a6 murder

[babybird67]

can anyone pinpoint this reference for me?

I remember reading somewhere that VS had a conversation shortly before the murder with one of her friends regarding MG's pattern of infidelities and how the relationship was coming to its close, but i can't remember where i garnered this information from...can anyone help? My understanding was that MG was a bit of a serial adulterer...is this true? Or was he in love with VS? (Of course those two options arent mutually exclusive, but the impression i get is one of a man not unused to having extra-marital affairs...who knows how deep his feelings for VS really were?)

thanks in advance

Jen

[Andrew]

Lay-by

I went to the lay-by today. I know it's been done before, but I understand that the council may make changes and build a visitor centre for the adjacent Forestry Commission site. So I went hoping to get a comparison photo to the 1961 picture that I've attached. The building with four chimney stacks is Oxley's Cottages and they are still there, right at the top of the hill, but shrouded from view by the vegitation which has grown in the last 48 years. Today's picture isn't in quite the right place, but it demonstrates the problem of sighting the horizon, given the number of trees and bushes in the way.
Regards
Andrew

[Hatchett]

Thanks very much for that Andrew. Looking at your picture it is still a desolate, sad place.

[Hatchett]

Hi Babybird,

What ever his past, and I am not too sure about the serial adultering, I understand that Gregston had left his wife and children for Valerie. So my view is that he probably did love her. Of course he could have left it too late. They had been seeing each other for a number of years. When he left his wife it could have come after Valerie had made her mind up that the relationship was only temporary.

And of course it wasn't that easy then, as it is now, to divorce. Not just legally, but socially as well. Social stigmas and things were in full swing.

But a good point.

Keep writing.

[larue]

hi Jen

I remember reading somewhere that VS had a conversation shortly before the murder with one of her friends regarding MG's pattern of infidelities and how the relationship was coming to its close, but i can't remember where i garnered this information from...can anyone help?

i too remember this, and like you, i cannot remember where i read it. i posted about this some time ago, and Vic aksed me where i found it. as i recall, in paraphrase, vs said something like, 'she thought their affair was going nowhere, and she expected it to just peter out...'

[sorry to be a bit gross here but...] this remark has made me wonder about the two semen stains on her undies. she must have been taking a risk having sex with a married man without taking any precautions. i mean, whatever would the neighbors have thought?

My understanding was that MG was a bit of a serial adulterer...is this true?

i think i read that his wife has been quoted as being tolerant of his 'affairs', which i understand to mean more than one, so yes, it seems he was.

[larue]

hi Hatchett

Social stigmas and things were in full swing.

you are absolutely right. which is cogent to my second paragraph in my previous post

[Victor]

What ever his past, and I am not too sure about the serial adultering, I understand that Gregston had left his wife and children for Valerie.

Hi Hatchett, Jen,

MG had apparently had a number of affairs over the years, and at the time of the murder he had moved out of the family home and had rented a bedsit on his own, not with Valerie. This suggests to me that he was dissatisfied with his marriage and was planning to leave, and perhaps divorce although another reconciliation is also possible "for the sake of the children".

Of course this leaves the way open for Foot's "pushing the Gregsten's back together" or Woffinden's "prying them apart" conspiracy theories. The very fact that you have these two opposite and competing conspiracy theories highlights how you can build a conspiracy out of negligible evidence.

KR,
Vic.

[Graham]

Hi Andrew,

you must've taken your life in your hands hopping onto the central-reservation to take your pic! That stretch of road is horrible - I nearly got zonked by an HGV as I pulled out of the modern lay-by. But your photo illustrates to posters who may not otherwise have appreciated it just how much changed the topography is since the A6 was duelled. I wonder how many people have walked up and down the modern lay-by without realising that the crime-scene is now the central reservation....

Hi Vic/Larue/Hatchett,

MG did indeed move out to his own flat, but I have a vague recollection of reading that VS wasn't his only affair. Also, Janet G admitted candidly that her sex-life with MG wasn't good, and that it was her fault, so she understood why he needed to put himself about a bit. What you'd call an understanding lady, I'd say!

The whole concept of a 'conspiracy' to either seperate or bring together MG and JG via the use of a gunman is to my mind absolutely and utterly preposterous! It was pure invention by people who are unable to view anything even slightly mysterious without proposing a conspiracy theory.
Sold a few books, though....

Cheers,

Graham

[Graham]

One or two interesting points here:

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1971/oct/28/james-hanratty

Cheers,

Graham

[Victor]

One or two interesting points here:

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/c...james-hanratty

Hi Graham,

It's quite noticeable that a major link in the "Alphon did it" argument, Mary Lanz, is thoroughly discredited. And Foot takes quite a bashing.

KR,
Vic.

[Limehouse]

Could he say particularly whether he had access to the first statement made by Miss Valerie Storie which was not available either to the court which committed Hanratty or to the court of trial?

Why on earth would Miss Storie's first statement be witheld?

[Victor]

Why on earth would Miss Storie's first statement be witheld?

Hi Julie,

Because:-
1. It contained nothing materially different from the other 6 statements.
2. Was made when she was not expected to live, and therefore in severe emotional distress plus physical torment and pain from her multiple gunshot wounds and emergency treatment, and consequently obviously not as reliable and complete as the other statements.
3. Was made when she was medicated (including anaesthetic?) and therefore confused. It could even be delerious rambling, from which the officers extracted as much as they could in case she didn't survive to make fuller statements.
4. Was not taken in a thorough manner nor recorded and needed to be transcribed from scribbled notes.

There's a few reasons for starters.

KR,
Vic.

[Limehouse]

Hi Julie,

Because:-
1. It contained nothing materially different from the other 6 statements.
2. Was made when she was not expected to live, and therefore in severe emotional distress plus physical torment and pain from her multiple gunshot wounds and emergency treatment, and consequently obviously not as reliable and complete as the other statements.
3. Was made when she was medicated (including anaesthetic?) and therefore confused. It could even be delerious rambling, from which the officers extracted as much as they could in case she didn't survive to make fuller statements.
4. Was not taken in a thorough manner nor recorded and needed to be transcribed from scribbled notes.

There's a few reasons for starters.

KR,
Vic.

Oh, I see. I thought it might be because it would have considerably weakened the case for the prosecution

[Victor]

Oh, I see. I thought it might be because it would have considerably weakened the case for the prosecution

Hi Julie,

Would it? A seriously injured woman expressing a moment of self-doubt, which of course was proved right at the 1st ID parade, followed by unshakable confidence when she was actually confronted with her rapist.

I agree that it should have been made available at the time, like a lot of other things such as the complete statements from the Rhyl witnesses, however that one minor point that she has in common with a lot of other rape victims is insignificant. Especially when the DNA proved her to be absolutely correct.

KR,
Vic.

[babybird67]

indeed Vic

the jury were well aware that Ms Storie had picked out an innocent man from the first ID parade, but they were also aware that Hanratty had not been on that parade to be chosen.

Too much emphasis i think is given to VS's identification when there were two independent witnesses to the driver of the Morris Minor later that morning, who both picked out Hanratty from an ID parade as being that man. NOBODY who allegedly saw the Morris Minor driver that morning picked out Alphon when confronted by him.

Three identifications of Hanratty either at the scene, or later in the murder car...coincidence? Unlikely, imo.