a6 murder

[jimarilyn]

By the way, does being passionate and knowledgeable entitle Reg to be downright rude to contributing members and bully/intimidate them into not contributing to the forum? Please tell me you are not trying to excuse his behaviour, which imo is inexcusable without apology. In fact, the more i read of the historic postings on the A6 thread, the clearer it is to see why people who oppose his viewpoint rarely come back and post anymore; as it is easy to see how a thread in which the issue was debated originally with mutual respect on both sides deteriorated into one in which those who believe Hanratty was guilty felt uncomfortable expressing themselves once a certain poster not a million miles away began to partake in the 'discussion.'

Fortunately, or perhaps unfortunately for Reg, i am made of pretty stern stuff, and am not easily bullied.

Hi babybird,

Before condemning Reg, who has contributed enormously to this main thread and it's sub-threads perhaps you should read some of the many and various insulting posts submitted by Victor and aimed at the likes of Tony, Reg and myself. Frankly they are disgraceful. Victor can be a very provocative and intolerant person who seems to delight in trying to nit-pick people's posts apart (sometimes sentence by sentence), seemingly just for the hell of it. As a consequence of this, the thread often becomes bogged down, advances little and posters become reluctant to engage in a war of words.


James

[babybird67]

Hi babybird,

Before condemning Reg, who has contributed enormously to this main thread and it's sub-threads perhaps you should read some of the many and various insulting posts submitted by Victor and aimed at the likes of Tony, Reg and myself. Frankly they are disgraceful. Victor can be a very provocative and intolerant person who seems to delight in trying to nit-pick people's posts apart (sometimes sentence by sentence), seemingly just for the hell of it. As a consequence of this, the thread often becomes bogged down, advances little and posters become reluctant to engage in a war of words.


James

You evaded my question James.

What is between Victor and Reg is nothing to do with me: I am not Victor nor am I Victor's keeper.

is it your contention that Reg is entitled to be rude to me because Victor was rude to him? Following this logic i am now entitled to be rude to you because Reg was rude to me. Once again, i fail to follow this sort of logic.

I have never insulted Reg: he has insulted me. What Victor has or has not said to Reg or to anyone else is nothing to do with me, and to persist in using Victor's alleged transgressions as an excuse for rudeness to me is a very peculiar and inexplicable approach.

I can only conclude you approve of Reg's behaviour, which is a shame, as i would like to think that his debating tactics of "attack the poster without addressing the arguments" were in the minority.

[Victor]

On the contrary, before identification parades are held, witnesses are given strict guidelines. They are advised not to pick any suspect out (especially in a crime as serious as murder) unless they are convinced in their own mind that he/she is the guilty party. If they are unsure then they are not to pick anyone out.

There is no proof that this was said to Storie, and furthermore, that she understood it.

The absolute certainty that Storie did not know that she could ask the members of the ID Parade to speak indicates that she did not fully understand her rights.

So Michael Clark was blue-eyed ?????? Where did you get that information from ?

Dr Rennie. If I remember correctly.

I noticed that you are having trouble deciding whether hazel is light or dark. Well, you could be deliberately ignoring evidence that undermines your arguments, or you might have missed the question.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Sounds very much like Mrs Meike Dalal's vicious attacker and would be rapist. Mrs Dalal (unlike Miss Storie) saw her assailant quite clearly for about 5-10 minutes in daylight hours. She made a positive identification of Alphon as being the guilty party (it definitely wasn't Hanratty as he was in Ireland on September 7th). This crime bore all the hallmarks of the A6 murder a fortnight earlier.
Mrs Dalal's attacker actually went ahead and hit her violently over the head three times. He also made a somewhat bungled attempt to tie her hands/wrists, much, it would seem, in a similar manner to the way the A6 gunman had tied Miss Storie's hands/wrists together. None of this (the binding of hands and threatening to hit over the head) had been mentioned in the press re. the A6 murder, and to cap it all off Mrs Dalal's would be rapist told her that he was the A6 murderer !!

So why was Alphon not tried for this crime? It was because he had an alibi.

Fear and intimidation are recognised to be effect weapons in undermining the mental state of a victim, for example rendition. Therefore anyone claiming to be a murderer is likely to encounter less resistance and maintain an image of having greater power.

Mrs Dalal's attacker is not the only one to claim to be the A6 murderer, there are quite a few people who've claimed the same, and I've lost count of the number of false confessions to be JtR.

"This crime bore all the hallmarks of the A6 murder a fortnight earlier" apart from noone died, noone was raped, the circumstances are completely different (an assault in her own home compared to a car in the middle of nowhere). There are more differences than there are similarities.

KR,
Vic.

[jimarilyn]

Was this a statment or just a comment she had made expressing quite natural doubts that she might not be able to identify a man who had attacked her obscuring his own features?

This was a statement made by Miss Storie during a long police interview with her in hospital. The relevant part of this statement can be seen about 3min 50sec into the Youtube video link below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujp3YWdSVAk

Was this at the ID parade where she was wheeled out from hospital shortly after being oeprated on against the advice of her doctors? Do you not think she might not only have been emotionally traumatised by the possibility of coming face to face with her attacker but groggy from the effects of anaesthetic? You cannot claim to know what she understood...you were not there and you do not know what was and what was not explained to her about the process, and even if you had been, it is pure conjecture to speculate what she 'understood' since as already pointed out she was recovering from an operation as well as from a serious attack.

I believe she would not have agreed to the ID parade if she felt in any way nervous, anxious or not up for it.

No it is not. It is irrelevant. That argument may hold some water if Alphon himself had not been on the same parade...unless you wish to argue that Clark resembled Alphon to a greater extent than Alphon resembled himself? Which would be patently ridiculous. By the way, the Hanratty family accept that Alphon "could not have been" the A6 murderer...what prevents you from accepting that fact also?

I don't know for a fact that the family accept any such a thing. Many things prevent me from accepting that 'fact'.

And this is also what i find diffcult to swalllow; every effort is made to explain away innocently every lie told by Hanratty by those who support him, down to describing him - unfathomably to my mind - as "open and honest" (no wonder he was always getting caught ); yet every contrary effort is made to depict the VICTIM of the crime, who has no criminal record and was not on trial for any crime, as being DELIBERATELY dishonest and a liar. Not acceptable in my opinion.

You continually describe Hanratty as a criminal and liar. In fact in one of your posts Babybird you describe him as a "serial liar" (first time I've ever come across that expression incidentally) but you don't list these lies. We all know that he persisted (up until just prior to his taking the stand) with the lie that he stayed with three friends in Liverpool from the Tuesday evening until the Thursday evening. He lied about this to Acott and his defence team but didn't lie in the witness box about it. I for one can fully understand his reasons for this. And so, Babybird, he lied about this. Can you elaborate on all the other lies you accuse him of telling, as I would dearly love to know about them. Perhaps you can list them for us.

Considering the fact that up until Friday evening (when you bumped into your friend Victor in the chat room) you were a complete newbie to the A6 murder case, you do seem to have "rushed to judgment" and done so without having read any of the seven books on the subject. So much so that you've even cast your vote in the Hanratty Innocent or Guilty poll thread.

I only wish I had your uncanny ability to digest, assimilate and come to a decision about all the known facts in the case in such a very short period of time. This I find truly amazing.


James

[jimarilyn]

So why was Alphon not tried for this crime? It was because he had an alibi.

Absolutely not so. Alphon had no corroborated alibi for the time of the murder. James Hanratty on the other hand did.

Fear and intimidation are recognised to be effect weapons in undermining the mental state of a victim, for example rendition. Therefore anyone claiming to be a murderer is likely to encounter less resistance and maintain an image of having greater power.

Where is your proof/evidence of this ? Mrs Dalal's vicious assailant encountered resistance from her. She even managed to thwart an attempted fourth blow to her head.

Mrs Dalal's attacker is not the only one to claim to be the A6 murderer, there are quite a few people who've claimed the same, and I've lost count of the number of false confessions to be JtR.

Who are these conveniently anonymous people who have claimed to be the A6 murderer ? Quite a few ? How many ? I'd be most interested to know. Or are you just taking the police's word for it ?

"This crime bore all the hallmarks of the A6 murder a fortnight earlier" apart from noone died, noone was raped, the circumstances are completely different (an assault in her own home compared to a car in the middle of nowhere). There are more differences than there are similarities.

Thanks to Providence Mrs Dalal was not killed or raped. Had she not been able to escape in the struggle and yell to high heaven she might well have been another rape/murder victim. The botched binding of the hands, the preparation for rape and the bashing of the head don't put you in mind of an event two weeks previously ??? Was her attacker psychic or did he know first hand of the goings on in the murder car ?

[babybird67]

hi James

This was a statement made by Miss Storie during a long police interview with her in hospital. The relevant part of this statement can be seen about 3min 50sec into the Youtube video link below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujp3YWdSVAk

Thanks...i will watch that later.

I believe she would not have agreed to the ID parade if she felt in any way nervous, anxious or not up for it.

Pure conjecture about what she was or was not feeling at the time. You cannot possibly know any of that.

I don't know for a fact that the family accept any such a thing. Many things prevent me from accepting that 'fact'.

Counsel acting for them accept that fact. Unless you wish to argue Counsel acting for you do what they want without consultation with their clients?

You continually describe Hanratty as a criminal and liar. In fact in one of your posts Babybird you describe him as a "serial liar" (first time I've ever come across that expression incidentally) but you don't list these lies. We all know that he persisted (up until just prior to his taking the stand) with the lie that he stayed with three friends in Liverpool from the Tuesday evening until the Thursday evening. He lied about this to Acott and his defence team but didn't lie in the witness box about it. I for one can fully understand his reasons for this. And so, Babybird, he lied about this. Can you elaborate on all the other lies you accuse him of telling, as I would dearly love to know about them. Perhaps you can list them for us.

Certainly. He lied that he didn't kill MG. He lied that he didn't rape VS. He lied that he didn't attempt to kill VS. He lied that he was in Liverpool at the time of the murder. He then lied that he was in Rhyl at the time of the murder. That's quite a few to be going on with, don't you think? In fact, a career based upon burglary, larceny, and other criminals acts, would necessarily entail an awful lot of lying. Do you think he told his family he was out at night stealing the possessions hard-working law abiding people spent their honest lives working for? How do you think he would have felt if some scumbag had broken into his mother's home and taken all her possessions?

Considering the fact that up until Friday evening (when you bumped into your friend Victor in the chat room) you were a complete newbie to the A6 murder case, you do seem to have "rushed to judgment" and done so without having read any of the seven books on the subject. So much so that you've even cast your vote in the Hanratty Innocent or Guilty poll thread.

Sorry, is there a period of time before i am allowed to have an opinion on the case? I've already been told by Reg i am too ignorant to have an opinion...your above comments run along the same lines. I think both you and Reg ought to think about who the hell you think you both are. Yes i cast my vote because i believe Hanratty was guilty. MY OPINION. How dare you suggest i should not be entitled to one. I see now why you have evaded the question several times when i asked you if you thought Reg's behaviour was justified...you just indirectly answered a resounding yes! Lol!

I only wish I had your uncanny ability to digest, assimilate and come to a decision about all the known facts in the case in such a very short period of time. This I find truly amazing.

I read fast. I can read a book in a day. I'm intelligent, eager, interested. Yep, i am rather amazing aren't i. Thanks for noticing. You may envy me but we cannot all be as talented as eachother now can we...you'll just have to live with your shortcomings.

Do we have to keep concentrating, by the way, on my personality, or would you like to discuss the case rather than YOUR OPINION ON my suitability to partake in a discussion about it?

[babybird67]

by the way

I find it extremely telling that when newbies who agree with you and Reg have joined the thread also confessing that they have not yet read the books yet, they have been universally welcomed, WHEN they agree with you. They have not been called ignorant. They have not been subjectedto the Spanish Inquisition regarding how they arrived at their opinion without having read any of the books yet. Very, very telling, imo.

Honestly, it's like being in a school playground 'playing' with you two.

Surely you can cope with people who don't agree with you without resorting to insults? Or is that approach just a little too grown up?

[john]

It is one of the enduring mysteries of the case-what Michael Clark looked like. Dd Rennie gives one version. Mr Acott another.
It is mystery why he was not called to the trial. If he did not look like any of the photo fits then one can se the prosecution not being keen, but if he was stocky as Dr Rennie indicates-one could never have called Hanratty stocky-then why did not Sherrard insist on Clark being present. We I fear shall never know.

Babybird-it is not true to say that Ms Storie was groggy etc at the first parade. All from Dr RennIe to the police taking statements from her-you might explain why would the police want to hold back statements- to Acott in testimony have said that she was fit to stand the parade. You cannot argue when it suits you otherwise i.e she was not and how can anyone know what was going on. You write that you cannot know how she was feeling. Equally you cannot dismiss the evidence of the medical team at the time that she was ok for the first parade otherwise anything else is equally conjecture from you. Factually the medical team and the police testified in court that she was not groggy and signifcantly Ms Storie never suggested that at any time. ie any anaesthetic effects had clouded her decision of selecting Clark It would have give a possible defence claim in court if she had been!


As I have said before until anyone of us see a picture of Clark we cannot decide how accurate Ms Storie or Rennie or Acott's opinions are and how accurate was it compared to Hanratty.
If Clark is significantly different in appearance then that must raise questions as to her accuracy, That cannot be disputed surely. If he looks like Hanratty or Alphon then case closed.

Neither side wanted Clark at trial, I wonder why?

[Tony]

Hi Julie,

It’s all very well people telling us that Valerie felt compelled or under some sort of obligation to pick out someone/anyone on that first ID parade and we should accept that as fact. Of course that was not the case at all. It may suit some people’s views, of course.
But let’s have a look at the evidence and by evidence I mean what Valerie Storie said under oath.
And just how close did Mr Alphon come to a meeting with the hangman after Valerie’s identification effort and subsequent evidence on and after that first parade.

I will do this on a question and answer basis between Sherrard and Storie in court:

Q You told us today that on that first identity parade you were nervous and tensed up?
A Yes.
Q You will remember Dr. Rennie. Do you?
A Yes.

Q He put it the same way when he was asked about it. Do you remember telling me in the Magistrates Court that you appreciated the necessity for care and caution on that first identity parade?
A Yes.

Q The way in which you put it was: “I appreciate the necessity for great care and caution”. I want to put another sentence to you. Will you be good enough to say whether this represents your evidence: “ I know it would be my duty not to poit to anyone unless I was certain in my own mind that he was my assailant”?
A Yes; I understand that.

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 then you identified a man as being, in your view, the assailant?
A Yes.

Q Can you tell us now what that man looked like?
A No.

Q And on that occasion apparently you were sufficiently certain to make that identification without asking for any of the men to speak?
A At that time I did not know I was allowed to ask the men on the parade to speak.

Q But you were satisfied to make the identification without that?
A Yes.

Q You now know, do you not, that there was a man on that parade called Peter Alphon?
A I know now.

Q And when it appeared you had identified some other person on that parade did you not afterwards say that there was a fair resemblance between Alphon and the man who attacked you?
A When am I supposed to have said that?

Q Some time after the parade?
A Some time afterwards, yes.

Mr Justice Gorman: What did you say?
Sherrard: There was a fair resemblance between Alphon and the man who attacked you?
A Yes.

Mr Justice Gorman: Are you putting it to this lady that the man whom she identified was Peter Alphon?
Sherrard: No, My Lord. (To the witness): It was not the man whom you identified?
A No.
Q Can you tell us to whom you made that observation?
A In the first instance I believe it was the doctor at Stoke Mandeville Hospital.

Q And later?
A I am not sure whether it was Superintendent Acott or not.

Q May it have been Superintendent Acott?
A It may have been, but I do not remember.

This led Mr Justice Gorman to say to the jury:

“Supposing there had been no evidence on 24th September that would have exonerated the man who was picked out by Miss Storie on that date, how tragic the consequences might have been for someone else”

I wonder why she picked out Clark when admitting straight after that she thought Mr Alphon looked like her attacker. Could she have been scared half to death by a second sight of Mr Alphon?

Tony.

I don’t particularly like quoting my own posts but this one was a fair bit ago and it highlights Valerie’s evidence of the first ID parade that is now being discussed at length on here.

Tony.

[jimarilyn]

I read fast. I can read a book in a day. I'm intelligent, eager, interested. Yep, i am rather amazing aren't i. Thanks for noticing. You may envy me but we cannot all be as talented as eachother now can we...you'll just have to live with your shortcomings.

Do we have to keep concentrating, by the way, on my personality, or would you like to discuss the case rather than YOUR OPINION ON my suitability to partake in a discussion about it?

Hi Babybird,

You forgot to add that you have a very closed mind that no key it seems would stand any chance of opening.
For someone with ME you have amazing energy. ME would render 99.99% of it's sufferers totally incapable of devoting the time, concentration, effort and energy you have put into this thread in the space of just a few days.
An indefatigable ME sufferer is a new one on me. I take my hat off to you.

[Victor]

Absolutely not so. Alphon had no corroborated alibi for the time of the murder. James Hanratty on the other hand did.

You might not believe he had one, but the official reason for Alphon escaping the Dalal crime was that he was given an alibi by the people who supplied him with Almanacs.

Where is your proof/evidence of this ? Mrs Dalal's vicious assailant encountered resistance from her. She even managed to thwart an attempted fourth blow to her head.

Your seriously asking for proof that intimidation is an effective method of domination? Try asking George W Bush whether rendition is effective.

Who are these conveniently anonymous people who have claimed to be the A6 murderer ? Quite a few ? How many ? I'd be most interested to know. Or are you just taking the police's word for it ?

No actually, Lord Brooke of Cumnor..."To your Lordships, it may seem fantastic that anyone should voluntarily and untruthfully declare himself to be a murderer. But the records in the Home Office show that this is by no means uncommon. One can only speculate at the queer motives of a man who makes a false confession of murder. But some of the people involved in this particular story were, as the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, said in another place, queer people—decidedly queer. This particular confession that we have been discussing was not, in fact, the only confession to the murder of Mr. Gregsten that was received. Two other confessions of the same murder actually reached the Home Office. But they were anonymous, and although the police made every effort to discover their authors, they were unsuccessful."
[See http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/l...ames-hanratty]

KR,
Vic.

[babybird67]

hi John

It is one of the enduring mysteries of the case-what Michael Clark looked like. Dd Rennie gives one version. Mr Acott another.
It is mystery why he was not called to the trial. If he did not look like any of the photo fits then one can se the prosecution not being keen, but if he was stocky as Dr Rennie indicates-one could never have called Hanratty stocky-then why did not Sherrard insist on Clark being present. We I fear shall never know.

Precisely. Two witnesses who both saw Clark cannot agree what he looked like...has anybody considered dark eyes might refer to the surrounding area of the eyes, as in having bags around one's eyes, rather than actual colour of the eye? It's a possibility.

Babybird-it is not true to say that Ms Storie was groggy etc at the first parade.

I did not say she was John. I said she "might" have been, and that is totally different. I was positing it as possibility rather than a fact...please don't misrepresent my postings in that manner. I chose my words carefully.

You write that you cannot know how she was feeling.

You cannot. Nobody can possibly know what anybody was feeling or thinking at that time. We weren't there; we aren't inside people's minds or bodies.

Equally you cannot dismiss the evidence of the medical team at the time that she was ok for the first parade otherwise anything else is equally conjecture from you.

I stand to be corrected but had she not just undergone an operation to remove two bullets from her body and was it not on the advice of her doctor that she not attend the parade? I cannot remember where i recall this detail from, so if you have any further information on it, links to where it was said etc, i'd be grateful. Is it normal for a dcotor to be present when a victim attends an ID parade? If not standard practice, what was he there for?

Factually the medical team and the police testified in court that she was not groggy and signifcantly Ms Storie never suggested that at any time. ie any anaesthetic effects had clouded her decision of selecting Clark It would have give a possible defence claim in court if she had been!

can you provide a link so i can read this testimony if you have it? Thanks.

As I have said before until anyone of us see a picture of Clark we cannot decide how accurate Ms Storie or Rennie or Acott's opinions are and how accurate was it compared to Hanratty.

How will that resolve anything? Two contemporary wtinsses have described him differently as it is!

If he looks like Hanratty or Alphon then case closed.

How can the case be closed on a matter of the identification of a volunteer in an ID parade? there is much more compelling evidence than that! Have you read the DNA evidence?

[babybird67]

Hi Babybird,

You forgot to add that you have a very closed mind that no key it seems would stand any chance of opening.
For someone with ME you have amazing energy. ME would render 99.99% of it's sufferers totally incapable of devoting the time, concentration, effort and energy you have put into this thread in the space of just a few days.
An indefatigable ME sufferer is a new one on me. I take my hat off to you.

Haha...now you are questioning my medical diagnosis? Haha. Where did you get your medical degree from James? And i do admire your made up statistic of 99.99% of ME sufferers haha...how many do you personally know by the way?

If you knew anything about ME you would know it is a chronic illness characterised by remissions and relapses. Currently i am in a remission which has me functioning at 80% of normal. But keep the character assassination coming, James, it is really reflecting so well on you!

[jimarilyn]

Certainly. He lied that he didn't kill MG. He lied that he didn't rape VS. He lied that he didn't attempt to kill VS.

NO. He didn't .

He lied that he was in Liverpool at the time of the murder.

Yes, he did.

He then lied that he was in Rhyl at the time of the murder.

No. He most certainly did not !

Yes i cast my vote because i believe Hanratty was guilty. MY OPINION. How dare you suggest i should not be entitled to one. I see now why you have evaded the question several times when i asked you if you thought Reg's behaviour was justified...you just indirectly answered a resounding yes! Lol!

You need to re-read my post more carefully as I suggested no such thing.
I might add that I find a lot of your posts presumptuous, boastful and ill-informed. With hindsight yes I think Reg's posts were justified. As justified as yours anyhow.