocent.

      VS identification put Hanratty in the car, therefore Swanwick didn't have to explain Hanratty's various movements, just suggested possibilities that could link everything together.

      KR,
      Vic.
      Truth is female, since truth is beauty rather than handsomeness; this [...] would certainly explain the saying that a lie could run around the world before Truth has got its, correction, her boots on, since she would have to chose which pair - the idea that any woman in a position to choose would have just one pair of boots being beyond rational belief.
      Unseen Academicals - Terry Pratchett.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Victor View Post
        OK point taken, I phrased that badly.

        I'm not going to bother re-wording it though because it's sort of right.

        If Hanratty had proved he was somewhere else then he would have been innocent.

        VS identification put Hanratty in the car, therefore Swanwick didn't have to explain Hanratty's various movements, just suggested possibilities that could link everything together.

        KR,
        Vic.
        Hmm,

        Sort of right was it?

        Might just have sort have executed the wrong man.

        Possibly. Because as you say Swanwick only had to suggest possibilities that could link everything together. (?)
        Doesn’t sound much like evidence to me. And that post isn’t any better the second time you put it Vic.

        Tony.

        Comment


        • Something that continues to puzzle me.. Just how easy is it to determine the colour of someone's eyes at night - ( with or without the help of passing headlights ) ?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by simon View Post
            Something that continues to puzzle me.. Just how easy is it to determine the colour of someone's eyes at night - ( with or without the help of passing headlights ) ?
            Good morning Simon,

            I hope you are keeping well. That is a very good point about the colour of the eyes when seen briefly in the car headlights at night and something I have never really thought about.

            An experiment on this matter will take place tomorrow night in my own car. At the moment I’m a little worried how my wife will react when I tell her to park in a lay-by, turn off the lights and get in the back of the car with me. Ah well nothing ventured as they say.

            The results of my experiment will be revealed on Friday morning.
            Well the eye colour bit will be at any rate.

            Nice to see you back Simon.

            Tony.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Tony View Post
              Hmm,

              Sort of right was it?

              Might just have sort have executed the wrong man.

              Possibly. Because as you say Swanwick only had to suggest possibilities that could link everything together. (?)
              Doesn’t sound much like evidence to me. And that post isn’t any better the second time you put it Vic.

              Tony.
              Absolutely, we're not talking about the evidence linking Hanratty to the car, the murder and the rape, we're talking about evidence of where he was before and after the crime. To Swanwick it isn't important when he went to Liverpool unless he can offer direct evidence about it.

              Or Rhyl, why the need to speculate about when he went to Rhyl? He can't prove his alibi. Swanwick has direct evidence he was in the car (VS identification), he can directly link Hanratty to the Vienna Hotel in the room where the bullets were found (the J.Ryan signature in the register), he can place Hanratty in London on Monday and Liverpool on Thursday.

              Speculation about the peripheral aspects isn't important to the prosecution side, they are only important to the defence side and then only IF they can provide an alibi for the appropriate time period.

              Taking James' example, the importance of the Telegram is that it defines a point in time and a location for Hanratty, now if the defence can prove that it's impossible to get from deadman's hill to liverpool and send the telegram then it's important alibi evidence and useful for the defence. All Swanwick has to do is prove that it is possible to commit the crime and get there to send the telegram. This eliminates the telegram as alibi evidence.

              Or in the case of the aeroplane flight, Acott proves that it is possible to get from the sweetshop on Monday to the cornfield on Tuesday. It's ridiculous, but it's the Prosecution trying to disprove the theory that Hanratty couldn't have committed the crime because he was in Liverpool. They've given their theory...he was committing the crime...and they've given their evidence for it.

              KR,
              Vic.

              ps Good luck with the eye colour test - see if you can confirm why the eyes are dark on the cover of Woffinden's book at the same time!
              Truth is female, since truth is beauty rather than handsomeness; this [...] would certainly explain the saying that a lie could run around the world before Truth has got its, correction, her boots on, since she would have to chose which pair - the idea that any woman in a position to choose would have just one pair of boots being beyond rational belief.
              Unseen Academicals - Terry Pratchett.

              Comment


              • science

                [QUOTE=Tony;75328]....

                An experiment on this matter will take place tomorrow night in my own car. At the moment I’m a little worried how my wife will react when I tell her to park in a lay-by, turn off the lights and get in the back of the car with me. Ah well nothing ventured as they say....


                hi Tony

                Just going away for a couple of days so will wait with huge anticipation the results of this test. All in the interests of science eh? Perhaps that will be part of the next light hearted offering from you - chat up lines I have known and loved.

                Good luck

                Viv

                Comment


                • [QUOTE=Victor;75195]I agree, that's quite a summary.


                  That depends monozygotic twins are usually completely identical but there is this paper...http://8e.devbio.com/article.php?id=111

                  Hi Vic

                  thanks - I read it briefly and like DNA asa whole it all seemed a bit puzzling. I know I am an identical twin but worried if I am Mono or Dizi or what:laugh4

                  As with the DNA it seems answers are there but need a bit of clear thinking (I am a bit ofa slow learner these days it seems) In facy it seems I am a Mono being identical - what a relief

                  I am very impressed that you found that for me - cheers

                  Viv

                  Comment


                  • tony's course

                    [QUOTE=Tony;75234]At the end of the lesson he asked me to call in at his office. He asked me why I was attending the course as he thought I had an equal knowledge of the case as he did. He said he had almost completed a book on the case but doubted whether it would be published due to the libel laws. He told me he was going to name the man behind the crime and the man who had committed the murder. It was definitely not James Hanratty he said. He was very passionate about the case and had run the course a couple of times in the past and he said it was always well attended. But he assured me that his book would be published one day and to look out for it.

                    Hi Tony

                    wow - I wonder who he thought. Did he name his suspect to you?

                    It makes me wonder if there is place for an update / new book on the subject - there's enough expertise here and all views could be represented....

                    Go on, someone take it on

                    ATB

                    Viv

                    Comment


                    • [QUOTE=Victor;75353]Absolutely, we're not talking about the evidence linking Hanratty to the car, the murder and the rape, we're talking about evidence of where he was before and after the crime. To Swanwick it isn't important when he went to Liverpool unless he can offer direct evidence about it.

                      Or Rhyl, why the need to speculate about when he went to Rhyl? He can't prove his alibi. Swanwick has direct evidence he was in the car (VS identification), he can directly link Hanratty to the Vienna Hotel in the room where the bullets were found (the J.Ryan signature in the register), he can place Hanratty in London on Monday and Liverpool on Thursday.

                      Speculation about the peripheral aspects isn't important to the prosecution side, they are only important to the defence side and then only IF they can provide an alibi for the appropriate time period.

                      Taking James' example, the importance of the Telegram is that it defines a point in time and a location for Hanratty, now if the defence can prove that it's impossible to get from deadman's hill to liverpool and send the telegram then it's important alibi evidence and useful for the defence. All Swanwick has to do is prove that it is possible to commit the crime and get there to send the telegram. This eliminates the telegram as alibi evidence.

                      Or in the case of the aeroplane flight, Acott proves that it is possible to get from the sweetshop on Monday to the cornfield on Tuesday. It's ridiculous, but it's the Prosecution trying to disprove the theory that Hanratty couldn't have committed the crime because he was in Liverpool. They've given their theory...he was committing the crime...and they've given their evidence for it.

                      KR,
                      Vic.

                      Hi Vic

                      That's a very good response if I may say but does that type of 'demonstration' really eliminate the alibi as evidence if it is all but impossible to achieve? Not so bothered about going into the specifics of this case but more on validity of rebutting a defence (or prosecution) with alset of if buts and maybe's that might just prove possible if highly unlikely.

                      Any thoughts anyone?

                      ATB

                      viv

                      Comment


                      • [QUOTE=Victor;75201]Hi burkhilly,


                        Those two paragraphs together highlight the hypocrisy concerning the two events, they are essentially similar, only VS identification was much closer in time than all the Rhyl ones. All the Rhyl witnesses are Identification witnesses, so every time someone criticises VS Identification the same applies to all the Rhyl witnesses.

                        Hi Vic

                        In principle yes but she also picked out the wrong man earlier (and nearer to the time of the crime). Plus the incredible trauma involved...

                        ATB

                        Viv

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by jimarilyn View Post
                          Hi Viv,

                          Thanks for your kind comments about the YouTube videos. Someone (I think it may have been Steve, who sadly hasn't posted for ages) mentioned last year that there were surprisingly no A6 Murder related videos available for viewing on YouTube. A couple or so years ago I had transferred onto DVD an old video tape I had of Bob Woffinden's 1992 documentary "Hanratty -- The Mystery of Deadman's Hill". I'd wanted to put this on YouTube for some time but didn't have the technical know-how to do so.

                          I let the idea pass by until one day I decided to have another go at it. I eventually figured out how to do it ( by installing the VCL Media Player ). Disappointingly, you can only upload it onto YouTube in small segments (which is why there are 12 five minute chapters and one 2 minute chapter).

                          I thought it would be a good idea to put it on YouTube permanently, especially for those people who might not have a video copy of the documentary or who may never have even seen it (it hasn't been screened on Channel 4 since 1996).

                          regards,
                          James

                          Hi James

                          it's a great resource and I notice there are quite a few JTR videos on murder sites. I know Steve and you (plus others?) posted recent photos on this thread, it would be great to think these could go on or better still there is a home movie or collection of stills like the JTR ones just waiting to be found / uploaded

                          well done again

                          ATB

                          viv

                          Comment


                          • [QUOTE=jimornot?;75381]
                            Originally posted by Tony View Post
                            ....

                            An experiment on this matter will take place tomorrow night in my own car. At the moment I’m a little worried how my wife will react when I tell her to park in a lay-by, turn off the lights and get in the back of the car with me. Ah well nothing ventured as they say....


                            hi Tony

                            Just going away for a couple of days so will wait with huge anticipation the results of this test. All in the interests of science eh? Perhaps that will be part of the next light hearted offering from you - chat up lines I have known and loved.

                            Good luck

                            Viv
                            Just following on with this and remembering your last post to Limehouse - careful it is Spring time soon and you mentioned yourself about the sap rising

                            Don't do yourself a mischief

                            ATB

                            Viv

                            PS are any of your mates from the pub on this thread at all? Can they add anything even if to give the low down on you- our voice of reason?
                            Last edited by jimornot?; 03-18-2009, 09:34 PM. Reason: typo

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Tony View Post
                              Good morning Simon,

                              I hope you are keeping well. That is a very good point about the colour of the eyes when seen briefly in the car headlights at night and something I have never really thought about.

                              An experiment on this matter will take place tomorrow night in my own car. At the moment I’m a little worried how my wife will react when I tell her to park in a lay-by, turn off the lights and get in the back of the car with me. Ah well nothing ventured as they say.

                              The results of my experiment will be revealed on Friday morning.
                              Well the eye colour bit will be at any rate.
                              Tony.

                              Tony: Your posts often make me laugh - but this takes the top prize!

                              Comment


                              • Thanks for your reponses to my rather large post. Nice to see that the thread is back debating events, which is how it should be. I am still reading information, and am trying to do my own timeline of events, or should I say timelines? This is so I can put things into prospective in my own mind.

                                With regards to the DNA and possible contamination. The knicker sample was inside two envelopes stored in a box (I believe) with the broken vial. Something happened to me on Monday, which made me think about this. On Monday morning I took from my freezer a frozen meal for my lunch. I put the meal into my bag and went to work. When I got to work about 20 minuites later, I put ithe meal in the fridge. When I had put the meal in my bag it was next to a large manilla envelope which I didn't even think about. Yesterday, I removed the envelope from my bag to give a one page report to someone. In two sections of the report the ink had smudged badly, which I didn't understand. I then looked at the envelope and saw a small watermark on the envelope. The envelope was thick and good quality. In just 20 minutes water from the meal packaging had penetrated the envelope. If I had left the envelope for 40 years - would the watermark have been noticable?

                                Speculation, speculation, speculation. Don't we love it!!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X