a6 murder

[Limehouse]

Hi Graham,

No, as far as I can remember, Foot and Woofendin did not mention Hanratty being connected to establishment figures.

My suggestion is not that Hanratty was the victim or scapegoat of a conspiracy involving Gregten's family.

I am suggesting that Hanratty had connections with the underworld, who in turn had connections with people in 'high society' who were indulging themselves in all sorts of sordid activities and people who ought to have brought them to justice had reasons for not doing so. Perhaps Hanratty got too greedy or became a liability in some way. When an out-of-the-blue opportunity came to silence him, he was silenced.

I completely agree with everything you say in your post and people reading this probably think I am 'on something' for suggesting such things but the idea really formed after I read an article from a reliable source that suggested the whole truth did not emerge when the events I refer to were uncovered (events in 1963). The article did not mention Hanratty, or even hint at him, but it just got bells ringing in my head and I have been thinking about it ever since. I thought now might be a good time to raise the idea.

[Victor]

4. The amount of time he spent in jail is very relevant. It does narrow down the time he had to network within these circles. However, his association with the Soho club is well known and he did manage to obtain large amounts of cash by, it appears, simply popping his head round the door when he was short.

Hi Julie,
Was the Soho club just "looking after one of their own"? Giving him a loan in return for later service.

Then there is the switch of his abili - as I have always said, it's almost as if he was expecting someone in Liverpool to pipe up and confirm his story. He seemed so sure that would happen, even though it was probably not true. Why was that? Finally, when the right technology came along (DNA), the perfect opportunity arose to kill the 'Hanratty was innocent' cry stone dead.

Was he expecting PLA to confess and get him off the hook?

If my idea is correct (and it's just an idea, just a wild idea really) VS and MG were not involved. They were murdered by a random, unhinged killer, and Hanratty fitted the frame. It was an opportunity to dispose of him.

I tend to think VS and MG were not involved because of where they were hijacked from, the lack of opportunity to arrange the hit, and the motive - it could have gone either way (breaking up the marriage or strengthening it)

Maybe he didn't squeal at the end because he feared for his family.
Think about his letter just before his execution.

I get your point here, he stayed quiet for the sake of his family.

It has been strongly speculated of late that the scandal to which I refer hid a lot more secrets than it actually revealed. There were people being paid to keep quiet, people being paid to turn a blind eye, recruiters, indulgers - all sorts of curruption at the top of society and, when everything hit the fan, only a few paid a high price.

So was PLA paid to confess?

KR,
Vic.

[Graham]

Re: PLA's involvement, if he hadn't upset the guests at The Alexandra Court Hotel the police would almost certainly never have latched onto him...and maybe not even have caught Hanratty. I think it speaks volumes for his character that, once he was involved, he made the most of it instead of disappearing once he was off the hook. To my mind it's Alphon's refusal to leave well alone that contributes much of the mystery of the A6 Case.

Cheers,

Graham

[Limehouse]

Hi folks,

I am not suggesting PLA was involved at all.

This is how I see it.

Gregten and Storie are attacked in a cornfield by an unknown killer.

Alphon is the first suspect due to his strange behaviour at the hotel. He is eliminated - but later capitalises on his 'involement'.

Hanratty is elswhere and nothing to do with the murder. However, on closer inspection of the hotel register, the name J Ryan emerges and is associated with Hanratty. Hanratty is already known, not just as a criminal but as an associate of the Soho scene. He has links with the criminal underworld who are supplying prostitutes and rent boys to members of high society. The criminal underworld and members of high society are protected by those who are actually paid to see that justice is done, but who are, in fact, lining their own pockets. Hanratty helps out. He 'fishes' for decent stock, runs errands - that sort of thing. However, he has become a liability. He might 'get done' for another robbery and start blabbing in jail. Along comes an opportunity to frame him. By chance, he stayed at the same hotel as the very first suspect. Into the frame he pops.

[burkhilly]

Great posts Julie and Graham - I really enjoyed reading them. Wish I could contribute and join in the debate - just what the thread needed.

[Limehouse]

[QUOTE=burkhilly;86662]Great posts Julie and Graham - I really enjoyed reading them. Wish I could contribute and join in the debate - just what the thread needed.[/QUOTE

You are welcome to join in. The more the merrier!

[Graham]

Great posts Julie and Graham - I really enjoyed reading them. Wish I could contribute and join in the debate - just what the thread needed.

Yeah, it's what this thread is about, I think.

Julie, from what I've read about London gangs and the underworld in general in those days, if 'der mannidgement' wanted someone to disappear, then that someone just wouldn't be seen any more. I honestly don't think they'd see the need re: Hanratty to wait for an opportunity like the A6 to come along before they disappeared him. There are loads of cases of blokes just vanishing during the 1950's and 1960's, no-one ever brought to book, and I have to say that police corruption and their links with the big gangs contributed to that. Who was the bloke who annoyed the Krays and was blown away in an East End pub, and the killer just walked off into the night?

It reminds me of Monty Python and Spiny Norman - and the nailing of heads to coffee-tables..."Yeah, 'e wuz 'ard, but fair".

But of course you could be on the right track...just never know what's hidden with the A6 Case.

Cheers,

Graham

[Limehouse]

Yeah, it's what this thread is about, I think.

Julie, from what I've read about London gangs and the underworld in general in those days, if 'der mannidgement' wanted someone to disappear, then that someone just wouldn't be seen any more. I honestly don't think they'd see the need re: Hanratty to wait for an opportunity like the A6 to come along before they disappeared him. There are loads of cases of blokes just vanishing during the 1950's and 1960's, no-one ever brought to book, and I have to say that police corruption and their links with the big gangs contributed to that. Who was the bloke who annoyed the Krays and was blown away in an East End pub, and the killer just walked off into the night?

It reminds me of Monty Python and Spiny Norman - and the nailing of heads to coffee-tables..."Yeah, 'e wuz 'ard, but fair".

But of course you could be on the right track...just never know what's hidden with the A6 Case.

Cheers,

Graham

Hi Graham,

Well, you are getting closer to the way my mind is working. London's underworld, police corruption, mucky habits in high places and a scandal that finally broke in 1963 - which you have mentioned in an eralier post today but I haven't.

It's probably a crazy idea, but as i say, that article really got me thinking.

[Rob63]

I tend to agree with Graham, if someone wanted JH out of the way, a bullet in the head and dumped in the Thames is a lot easier.
Framing him for a murder and relying on a jury to do your dirty work is a bit risky and complicated, it could`ve swung either way. Unless he was connected with the murder in some way, a fall guy so to speak.
I`m not sure I believe JG when she said she accepted the affair, and neither did her family accept it, she certainly didn`t accept the idea of a divorce. I`m pretty sure I read that someone contacted the Road Research lab about MG and VS and they found themselves on the carpet in front of the director. Apparently VS told him to mind his own business...no mean feat for a young girl in a steady job.
And MG had discussed marriage with VS, whether this was genuine or just a case of keeping her keen I don`t know.
Another things which bemuses me, I can`t remember if its in one of the letters or a conversation between JH and his brother, where he reiterates his innocence and asks his brother to keep an eye on the newspapers. Bit of an odd statement unless he thought something might be uncovered.

[Rob63]

Just came across this webpage, some interesting reading about the Harmony cafe and dixie France http://www.classiccafes.co.uk/confessional_harmony.htm

[Limehouse]

Classic Cafes is my very favourite website!

[jimornot?]

Dear all

Just popping in before going off away for a short break - what a good series of interesting posts of late.

A quick note to Burkhilly – I never add any new facts or findings and accept that others’ knowledge is far greater than my own but I like to ask questions to help clarify my own thoughts or simply to support someone’s opinions. All will welcome your contributions.

Julie’s post is perfect. It allows for debate and sets the grey cells in motion. It certainly can’t be readily dismissed because we just don’t know but I think on the whole, a set up because of links with the establishment isn’t the case here.

It is fascinating that so much may still be hidden from the 60’s scandal(s) although in my naivety I would have thought most would have been revealed in the ensuing 40 plus years.

I can’t quite see why those wanting rid of JH would adopt such a high risk strategy when there were quicker solutions often favoured (eg Graham ‘s reference to Ronnie Kray shooting Cornwall in the Blind Beggar pub).
I accept SOME of the police may not have been adverse to letting things go / looking after their friends but I would think though that Acott & Oxford (leaving aside VS) were convinced of JH’s guilt. Wouldn’t someone have written a book to indicate they knew something (probably me being naïve again here though). If Hanratty didn’t do it would there really be a cover up on the DNA even now?

Intrigued about the Soho club connection and JH's ability to get funds and why. But it may be as simple as Vic suggests that the funds were merely temporary loans

On the other hand, the idea / theory offers very plausible thoughts on why JH thought people would stand up for his alibi.

Just a few thoughts – great stuff

All the best

Viv

PS Graham mentioned PLA's alibi - I haven't ever seen anything that seems to make it especially sound (or have I missed something?) It was supplied I thought by his mother

[Graham]

From what I've read of her, Janet Gregsten was a bit of a damaged character, having had a troubled childhood and upbringing. I'm no psychologist, but I get the impression that she was quiet and reserved and serious-minded, whereas Michael G. was anything but - a mis-match, really. The chances are that MG was so open about his infidelities that probably everyone who knew him, family and friends included, were aware of what he was like. That's not to say his behaviour was accepted, but I think as far as JG was concerned she realised that there was nothing she could do about it and learned to live with it as best she could. The other thing to mention is that even in 1961 divorce was something whispered behind closed doors - compared with 2009 it was incredibly rare. Someone in my own family who lived with an unfaithful husband just put up with it rather than go through the shame of a public divorce.

JG said that VS was 'her friend', and I wonder if this is because she, Janet, realised that VS's personality was much stronger than her own, and that there was no way she could have prevented VS's affair with her husband. Feasible?

Re: PLA's alibi, his old ma confirmed that she met him on a street corner to fork out money, at about the time the Morris was in the cornfield. That, and the i.d. parade on which VS didn't pick him out, appeared to satisfy Acott who removed PLA from his suspect-list (assuming there was a list, and I'm sure there was otherwise he wouldn't have been doing his job...)

That 'Classic Cafes' thread is a gem. Thanks to Rob for that. I've seen it before, but missed the reference to Dixie France. I've long wondered if his missus and children really knew what he got up to...and I've long wondered just how much knowledge Dixie took to his grave...and if Paul Foot did see all his last letters, how much knowledge Paul took to his grave....

Cheers,

Graham

[Victor]

PLA Alibi

Re: PLA's alibi, his old ma confirmed that she met him on a street corner to fork out money, at about the time the Morris was in the cornfield. That, and the i.d. parade on which VS didn't pick him out, appeared to satisfy Acott who removed PLA from his suspect-list (assuming there was a list, and I'm sure there was otherwise he wouldn't have been doing his job...)

As well as his ma (disputed) he did book the room in the Vienna for the murder night and claimed to be there but the first time he was seen there was the day afterwards. And then it gets sticky relying on Nudds\Snell. Juliana Galves made a statement but that was almost certainly an amalgam of all hotel staff and the relevant bit probably came from Nudds.

Foot says PLA made a long detailed statement about his movements in August including the "slept under Southend pier" bit, so presumably that statement is with the defence papers somewhere.

Then there's Baz's 12 points, some of which are patently ridiculous like the JH was 25, PLA was 30 one or relying on things the gunman said in the car some of which are true, others not but you can't just chose which.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

PLA Alibi

As well as his ma (disputed)

Reading Foot last night I get the distinct impression that he implies that Acott put pressure on MrsA to retract her alibi, and eventually she did but was taken ill and examined by a Doctor. This suggests to me that this forced retraction isn't genuine.

he did book the room in the Vienna for the murder night and claimed to be there but the first time he was seen there was the day afterwards. And then it gets sticky relying on Nudds\Snell. Juliana Galves made a statement but that was almost certainly an amalgam of all hotel staff and the relevant bit probably came from Nudds.

I haven't got to the bit where Foot makes a case for the hotel register supporting the second Nudds statement yet, but what I did notice was the discrepancy (or lack of) between what JH and PLA were charged for a night's stay.

Foot implies the word "desposit" after PLA (Durrant) was because of the room changing shenanigans (from Nudds 2nd) and that room 24 (big, shared, bullet cases found here) costs more than a single! Anyone else think its weird to pay more for a room where you might have some stranger sleeping over the other side of the room?

But the really killer blow is that JH (Ryan) paid the same price as a single room when he stayed in the big, shared room.

Therefore surely the hotel records support the 1st and 3rd Nudds statements and not the 2nd.

It's also interesting to note that when the Police are hunting for suspects and request hotel managers and landladies to report odd behaviour in guests, Foot mentions "metallic noises" coming from PLA's room, implying that he's messing about with the gun and bullets. Unfortunately Edwin Cooke has already found the murder weapon with a large pile of bullets, so the "metallic noises" must be something innocent. That's probably why he doesn't explicitly state it and leaves the doubts to brew in the reader's mind.

KR,
Vic.