a6 murder

[Steve]

Maybe a reference to Valerie Storie

You could well be right!

[jimarilyn]

You could well be right!

Hi

I can't believe I typed Miss Gregsten instead of Miss Storie. Must have had a brain seizure or something.

[jimarilyn]

Anyhow here are those two females, photographed in Valerie Storie's hospital ward at Guy's hospital on September 20th 1961. This must have been quite a tense and strained meeting. I wonder what Janet's true feelings towards the 22 year old Valerie were. Almost 4 years before, in December 1957 the 19 year old Valerie had had her first date with the married Gregsten and a year later they went to the Christmas dance together. It seems as if the bold Valerie didn't care too much about the marital status of Michael Gregsten or the feelings of his wife and two young sons. "Femme fatale" or what ?

[Steve]

Both described the other as 'my friend' at different times, but they don't look very friendly in this picture!

[jimarilyn]

I think someone said earlier on this thread that Miss Storie (got it right this time !) had been expecting their affair to fizzle out over the course of the following few months.

[Steve]

Yes, that's right, she said exactly that when interviewed for one of the television programmes on the subject.

[jimarilyn]

I wonder how long the couple had been in the cornfield before the murderer tapped on the window of the Morris Minor ? This has never been made clear in any of the books I've read on the subject. Was it a minute, 10 minutes, 20 minutes or what ?. If it was just a minute or two then it would seem as if the murderer had been lying in wait for them. They had been to the same spot several times previously. It just doesn't ring true that a complete stranger should be ambling along Marsh Lane around 9.30pm armed to the teeth with an Enfield .38 and bullets galore and all of a sudden happen upon a humble Morris Minor parked well inside a cornfield and think to himself "Wow, a Morris Minor, what a great opportunity for a stick-up, my luck's really in tonight". Rich pickings indeed !

[jimarilyn]

Anyhow here are those two females, photographed in Valerie Storie's hospital ward at Guy's hospital on September 20th 1961. This must have been quite a tense and strained meeting. I wonder what Janet's true feelings towards the 22 year old Valerie were. Almost 4 years before, in December 1957 the 19 year old Valerie had had her first date with the married Gregsten and a year later they went to the Christmas dance together. It seems as if the bold Valerie didn't care too much about the marital status of Michael Gregsten or the feelings of his wife and two young sons. "Femme fatale" or what ?

Attachment has vanished again and I know why. Instead of closing the "Manage Attachments" window afterwards I have instead removed the file. Anyhow here's that photo of J & V again'

[Graham]

Regarding how long the Morris was in the cornfield before the gunman arrived, according to Mary Lanz the couple left her pub at about 9.20, when in late August it probably wasn't completely dark, but I believe it was certainly dark when the gunman tapped the window of the car. They'd stopped at Huntercombe Lane before moving on to the cornfield, so probably they'd not been in the cornfield all that long. Maybe 30 minutes? Less? The chances of the gunman 'lying in wait' for the car are so remote as to be non-existent. Presumably something happened in Huntercombe Lane to make the couple move to the cornfield, otherwise one must assume that they'd have stayed there, in which case how could anyone be expecting the arrival of the car?

I really do think that Hanratty had had a bad day, had failed in his plan to commit profitable burglary and/or armed robbery, and was either frustrated enough to try his hand at the first person or persons he encountered and/or needed a car to get himself back to London at an hour when presumably there was no public transport running. Why he decided to take them all for a long ride north I have no idea, except to say that Hanratty was never all that rational, did things on the spur of the moment, and had little ability to think things through. Maybe he thought Gregsten and Storie were 'cocky' and needed to be taught a lesson - who knows? His actions once inside the car form what is really the most puzzling mystery of this puzzling and mysterious case. Why didn't he just rob them for what they'd got on them and pinch the car? Why did he stay? Maybe at first he decided to force Gregsten to drive into London, but decided he liked being 'in charge' and thought he'd have a bit of fun. Just don't know.

The photo of Janet Gregsten and Valerie Storey certainly seems to suggest that there was no love lost between them, but having said that Michael was something of a Lothario and I guess that Janet was perfectly used to his various indiscretions. She admitted that she had little interest in sex, and that she understood that her husband was the exact opposite. She must have been an extraordinarily understanding woman, given the general moral climate of the times. She was also extremely attractive, and it's understandable that Woffinden (in particular) emphasised (wrongly) that the crux of the case was another man's lusting after her. Of all the people in this sad case, Janet is the one I always had the most sympathy for, because by her own admission she had, to quote her own words, 'a crap life', even before her husband was murdered.

Cheers,

Graham

[simon]

Perhaps the motive..in reality the murder of Gregsten...had to appear to be rape ? That would explain why sex took place at all, in that cramped and gory setting.
As to why Hanratty was so smartly dressed in the cornfield : perhaps he'd reckoned they would never open the car window to him otherwise ?

Both suggestions have no doubt been made before, but I'm new to this and am still ploughing through the old postings!

[Steve]

Hello Simon

It’s very possible that the ultimate motive was rape, that Hanratty decided ‘to possess himself of the woman’ as was suggested during the legal proceedings. It’s most unlikely, though, that sex was the initial motive. Acott did suggest that Hanratty had succumbed to ‘peeping tom’ temptations, but the genesis of the crime is more likely to have been just random.

Hanratty was smartly dressed in the cornfield because he was always smartly dressed.

Kind regards,
Steve

[richardnunweek]

Hi Guys,
This case is extremely hard to fathom, but if one takes it as a simple ABC, we have the following.
Michael/Valarie, have been carrying on for about 4 years, he was a married man, but had a higher sex drive then his wife, and had several flings.
He and Valerie, went for a drink , then a drive into the field for customary sex, nothing sordid , just the norm.
After 30 min, the accused turns up , points a long barrelled revolver in the window, and gets in the back seat.
Motive.
Robbery, of personal items.
Of the car,
Rape of the female.
Premeditated Murder.
The most obvious is the first two. however why the long drive?
I would suggest that JH was either innocent [ unlikely] or extremely disturbed, and was clearly under the influenze full stop, or had very unusual behaviour patterns during that period.
His reactions after discovering the girl was alive, despite convinced he had killed her also, was one of sheer desperation, and showed him as a killer, that had no intelligence, and could only say 'Guys it wasnt me'
Regards Richardl.

[Limehouse]

Hi Richard,

Yes, I think there is a great deal of credit in the notion that the real shock for Hanratty, if he was the murderer, was finding out that Valerie had not in fact died.

As Hanratty was known not to be a drinker and Valerie did not mention smelling alcohol on him, it is unlikely he was under the influence of alcohol, but pill or other drung? Well, it is possible.

Hanratty was certainly disturbed. His whole lifelstyle suggests disturbed and disordered thinking. There was, I feel, a small element of decency about him, but he always tried to justify his crimes by saying he only burgled 'rich, empty houses - they have insurance' which suggests he was incapable of thinking about the psychological effect of the burglary on the victims. It also suggests he was incapable of taking responsibility for his crimes.

I feel that if it was Hanratty in the field that night the motive was either robbery or he was hired to do the job.

[Steve]

Narcotics?

I am surprised that the suggestion of drugs should crop up in respect of the A6 murder. I think it was suggested on the old thread, someone from the USA I think, and drug-taking criminals were a feature of 1960s America. I don’t believe, though, that drug-taking featured in serious crimes in the 1961 UK. (If I’m wrong I’m sure I’ll be told quickly.) I am sure that drugs only featured in the public eye with The Beatles and Rolling Stones. One thing is for certain is that drugs were not so easy to get hold of in 1961, I would go so far as to say that for someone like Hanratty it would have been easier to lay hands on a gun and ammunition than drugs.

If drugs had been a feature of the crime in any way it would have cropped up as a motive or other factor at the trial.

Kind regards,
Steve

[Limehouse]

Hi Steve,

I was not really thinking about illegal drugs but perhaps prescription pills that may have affected Hanratty's mood. We know that he had periods of hospitalisation during which he was diagnosed as being 'mentally defective'. I would not be surprised if the health professionals prescribed something that was supposed to help but in fact had an adverse effect.

I can give you an example from my own experience. As a child (in the 1960s) I had very severe eczema and also, quite separately, extreme anxiety. The doctors concluded one was caused by the other and prescribed 'medicine' for my eczema in liquid form. When I turned 15 the medicine was given to me in tablet form and I continued to take this until I was 22 when I found out it was amytriptyline - an anti-depessent. No consultation was held with me when I became an adult. I was simply prescribed this drug for years on end - and it didn't even cure me! It did, however, have side effects.

I'm using this as example of how, people with certain impairments of a mental type were treated like morons, were not consulted about their treatment and were often prescribed drugs to address behaviour that was considered socially embarrassing (in my case, body twitches, grimacing, phobias and compulsive behaviour).

So, it is possible that Hanratty was prescribed drugs that affected his thinking processes even more than they were already impaired.

Limehouse