a6 murder

[Andrew]

Something to ponder

Hello all,
From the appeal:
*Further, it is also important to underline that the spent cartridges were discovered before James Hanratty had featured in the investigation: it was their presence in room 24 that caused the police to seek to identify the "J Ryan". He had been one of only two people who had spent a night in that room (which had four beds) in the period between the week of the murder and the recovery of the cartridges.*
The cartridges are scientifically linked to the gun and the gun is similarly linked to the murder, but the cartridges are not directly linked to the murder. This means that those cartridges could have been fired at any time since the gun and ammunition were made in World War 2. Logically the police should have investigated any occupants of room 24 back to a point in time when a hotel staff member could swear that they had definitely not been any cartridges on the chair. What I’m driving at here is that if a known arms dealer, robber or general hood had been in residence during that period it would have been interesting information, wouldn’t it?
Regards
Andrew

[Limehouse]

Certainly, that's a very good point Andrew. Even if, as claimed by the prosecution, the catridges were left in the room the night before the murder, it does not follow that the same person had the gun when the murder was committed.

[jimarilyn]

Hello all,
From the appeal:
*Further, it is also important to underline that the spent cartridges were discovered before James Hanratty had featured in the investigation: it was their presence in room 24 that caused the police to seek to identify the "J Ryan". He had been one of only two people who had spent a night in that room (which had four beds) in the period between the week of the murder and the recovery of the cartridges.*
The cartridges are scientifically linked to the gun and the gun is similarly linked to the murder, but the cartridges are not directly linked to the murder. This means that those cartridges could have been fired at any time since the gun and ammunition were made in World War 2. Logically the police should have investigated any occupants of room 24 back to a point in time when a hotel staff member could swear that they had definitely not been any cartridges on the chair. What I’m driving at here is that if a known arms dealer, robber or general hood had been in residence during that period it would have been interesting information, wouldn’t it?
Regards
Andrew

It would indeed Andrew, you have given much food for thought there. For argument's sake, let's suppose that the spent cartidge cases went completely unnoticed (assuming nobody planted them there between August 22nd and September 11th) until they were found by Mr Crocker and Juliana Galves on the morning of September 11th. If this is the case then they could have been lying on that chair for days or even weeks before Hanratty occupied that room. It would have been very interesting to know just how often room 24 had been occupied prior to August 21st and if any of those occupants were known to have been underworld characters. I wonder how thorough the police were in their investigations into the Vienna Hotel ?

Interesting to note that neither the Nudds's nor Robert Crocker were employed at the Viennna for very long. Nudds and Snell were there for just over 4 weeks and Crocker was there for only about 7 weeks. I wonder how long the previous manager and his staff lasted ?

regards,
James

[Graham]

As I understand it, the day Crocker discovered the cases was when he had gone (or had been sent) to the Vienna to sort out lax standards at that hotel, and was going from room to room to check on housekeeping. The only other occupant of Room 24 since 'Ryan' was an Indian gent, who either didn't see the cartridges or, if he did, said nothing about them to any of the Vienna's staff. After all, why should he? He was only passing through, so to speak. And again, as I understand it, the cases were effectively concealed between the back and the seat of what (as I understand it...sorry for the repetition) was an old-fashioned over-stuffed armchair. Had Crocker not found them during his inspection they could have remained undiscovered for a long, long time.

But the logic of this suggests that as (a) the cases had been fired from the gun found on the 36A bus; and (b) that particular gun was shown to be linked to Hanratty; and (c) Hanratty had stayed in Room 24 the night prior to the murder, I believe it stands to reason that Hanratty had left them there.
I also recall reading somewhere that the gun was in effectively new condition when found; that is, it had been stored somewhere in pristine condition before it was found on the 36A bus and had been fired relatively few times. (I'm open to correction about this, though, 'cos I can't remember where I read it).

To suggest that the cases could have been there since the Year Dot, left there by a previous owner of the gun, really doesn't stand up to much scrutiny.

Cheers,

Graham

[Andrew]

Graham
Well , I didn't suggest that the cases had been there "since the year dot" as you put it. The wording of the appeal suggests that it wasn't necessary to look back further than the 21st August and I think that it might have been helpful.

Regards
Andrew

[Graham]

Hi Andrew,

yes, I understand what you're getting at, but had the police asked the staff at the Vienna if, for example, they'd 'seen any cartridge cases in the room', what kind of response do you think they'd have received? Blank looks, almost certainly. The Vienna wasn't much more than a doss-house in those days, and servicing of the rooms wouldn't have been much more than changing the bed-clothes and maybe 'plumping up the cushions' to coin a phrase. I'd bet the rooms weren't even hoovered one month to the next.

A few years ago a good friend of mine was staying in a 'hotel' (I think it was just a pub offering accomodation) somewhere in the Stoke-on-Trent area, and he found a wallet containing credit cards and a large sum of money under a bed. As it happens, the rightful owner was traced. The wallet had been there for some time, apparently.

Graham

[Limehouse]

As I understand it, the day Crocker discovered the cases was when he had gone (or had been sent) to the Vienna to sort out lax standards at that hotel, and was going from room to room to check on housekeeping. The only other occupant of Room 24 since 'Ryan' was an Indian gent, who either didn't see the cartridges or, if he did, said nothing about them to any of the Vienna's staff. After all, why should he? He was only passing through, so to speak. And again, as I understand it, the cases were effectively concealed between the back and the seat of what (as I understand it...sorry for the repetition) was an old-fashioned over-stuffed armchair. Had Crocker not found them during his inspection they could have remained undiscovered for a long, long time.

But the logic of this suggests that as (a) the cases had been fired from the gun found on the 36A bus; and (b) that particular gun was shown to be linked to Hanratty; and (c) Hanratty had stayed in Room 24 the night prior to the murder, I believe it stands to reason that Hanratty had left them there.
I also recall reading somewhere that the gun was in effectively new condition when found; that is, it had been stored somewhere in pristine condition before it was found on the 36A bus and had been fired relatively few times. (I'm open to correction about this, though, 'cos I can't remember where I read it).

To suggest that the cases could have been there since the Year Dot, left there by a previous owner of the gun, really doesn't stand up to much scrutiny.

Cheers,

Graham

Hi Graham, folks,

I definitely don't accept the offocial version of how the cartridge cases ended up in that hotel room.

Firstly, if the gun owner had been 'trying out' the gun to see how it felt to hold it and fire it I am sure other guests and staff in the hotel would have become aware of this. Secondly, I am equally sure that had the gun owner risked doing this, they would have been very careful not to leave the evidence behind. Thirdly, I am sure that the spent cartridges were spent purely so that they could be connected to the gun in question.

Let's return to the chair. If the spent cartridges had 'rolled' out from a bag or jacket owned by the gun owner, they would not have become 'trapped' between the back of the chair and its fixed cushion. It would have taken some force for them to slip between the back of the chair and its fixed cushion. Had they become trapped and therefore unseen, they would not have simply rolled out when the chair was examined closer by the area manager. However, if I am wrong and the cartridges had become trapped, who knows how long they had been there?

[Victor]

Firstly, if the gun owner had been 'trying out' the gun to see how it felt to hold it and fire it I am sure other guests and staff in the hotel would have become aware of this. Secondly, I am equally sure that had the gun owner risked doing this, they would have been very careful not to leave the evidence behind. Thirdly, I am sure that the spent cartridges were spent purely so that they could be connected to the gun in question.

Hi Julie et al,

I very much doubt that anyone would be stupid enough to try out the gun in a hotel, as Alphon suggested he'd done at one point. I think the cartridge cases must have fallen out of a bag or jacket on the chair.

Let's return to the chair. If the spent cartridges had 'rolled' out from a bag or jacket owned by the gun owner, they would not have become 'trapped' between the back of the chair and its fixed cushion. It would have taken some force for them to slip between the back of the chair and its fixed cushion. Had they become trapped and therefore unseen, they would not have simply rolled out when the chair was examined closer by the area manager.

That all depends upon the design of the chair, and most sofas and armchairs are renowned for trapping coins and small items like cigarette lighters which are comparable in size to cartridge cases.

However, if I am wrong and the cartridges had become trapped, who knows how long they had been there?

That is indeed true, but the ballistic\forensic link to the murder weapon limits possibilities, especially as Hanratty was the only person to sleep in that bed because the Indian gentleman slept in the double bed on the other side of the room.

KR,
Vic.

[Limehouse]

Just because Hanratty slept in the room, it doesn't rule out someone else placing the cartridges there before he arrived or after he left.

[Graham]

I never ruled out the (remote) possibility of the gun being planted on the bus, so I guess that there's an even remoter possibility that the cases were planted at the Vienna. But I doubt it. Much too convoluted a scenario.

Cheers,

Graham

[Victor]

Just because Hanratty slept in the room, it doesn't rule out someone else placing the cartridges there before he arrived or after he left.

Hi Julie,

Of course it doesn't, but wouldn't it be yet another coincidence, and one too far for me, for the cases to be planted there beforehand. I just can't fathom how remote the possibility of a third link to the Vienna is, you want the murderer, a third person, to have stayed at the same seedy hotel as Hanratty and Alphon.

And on the other side, the gun was in police possession a day and a half after the crime, and the cartridge case find was the cause of Hanratty or "J Ryan" being connected with the crime so that means we're talking of a conspiracy involving the police or other officials framing a man unconnected with the crime who was later identified by the victim and blood type and much much later DNA, who couldn't provide tangible evidence of his whereabouts on the night of the murder. That's not a carrot in a bunch of bananas, that's a cucumber in a bunch of bananas.

KR,
Vic.

[BLACKWOOD]

Deadmans Hill

There are 450 plus pages on this subject so it is difficult to know what has and has not been discussed.

Surely the culprit must have been aware that if he was caught he would hang.

Therefore he had to be 100 per cent sure that there would be no surviving witness.

Yet his attempts to "murder" Ms Storie were ineffective.

I cannot help but think that , preposterous as it may sound, the culprit actually wanted Valerie to live for some unaccountable reason.

[jimarilyn]

There are 450 plus pages on this subject so it is difficult to know what has and has not been discussed.

Surely the culprit must have been aware that if he was caught he would hang.

Therefore he had to be 100 per cent sure that there would be no surviving witness.

Yet his attempts to "murder" Ms Storie were ineffective.

I cannot help but think that , preposterous as it may sound, the culprit actually wanted Valerie to live for some unaccountable reason.

Hi BLACKWOOD,

Welcome to A6 World. A very thought provoking post if I may say so.

I've always thought it a bit strange that the murderer's last few shots were fired over Valerie Storie's head, especially when he was so accurate with his first 5 shots. Those 5 shots (4 of which were in a very neat line down her left shoulder) were grouped very closely together. They were (according to the ballistics evidence) fired from a .38 Enfield revolver. In the still of the night on a very dark stretch of road. That the killer was able to group these shots ( in pitch black conditions) so close together with a revolver that had considerable recoil suggests a certain degree of skill with a handgun.

If it was indeed the killer's intention to leave no living witness to the crime why not fire the bullets into her head like he did with Mike Gregsten ? Far less chance of surviving that way.
Who knows, perhaps he was playing some macabre game with her and missed deliberately with the last few shots. If so, and expecting her to survive her wounds, perhaps it was done to serve as a future warning to her, to instil fear into her. This speculative scenario would certainly fit in with the kind of calculating individual I believe Peter Alphon was.

As I say mere speculation on my part.

[larue]

hi blackwood,

welcome to the forum

There are 450 plus pages on this subject so it is difficult to know what has and has not been discussed.

so far, the discussion seems to be fairly comprehensive

Surely the culprit must have been aware that if he was caught he would hang.

Therefore he had to be 100 per cent sure that there would be no surviving witness.

Yet his attempts to "murder" Ms Storie were ineffective.

I cannot help but think that , preposterous as it may sound, the culprit actually wanted Valerie to live for some unaccountable reason.

an interesting viewpoint.

with the first two statements, i agree. yes, the gunman knew he would hang if caught, and yes, he should leave no living witness.

as for wanting vs to live, then why shoot at her? and why so many times?

he was trying to kill her, of that there can be little doubt. as we all know, it was dark at the time, so he would not have seen where his bullets were striking. as far as he knew, he could have shot her through the head 5 times. he then reloaded, and shot at her again. then he went and kicked her, to be sure. and after all that, she survived. taken altogether, not a very competant killer...

[Graham]

I'm sure he meant to kill VS and leave no living witness, but not so sure he genuinely mean to kill Gregsten. It's been suggested before that he might have fired 'by mistake' - he did say JG's rapid movement frightened him. I also wonder if his protestations of innocence were really "I didn't mean to do it" rather than "I didn't do it".

Graham