a6 murder

[burkhilly]

You don't have both a .32 and a .38 to test the wound evidence as well do you? (posted by Reg)



.38 gun was found on the bus - but the pathologist who examined MG believes that he was possibility shot with a .32. Is this correct? I vaguely remember reading something on the thread about this, but assumed it was speculation.

Be interested to hear the views of Jimarilyn and Tony on this.

[jimarilyn]

You don't have both a .32 and a .38 to test the wound evidence as well do you? (posted by Reg)



.38 gun was found on the bus - but the pathologist who examined MG believes that he was possibility shot with a .32. Is this correct? I vaguely remember reading something on the thread about this, but assumed it was speculation.

Be interested to hear the views of Jimarilyn and Tony on this.

Hi Burkhilly,

This is a real enigma. I don't know if you have a copy of Home Office Pathologist, Dr Keith Simpson's 1978 book "Forty years of murder" but on page 163 he writes....

"I went first to the scene, as I always did, to join the police team in their initial survey, then later drove on to Bedford Mortuary. From the fall in temperature, rigor mortis, and other conditions I estimated that Gregston had died between 3 and 4 a.m. He had two .32 calibre bullet wounds of the head, shot 'through and through' from left ear to right cheek. The skin was tattoed round the entry wounds, and the range could not have been more than an inch or two; the shots had evidently been fired in rapid succession, before the head had moved.

On the following Sunday I went across from my Tring house to Bedford Hospital to examine Valerie Storie. She had similar calibre through and through wounds, one of the neck and four drilled-in holes in over her left shoulder and down over her arm. I thought probably all five shots, which were in a line, had been fired in quick succession and from beyond arm's range"

Regarded as the top pathologist in his field at that time one would expect Dr Simpson to know the difference between .32 calibre and .38 calibre bullets.
The important thing to note is that .32 calibre bullets are fired from an automatic (which holds 7 rounds) and .38 calibre bullets are fired from a revolver (holding 6 rounds).
In addition, as Tony rightly pointed out fairly recently, Dr Simpson made no subsequent effort to amend what he had written in his book. Who knows, perhaps he was trying to tell us something .............................

Extremely puzzling.

regards,
James

[Tony]

Simon the result is in.

Hello everyone and particularly you Simon,

Well the experiment took place on Thursday night as promised; as I was being driven home I noticed a bit of a lay-by at the side of the road. “Now’s my chance” I thought. I would have liked to have stopped in a cornfield first for extra effect but we don’t have those up here.

“Erm pull in over there please and I’d like you to turn the lights off and get into the back seat with me, Sheila.”

Now for those of you who don’t know, and I suppose that’s all of you, Sheila is my wife and not some Aussie bird I met in the pub.

She did stop the car in the lay-by and looked across at me I was gazing into her large icy blue eyes.
“You’ve had too much to drink yet again. You want to grow up and stop these Thursday nights out” she said.
“What are you staring at? And if you think I’m getting in the back seat with you in that state you’ve got another think coming. What exactly are you staring at?”

“I’m carefully looking into your eyes dear and I want you to stare back into my eyes. It won’t take long.”
“Oh so you’re a hypnotist now are you?”

“No but you’ve got very large blue eyes and I’m trying to imagine I’m gazing into Jimmy’s eyes in this very situation and wonder if I could mistake the colour of his blue eyes and describe them as brown, or even if I could tell if they were either colour”

“What, who the hell is Jimmy?”

The doctor said this morning that I can have the bandages removed when the swelling goes down and I should make a full recovery but the important thing is this Simon: I’ve been married to Sheila for decades now and last night I could not tell you what colour her eyes were.

Tony.

[jimarilyn]

Hi Tony,

Just stopped laughing; very funny yet again. Very interesting indeed that you couldn't make out the colour of her eyes.

Incidenatally did your good lady pick you up in her Wheels ?
Anyhow wish her a G'Day from me.


regards,
James

[simon]

James and Tony - thanks for those interesting and amusing replies !

Simon

[burkhilly]

Hello everyone and particularly you Simon,

Well the experiment took place on Thursday night as promised; as I was being driven home I noticed a bit of a lay-by at the side of the road. “Now’s my chance” I thought. I would have liked to have stopped in a cornfield first for extra effect but we don’t have those up here.

“Erm pull in over there please and I’d like you to turn the lights off and get into the back seat with me, Sheila.”

Now for those of you who don’t know, and I suppose that’s all of you, Sheila is my wife and not some Aussie bird I met in the pub.

She did stop the car in the lay-by and looked across at me I was gazing into her large icy blue eyes.
“You’ve had too much to drink yet again. You want to grow up and stop these Thursday nights out” she said.
“What are you staring at? And if you think I’m getting in the back seat with you in that state you’ve got another think coming. What exactly are you staring at?”

“I’m carefully looking into your eyes dear and I want you to stare back into my eyes. It won’t take long.”
“Oh so you’re a hypnotist now are you?”

“No but you’ve got very large blue eyes and I’m trying to imagine I’m gazing into Jimmy’s eyes in this very situation and wonder if I could mistake the colour of his blue eyes and describe them as brown, or even if I could tell if they were either colour”

“What, who the hell is Jimmy?”

The doctor said this morning that I can have the bandages removed when the swelling goes down and I should make a full recovery but the important thing is this Simon: I’ve been married to Sheila for decades now and last night I could not tell you what colour her eyes were.

Tony.

[Tony]

Hi Reg

I know Vic referred to general questions on reliability of identification as a whole. You are right, it is a matter of fact that VS said her memory was fading and she did pick out the wrong man - who appears to have been very different to Hanratty anyway (as far as we know). The only counter argument I think is that if JH was the gunman then she may well have had a flashback that made her sure although I seem to recall she 'had' to ask for those on the parade to speak which implies a degree of uncertainty to me

VS is convinced she picked out the right man and she is the only one who would know. Does anyone recall / know what she said about picking out the wrong man when challened on it anytime?

ATB

Viv

Hello Viv,

You asked about Valerie’s identification of Michael Clark as the gunman. Well we can certainly look at her evidence although there are some on here who do not like us doing that but how can we get anywhere if we are not allowed to.

By her own admission Valerie only glimpsed the gunman for a few seconds. She described his face, eyes and hair. Her description of the face/complexion and the hair could hardly be described as similar to Hanratty.

She picked out Michael Clark after seeing him for at least five minutes in perfect lighting conditions. She did not have to pick him or anyone else out. There has never ever been an ID parade where the witness is told “You must pick someone out”
This is her evidence in court about the matter:

She said that she understood the necessity for care and caution and she understood it was her duty not to point to anyone unless she was certain in her own mind that he was the assailant.

Q On that first parade you surveyed the men paraded before you for some time, as long as five minutes, before saying something or doing something?
A Yes.
Q And you then identified a man as being, in your view, the assailant?
A Yes
Q Can you tell us what that man looked like?
A No.

Now Valerie was able to give a description of the gunman after seeing him for only a few moments. The description hardly sounded like Hanratty but she eventually picked him out on her second and probably last chance.
She picked him out after seeing him for a few seconds maximum in poor light.
When asked what Michael Clark looked like after she saw him in perfect light for five minutes she had no idea at all.

All she would say when pressed was that she had said that Michael Clark bore a fair resemblance to Peter Alphon.

Tony

[reg1965]

She admitted tax fraud under oath. Or maybe False Accounting.

Or what?

Total nonsense.

You have no knowlegde of the accounting records of Ingledene. Why are you making this stuff up?

Because of the DNA evidence you now see all of the evidence for Hanratty as pure coincedence.

Have fun!

I tell you what though Vic, you are doing a better job than the wretched Leonard Miller

Reg

[reg1965]

Hi All
It has been brought up before but VS wore glasses.

Was she wearing them when she had that all important glimpse of the killer?

All I am saying is that VS wore glasses and her eyesight may be in question.

I wear glasses and get light reflections via the lenses at night from bright lights.

Reg

[reg1965]

Three things:-
1. You conveniently ignored the other definition supplied.
2. Comparing notes is illegal.
3. What about the different stories to the judge?

Mr Evans and Mrs Jones' converstaion was not secret. It was in earshot of the jury.

They were not comparing notes. It was Hanratty's hair colour that was the subject of the conversation, which admittedly should not have happened but did, and did not favour Hanratty one iota.

What about Mr Swanwicks stealing of the guestbook which Mr Gorman severly rebuked him about? That was tantamant to contempt of court as I see it.

Reg

[reg1965]

Hi John,
I realise that now, but we don't have a full breakdown of the payments and withdrawals, and even Foot is ambiguous about them.


But his mother was helping him out by clearing some bills.


The payments stopped when he got mixed in the A6 case...What a coincidence!


Some of the largest sums where cheques from newspapers, but that doesn't mean that unscrupulous journalists weren't handing out the cash for tip offs, etc.


I'd like to know too. But it would be useful to know exactly what we are talking about and have the full data in tabular form so direct comparisons can be made, instead of the biased subterfuge and misdirection that appears in Foot's book.

KR,
Vic.

After your acceptance of the DNA all of the coincedences are starting to get a litlle worrying aren't they?

[reg1965]

Hi All
It would be interesting to know what happened to the .32 firearm that killed Gregsten and paraysed VS.

What calibre were the 2 bullets that were taken out of VS's neck just before the Alphon ID parade?

This has never been addressed let alone answered!

Reg

[reg1965]

The doctor said this morning that I can have the bandages removed when the swelling goes down and I should make a full recovery but the important thing is this Simon: I’ve been married to Sheila for decades now and last night I could not tell you what colour her eyes were.

Tony.

Hi Tony
Did you hear the grinding of gears as your good lady drove off?
Reg

[Tony]

Hi Tony
Did you hear the grinding of gears as your good lady drove off?
Reg

Hello Reg,

No I heard nothing as I was not really in any state to. Having said that I do drive an automatic car so it would be amazing really.

Almost as amazing as someone suggesting that behind Mr Alphon’s sudden found wealth were the cash gifts that his mother was giving to him to help clear some bills.

Truly amazing.

Tony.

[Tony]

You don't have both a .32 and a .38 to test the wound evidence as well do you? (posted by Reg)



.38 gun was found on the bus - but the pathologist who examined MG believes that he was possibility shot with a .32. Is this correct? I vaguely remember reading something on the thread about this, but assumed it was speculation.

Be interested to hear the views of Jimarilyn and Tony on this.

A very good morning to you Burkhilly,

You asked about the .38 which was found on the bus and the .32 that the Home Office Pathologist said had been used to carry out the killing.

Another very strange point in this case and one not even considered in court by the defence.

The two types of guns I am led to believe are chalk and cheese. So I do not know why the defence didn’t make a big issue of it.
You could imagine the courtroom almost; here we have the Britain’s leading authority on post mortems of murder victims stating quite categorically, and he continued to do so for years after, that the murder weapon was a .32 and one of the Met’s leading police officers saying he has got the murder weapon and it’s a .38 and it was found on the bus.

I think Sherrard and co could have just left that one for the judge to decide while they nipped across the road for a celebration drink. Keith Simpson might just as well have said the killer used a bow and arrow.

For a possible view from Basil Acott on the matter read my post 3392 on page 340. If you manage to stay awake you’ll find his discussion with Oxford near the end.

Tony.