a6 murder

[jimarilyn]

hi jimarilyn

take another look at that photograph, then at my post #3651

Hi Larue,

Just to clarify things a little am I correct in assuming that the photographer's bag (?) is where I've pointed to in the picture below ? The object I was referring to is marked with a few question marks.

regards,
James



PS. That Paint program I use is brilliant.

[larue]

hi jimarylin

verrrry interesting. your version of this photo is much better than mine, which had obviously been cropped. the mystery object is not in mine, nor can the rac box or the hedge on the right hand side be seen...

i'll haver to try to get a better copy, and no, i don't know what that object is either... hmmmm

[halomanuk]

Sorry to be nosy in this thread as i don't know much about the A6 murders but i'm just wondering if the photo above is the A6 ,as i live only 5 mins away so from a local history aspect that would be interesting compared to it today .

[larue]

hi Halomanuk

the picture above depicts the layby in which the a6 murder occured in 1961, on that stretch of the a6, known as Deadman's Hill. i believe that it no longer exists, having been built over when that secion of road was made dual carriageway.

there are, on this thread, pictures posted by Steve, [who, sadly has not posted for some time now] showing the area as is now, or was a year or two ago when he took the photos. hope this helps

[richardnunweek]

Hi ,
The crime scene photograph is a great picture, and the positioning of Mikes body must be worth commenting on.
Question. Was it mentioned at the inquest, details off how the body was actually removed from the car?
From the position the car must have been , and the place where Valeries wicker basket was[ memories of the sixties very popular in my youth with the girls] it seems to me that Valerie was told to help the killer to get Mike out of the car, so she got out of the passenger side , and placed her basket on the verge, whilst the killer lent across to pull mike out of the passenger side, for surely if he had been taken out of the drivers door , he would have just been left on that side.
Question.
Did Valerie actively assist the gunman in removing Gregston, or was she just watching on in horror?
It looks like she assisted in someway as she placed her basket on the verge.
Question . during this time was the gunman still wearing a face disquise?
Question. Where was Valerie laying in conjunction with Mikes body, was it the feet end, the head end, or by his side.?, and where was the guman standing when he fired his volley of shots at her.
I am full of questions today.....
Regards Richard.

[halomanuk]

hi Halomanuk

the picture above depicts the layby in which the a6 murder occured in 1961, on that stretch of the a6, known as Deadman's Hill. i believe that it no longer exists, having been built over when that secion of road was made dual carriageway.

there are, on this thread, pictures posted by Steve, [who, sadly has not posted for some time now] showing the area as is now, or was a year or two ago when he took the photos. hope this helps

Thanks Larue,appreciate your comments there.
Yep it is nothing like that nowadays but it is a very very wooded area for a great part of the road.
Thanks again,
Barry

[Victor]

Question. Was it mentioned at the inquest, details off how the body was actually removed from the car?

Hi Richard,
From the appeal judgment http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/j...6/HANRATTY.htm paragraph 25
On the man's instructions, Michael Gregsten was removed from the car by Valerie Storie who, with some assistance from the man, dragged him out to the lay-by.

Question.
Did Valerie actively assist the gunman in removing Gregston, or was she just watching on in horror?

See above.

Question . during this time was the gunman still wearing a face disquise?

From reading paragraph 23 of the judgment it appears that this is after Hanratty raped Storie and so he had already demanded she kiss him, and therefore the disguise had gone. It isn't stated explicitly though.

Question. Where was Valerie laying in conjunction with Mikes body, was it the feet end, the head end, or by his side.?, and where was the guman standing when he fired his volley of shots at her.

Again from para 25 He got in the car and she went over and sat down on the ground beside Michael Gregsten. The man then got out and went over to her. He threatened to hit her and she gave him a pound and asked him to go. He started to walk away and when about 6-10 feet away suddenly turned round and started to shoot. Miss Storie felt one bullet hit her; when the second bullet hit her she fell over and was hit by two or three more bullets while lying on the ground.

KR,
Vic.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Vic,
Many thanks for that, i had read it before , but had forgotten doing so, I should imagine then , that Valerie must have dragged Mike from the drivers seat out of the passenger door, no mean feat, must have been helped by the killer somewhat.
As mentioned before 'I wonder what happened to the duffle bag, it must have landed over on the back seat, or back on Valerie after the impact of the shots.
Richard.

[john]

There is something seriously bugging me about the photo of Gregsten in the layby.

Ms Storie in statement and testimony says that she dragged the body around the car-not pulling through the passenger seat or the murderer pushing the body out as some of the people above have written.

So the feet of the body and all of the body are facing away from the car direction. So either she pulled by the feet all around the car front or back-less likely and the head already severley damaged would be even more by being dragged around a car etc. And if she pulled him by his head which is unlikely she would have been drenched in blood etc which no one ever mentions thus is likely not to have been the case.

Also she mentions that the murderer walked abour 6-10 feet away then turned round to shoot her. So he must have walked in a straight line in line with the main road-(and possibly been seen risk by a passing car) and away from the car to turn round and shoot her which in itself if strange as surely the murderer would be heading to the drivers seat going round either the front or back of the car.

Also she claims that he kept trying the gears etc and crunching them after he had placed a rug on the drivers seat to absorb some of the blood etc.
So he would have gone back to the car to try the gears etc leaving her on the verge with the body and then back again to her and then back to the car. Weird.

There is something not adding up ,by the photo above which I had never seen before until now. I always thought she had been shot by the disused road section side of the road of the service road-not by the bank of the main road section.

[Victor]

Valerie's very first statement (to John Kerr) just stated that her attacker had 'big staring eyes' without mentioning any colour. Likewise, after being interviewed in hospital by DC Gwen Woodin, who passed her notes to DS Rees, Valerie just referred to her attacker as having 'big eyes'; again no mention of colour.

Hi Graham,

I've just found this from the judgment...
After Hanratty had shot her and just driven off - With her right hand she gathered up some stones and told the jury that she tried to make the words "blue eyes" and "brown hair".

KR,
Vic.

[Graham]

Hi Vic,

The 'message in stones' is usually overlooked, but the fact remains that it must be Valerie's very first attempt at describing the gunman. It may be difficult to perceive how she could have attempted to do this, but she quite plainly felt a need to record something about her attacker, and I wonder if the police might have overlooked this in the general hoo-ha of the overall situation that early morning. It seems that John Kerr didn't notice it. But I believe she referred under oath to her 'message in stones', which would naturally carry some weight as far as the law is concerned.

Hi John,

The actual spot where the murder happened is now under the northbound lane of the A6. At the time of the murder it was a kind of slip-road which I think led into the woods adjoining the A6, and not the lay-by that exists today. I would have to say that the body was removed from the car and placed in a spot where it was unlikely any other vehicle would run over it, i.e., on the grass verge. That would make sense, I think. I made a number of visits to the lay-by before I fully understood (with the help of Steve) how the ground had changed since August 1961. Today it's a long lay-by with a dead end at the northern extremity, but in 1961 it was a by-road or a slip-road, or so I believe. She also said that she waved her petticoats to try to attract passing vehicles, without success. A woman of some spirit, it has to be said.

Cheers,

Graham

[jimarilyn]

There is something seriously bugging me about the photo of Gregsten in the layby.

Ms Storie in statement and testimony says that she dragged the body around the car-not pulling through the passenger seat or the murderer pushing the body out as some of the people above have written.

So the feet of the body and all of the body are facing away from the car direction. So either she pulled by the feet all around the car front or back-less likely and the head already severley damaged would be even more by being dragged around a car etc. And if she pulled him by his head which is unlikely she would have been drenched in blood etc which no one ever mentions thus is likely not to have been the case.

Also she mentions that the murderer walked abour 6-10 feet away then turned round to shoot her. So he must have walked in a straight line in line with the main road-(and possibly been seen risk by a passing car) and away from the car to turn round and shoot her which in itself if strange as surely the murderer would be heading to the drivers seat going round either the front or back of the car.

Also she claims that he kept trying the gears etc and crunching them after he had placed a rug on the drivers seat to absorb some of the blood etc.
So he would have gone back to the car to try the gears etc leaving her on the verge with the body and then back again to her and then back to the car. Weird.

There is something not adding up ,by the photo above which I had never seen before until now. I always thought she had been shot by the disused road section side of the road of the service road-not by the bank of the main road section.

Hi John,

A very good post. You raise some thought provoking points

Regarding the position of the car when Miss Storie dragged Mike Gregsten's body from it I feel ( after much thought on the subject ) that the driver's door approximates to where that unidentified object (marked ???? in the photo) lay. By the way does anyone have any ideas as to what this object could be and if it might have fallen from the car as Gregsten's body was removed ?

Miss Storie's evidence on the subject makes interesting reading. The following is taken from Lord Russell's 1965 book "Deadman's Hill, Was Hanratty guilty ? " (pages 25 to 27)......

"We opened the driver's door of the car and the man turned to me and said, 'You will have to get him out; I must not get blood on me'. Mike's hands were gripping the steering wheel. When I touched them, they were stone cold. I managed to get the top of Mike out of the car. His legs seemed to be caught round the pedals and he was too heavy for me to lift out. So I said to the man, 'You will have to help me', and he managed to get Mike's legs out of the car. I dragged Mike to the back of the car, across the back of the car and to the edge of the concrete strip and laid him down. I said, 'Let me have my things out of the car. I must have my basket; it has some rally things in for work. I must have it '. He said, 'I do not want your things. You can have them '. He said, 'There is no hurry'. So I said, 'You must go quickly or it will be daybreak and someone will see you'. So I got my basket out of the front of the car, and the bag of washing, and I tried to grab a few things out of the glove pocket, stuffing it all into my basket. I grabbed it all and put bit down on the ground beside Mike. I said, 'Go on. Take the car '.

He asked me to start the car for him and show him where the gears were. I started the car and showed him the positions of the gears. He asked how you got reverse gear. I showed him. He wanted to know how how the lights worked, and I showed him and, leaving the car running, I walked back towards Mike. He came back with me. He seemed rather undecided as to what to do. He said, 'You will go for help '. I said, 'No, I won't. Just go....hurry '. The car suddenly stopped. I said, 'I will start the car again for you. You must go quickly '. I re-started the car and showed him how the gears worked yet again. He said yes, he understood and sat in the driver's seat. I went back and sat on the ground beside Mike with my legs tucked up underneath me, almost with my back towards the car. The man got out of the car again, came up to where I was sitting and said, 'I think I had better hit you on the head or something to knock you out, or else you will go for help '. I said, 'No, I won't. I won't move. Just go '.

I put my hand in my mack pocket and took out a pound note. I held it out to him. I said, 'Here you are. You can have that if you will go quickly '. He said, 'Where did you get that from ? ' I said, 'Oh it was just in my pocket.' He never asked me if I had got any more. He took the pound and started to walk away. when he was about six or ten feet away from me he suddenly turned round and started to shoot. I felt one bullet hit me. When the second bullet hit me I felt the use of my legs go and I fell over. He then fired another two or three bullets at me while I was lying on the ground. There was a pause and I heard a clicking sound as if he was reloading the gun, and then he fired another three shots. I do not think these hit me. They seemed to go over my head. I lay perfectly still. I heard him walk towards me and I tried to stop breathing and pretend I was dead. I felt him touch me...Whether it was with his hand or whether he kicked me, I do not know. He stood looking at me for a few seconds. I heard him walk back to the car. I heard him get in. I heard him slam the door. I saw him put the headlights on, and he started to drive off. He drove off in the direction of Luton. "


Several things strike me upon careful reading of this part of her evidence......

Firstly, it very much seems that the gunman would have to have sat in the passenger seat (or leaned across it) in order to release Mike Gregsten's legs which were trapped around the pedals. It appears Miss Storie dragged Mike's body around the back of the car unassisted. This would tie in with the man being ultra careful not to get any blood on his clothing.

Secondly, considering that she had just witnessed her lover being murdered, and she herself experiencing the trauma and ordeal of rape, she seems unusually cool headed and clear thinking especially with regards to her belongings which were in the car. She seems particularly insistent on having her wicker work basket.

Thirdly, it comes across strongly that the gunman was clueless about cars. He didn't even know how to start the car, let alone engage the gears. He didn't know how the lights worked.

Fourthly, considering that Miss Storie suffered 5 direct hits ( one of the neck and four of her left shoulder ) which were all in a line, it seems rather strange that the gunman missed her completely with the last three shots. Was he deliberately trying to miss from just a couple of yards away ?

Fifthly, how could Miss Storie say the gunman drove off (southwards) in the direction of Luton ? She must have been facing the car (and looking northwards) in order to see the headlights come on, and would not have known in what direction the car went after it reached the entrance to the lay-by.


regards,
James

[Graham]

I think we have to be a little cautious about reading too much into the positioning of the body. Both Valerie and the gunman musy have been totally traumatised after the murder and the rape, and were very likely not in complete control of their actions. I suspect that between them they just got the body out of the car as best they could, and weren't particularly bothered which way it was pointing when they laid it on the grass verge.

With regard to the apparent ignorance of the gunman when it came to driving, it's just occurred to me that my 1953 Morris Minor was started by first inserting the ignition-key (right-hand side of the dash, if I remember aright), turning it, and then you'd hear the click-click-click of the electric fuel-pump. If you tried to start the car before the fuel-pump had finished its (bloody annoying) clicking, the engine would just fire and stop through lack of fuel. Anyway, having turned the key and waited for the fuel-pump, you started the engine by pulling a knob in the centre of the dash. I don't know for sure if the 1956 Minors retained this method of starting the engine. (Are you there, Larue??)

Now Hanratty has something of a rep as a car-thief, and everything I've read about this side of his activities suggests that he pinched only up-market motors, like Jaguars. His own car was also pretty good for the time, being a Sunbeam Alpine (incidentally a car I always fancied). Now I can't be 100% certain, but I think that in 1961 expensive cars had the single-action starter - that is, insert the key and turn it to start the engine. Maybe Hanratty had never even been in a Morris Minor before and was unaware of the starting procedure, and needed assistance. He may also have been unaware that a Minor was pretty fierce on the clutch and easy to stall - it was only a 997cc engine, and you needed plenty of revs to pull away. Finally, the gunman did manage to drive the car all the way to Redbridge, a journey of about 55 miles assuming he went the direct route, which he probably didn't, without any known serious mishap. So he couldn't have been that clueless when it came to driving.

All this is, of course, pure speculation, but perhaps worth considering.

Cheers,

Graham

[richardnunweek]

Hi James,
That is a very intresting text, i agree that considering the trauma the last half a hour had produced the shooting of Mike , and the ordeal of rape, she seems to have been very positive in her thinking, for exsample...
Making sure that she had her work basket,
Meticulously searching through her glove compartment, for more items,
Here we have a woman that had seen her lovers head nearly blown off, had been subjected to a rape from a man with a gun, and still have the presence of mind to think about some irrelevant things , which had nothing to do with the dangerous situation she was in.
I would say that Valerie must have been aware, that the gunman would possibly now shoot her, she would have known that he would have nothing to lose , and possible have much to gain by killing her, and proberly was now in a desperate plight to save her life.
The biggest mystery in that text, was Mikes hands being firmly grasped on the steering wheel.
Question how was that the case?
Evidence suggests that he picked up the duffle bag, with both hands , and went to deliver it to the back of the car, and because of the sudden movement, he was shot twice in rapid succession[ right through].
So how come both his hands ended up on the steering wheel? were they placed there, or was Mike able to twist back round , and place them there in his final seconds of life..
The rest of that text explains most of what possibly happened, but the steering wheel...?
Regards Richard.

[jimarilyn]

The biggest mystery in that text, was Mikes hands being firmly grasped on the steering wheel.
Question how was that the case?
Evidence suggests that he picked up the duffle bag, with both hands , and went to deliver it to the back of the car, and because of the sudden movement, he was shot twice in rapid succession[ right through].
So how come both his hands ended up on the steering wheel? were they placed there, or was Mike able to twist back round , and place them there in his final seconds of life..
The rest of that text explains most of what possibly happened, but the steering wheel...?
Regards Richard.

Excellent question Richard and one that I addressed last December. I must admit I'm more than a bit puzzled as to how Mike Gregsten's hands could end up firmly clutching the steering wheel in the scenario that Miss Storie provided. That post from December is reproduced below.....

Hi

Picture the scene....

Michael Gregsten is in the process of turning to his left to pass the duffel bag (over his left shoulder according to Valerie Storie) to the gunman when he is struck down by 2 bullets fired (at point blank range) into the left side of his head. Is he using one or two hands to do this ?

The reason I ask this relates to Miss Storie's evidence (page 25 of Lord Russell's book) where she states :-

"We opened the driver's door of the car and the man turned to me and said, 'You will have to get him out; I must not get blood on me'. Mike's hands were gripping the steering wheel. When I touched them, they were stone cold."

Anyone any ideas how, after being shot in the head twice (while holding a duffel bag in his hands) Mike Gregsten's hands were somehow able to grab hold of the steering wheel ?
Something doesn't add up here.

Something still doesn't add up.
Dr Keith Simpson performed the autopsy on Mike Gregsten. He stated that ..."the shots had evidently been fired in rapid succession, before the head had moved"
This, I feel, is a very important statement because it suggests that Mike Gregsten was facing the front, with his hands on the steering wheel, when he was suddenly shot in the head at point blank range. This would begin to explain how his hands were clutching the steering wheel when Valerie Storie tried to drag him from the car.

Anyone got any suggestions ?

regards,
James