a6 murder

[burkhilly]

It's great to see so much debate going on........and welcome to the new posters! I do pop into the thread most days just to see if there's anything new that's come to light.

Let's be honest, if is wasn't for the DNA results there would still be many doubts about JH's conviction. But the fact is that most people believe that the DNA results were conclusive proof that "Jim did it".

Me? Still sitting on the fence with some reasonable doubt!

[NickB]

As for Hanratty being seen at or around Paddington Station that morning, I don't know.

The question is whether he volunteered that he went there because he thought he had been seen. I suggested it as a possiblity because there is no obvious alternative reason why he would have gone there first instead of straight to Euston.

Ron - I believe some newspapers reported JH as saying the train arrived in Liverpool at 3.30, others 4.30.

[Natalie Severn]

Qui Bono?

Victor,
The sexual affairs could have had a very important contribution to what happened.In France such crimes connected with affairs are termed "Crimes of Passion" and William Ewer had had a very long history of being in some way connected with a very beautiful and apparently "delightful" woman,Janet Gregsten from when she was twelve years old.Remember she was "chucked out" of the Hampstead home as a very young teenager [14 years of age].Ewer was living in that same house,at the time,and married to Valerie,Janet"s half sister. The murder trial was barely out of the way when Janet and Ewer became "lovers".Janet was then living with her two sons in the same house as Ewer and his wife.
Similarly Valerie Storie was having an affair with Mike Gregsten-a government scientist who had been warned about his association with valerie incidently,by his employers Janet at this time was deeply unhappy about her marriage and this affair.

Its worth putting this trial in the context of historical trials to see what other trials were hitting the headlines at this point in time. Well there were two, equally famous trials which took place in the period of the early 1960"s: One was about the "contents" of the book, "Lady Chatterley"s Lover"-----which had been banned because it wrote about an adulterous affair and explicit sex, and ofcourse ,the Duke and Duchess of Argyle"s infamous "divorce"-World Newws at the time.The Duchess,a society beauty, was absolutely pilloried for having had an extra marital affair with a man she had been secretly photographed with having oral sex .She lost not only her reputation but everything else--her money[which had come from her hugely rich father] her home, her marriage,her children --all -as a result of this "fling" at a party.Yet it has been pointed out since that the Duke was apparently every bit as "culpable" having given a dog"s life to his maid servants with his incessant demands for sodomy .Yet it was on the evidence of one single "photograph",taken by one of these "desirable" young maids ,of the Duchess having oral sex with a " headless man" ,that the Duke obtained his divorce, and blow me down,a whole can of worms was suddenly opened up about the romps of prominent politicians such as Profumo in Macmillan"s government.The whole business led to further "Highlights of the High Life"which had all been totally under wraps until this point and ofcourse a dozen heads or more rolled in the government of the day with Macmillan"s government finally collapsing.
So you see "extra marital affairs" were very serious matters in those days.Such affairs suggested and do still suggest,the participants were involved in deceit,betrayal and untrustworty behaviour.

Mr Ewer gained Janet from all this dont forget.Alphon found himself going from being an unemployed drifter, albeit of very high intelligence-he had won a scholarship to the prestigious Mercer School in London,to being a very rich man indeed!
He found himself richer by £7,500 that Autumn. Of this £2,500 has been calculated to have come from press stories./Where did the other come from?
It would be worth about £250,000 today.It wasnt through playing the tables,Vic,no.

[john]

Natalie

I do not think Hanratty did it.
But think about what you write.
In pilloring Ewer and Janet and Valerie for their extra marital afairs, remember that James had sex with Carol France, unprotected sex in a back street against a wall and she was 16 year old, barely legal age. This is not a relationshoip of a girlfriend of long standing.
She was the daughter of Parents who had on the surface up to that time been good to him and Hanratty knew that there would be trouble. His own words "her father would go potty if he knew"

I increasingly believe that Charles France did find out there has been sex between the two of them and that affected his subsequent behaviour towards Hanratty. The '3rd figure' was not such a factor with him I think as the fact that Carol had been 'violated' by 'Uncle Jim'.
Remember some time after the trial Carol France took an overdose of iron tablets. Why would she have been particularly stressed about the trial etc? Her parents, yes as they gave evidence but Carol's evidence was just factual and not contested by Swanwick or Sherrard.

[john]

Also Natalie

Janet Gregsten in interviews made it clear that she left her Hampstead home at 14 due to the behaviour of her stepfather after the new marriage of her mother. Not due to William Ewer.

What woulkd be interesting to find instead of regurgitating the same old stuff from everyon (ie what a author has written) would be someone to actually research more deeper the backgrounds of Trower/Blackhall and the Redbridge witnesses. Foot et al have never done this. They have just accepted what they saw as correct etc.
BUT from the Matthew's 1996 report and investigations, remember conducted by the Police not 'Justice'ites', it is clear there are very different conclusions drawn from the evidence compared to what Trower and Blackhall said they saw in evidence. The car could not have been there in Avondale around 700 am (the witness report of a woman kept quiet in 1962 but known by the Police at the time then and found by Matthews) reported that there was no Morris Minor car there at the time and the statetemnt of the time of the people who house the car was parke din front of said the same. At 9'o clock when they went to work there wa sno Morris Minor there. These were statetemnts that matthews found in the Police evidence.

So what exactly then did Blackhall and Trower see. We know what they said they saw. and so I ask again which would be interesting to know-what is their actual background (The authors' seized upon investigating Langdale' and Nudd's records but not these two.)
For example in it is worth checking all the witnesses pro or anti. Mrs Galves was not quite the font of respectability that everyone makes her to be. Under the FOA I have found that she was here under an illegal passport and did not have a visa to entert he country (remember Spain was considered in 1961 a hostile country to GB and the EU was far off then for GB). She had not permission to be here and thus was in danger of being sent back once investigations began at the Vienna. She was not and not after the trial. I wonder why.

[Victor]

Hi Clive,

Rape is not about sexual urge or sexual enjoyment but completely and utterly about power and control over the victim. I have an inkling that some people like to play act rough sex games but don't ever confuse that with the act of rape.

It is true that generally rape is about domination and power over the victim, and also that domination can also be part of a healthy and fulfilling sex-life without crossing the mutually established lines into abuse. I believe that Valerie behaved very courageously that night and showed several acts of defiance towards their abductor, for example, she hid some money from him and refused to kiss him initially and challenged him when he wanted to tie them up. The rape was therefore the gunman reinforcing his dominance for this defiance.

In other words Woffinden's comment in the Oldie article "[Hanratty] would have been unable to assert authority over the couple for six hours - he simply didn't have the mental equipment" is pertinent because the gunamn did not assert authority until the rape, he was defied, and the courageous Valerie was punished for her defiance.

And as for a profile of someone who may be more prone to be a rapist it is plainly Alphon who fit's that persona. Indeed a repressed homosexual, with Nazi tendancies who made many hundreds of menacing phone calls and on one occasion public assaulted 2 people because he lost control. All in all Alphon is the classic psychopath.

When you see the control Alphon takes in the Panorama interview where he's casually lolling over the bed, he would have been more in control in the car and less easily duped as the gunamn was. A repressed homosexual would be unable to rape a woman, especially to climax and the rapist did climax.

I've said before that the tube station assault was provoked by Justice - Woffinden says this too.

His was recorded (under advisement by the police by Justice) using phrases such as "I'll count to five" and "I'll have to hit you over the head". Valerie Storie made statements that both of these phrases were used by the A6 killer.

Foot and Justice recorded Alphon's calls. Foot and Justice had spent years believing Alphon was the A6 killer, and doing anything they could to prove it. Those conversations would be inadmissible in an re-evaluation of the A6 crime because Foot and Justice were undoubtedly leading the witness and engineering him into incriminating himself, so much so that Alphon called a press conference in Paris and did confess, albeit a demonstrably untrue confession with many glaring mistakes. The two phrases you've cited could easily be seeded by what Foot or Justice themselves said. It's a comparable situation to what Sherrard was claiming Acott did in the Hanratty and "kip" case.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Mr Ewer gained Janet from all this dont forget.Alphon found himself going from being an unemployed drifter, albeit of very high intelligence-he had won a scholarship to the prestigious Mercer School in London,to being a very rich man indeed!
He found himself richer by £7,500 that Autumn. Of this £2,500 has been calculated to have come from press stories./Where did the other come from?
It would be worth about £250,000 today.It wasnt through playing the tables,Vic,no.

Hi Norma,

Mr Ewer ended up with Janet, so in that sense gained her. You seemed to be saying he plotted and schemed in order to take her, and this is not supported by any facts. Even if this was Ewer's intention I don't see that going about it by arranging for her husband to be murdered or abducted or whatever is the slightest bit plausible. The furthest I'd go is to say he took advantage of the situation but even then there are way too many factors outside his control. And that doesn't explain how he knew where the cornfield was.

Alphon didn't play the tables, he gambled at dog tracks, and with £2,500 from the media, that's a huge amount of money to speculate with.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Indeed Hawser completely accepts that Hanratty was in Liverpool on 21st August and was seen by the sweet shop lady and the child who was with her.She was able to give the date because that was when the child was with her.A man who looked after left luggage also remembered him.Anyway,it is accepted that he was in LIverpool on both 21st August and 24th August when he sent France his telegram.
But France and his daughter claimed he was at their house on 21st didnt he?Must double check.

Hi Norma,

Hanratty himself says he was in London on Monday 21st, corroborated by Carole France's dentist appointment and the records of that. And then there is the stay at the Vienna, with the entry using Hanratty's widely known alias of Ryan.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

The point about the test itself is that whatever you choose to believe about the LCN DNA"s 2002 test vis a vis its reliability it is very controversial and is considered by the FBI and most European judiciaries too unreliable to use.
I am sorry Victor but I prefer to believe Woffinden on this--he is a journalist and documentary maker of the utmost integrity and his latest quote on the tests "unreliability" is in last month"s "The Oldie".Also editors rarely publish articles if what the writer is saying could be considered by their lawyers to be untrue or possibly libellous ie the editing staff /lawyers for" The Oldie' to be printing stuff about the FBI that simply isnt true.

Hi Norma,

In the Oldie, after revealing that Budowle is the "former chief laboratory scientist with the FBI", Woffinden carefully says...
"Dr Budowle testified that LCN gave too many unreliable results, and the FBI would not rely on such evidence"

"Former", as in no longer, as in not conversant with current practices and procedures. Furthermore, just why did he leave?

Secondly, "not rely on" doesn't mean "would not touch", it means "requires corroboration".

KR,
Vic.

[NickB]

I prefer to believe Woffinden on this--he is a journalist and documentary maker of the utmost integrity and his latest quote on the tests "unreliability" is in last month"s "The Oldie".

Woffinden was instrumental in instigating the DNA tests, approved of them and wanted the results to be accepted as settling the matter.

“In 1991, we asked the forensic science laboratories whether there were any surviving exhibits.

We were shown a small fragment of material from Valerie Storie's underwear and immediately asked whether it could be subjected to analysis using contemporary DNA techniques.

The Home Office originally refused this request, but the work, which is still in progress, was finally undertaken by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. It is a very small sample of material, and the work is very intricate.

However, I have no doubt that when the work has been properly concluded, these scientific tests will demonstrate that he had nothing to do with this crime.

The Commission will, in due course, refer the case back to the appeal court, and Hanratty's conviction will be quashed.”

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/HANRATTY%3B+was+he+guilty%3F+NO+says+BOB+WOFFINDEN+LEADING+INVESTIGATIVE...-a0109825547

[CliveEnglish]

[quote=Victor;138240I've said before that the tube station assault was provoked by Justice - Woffinden says this too.[/quote]

Afternoon Victor
Could you please reply with references to your above statements. I can't find anything in Woffinden where he agrees with you!

Clive

The mighty Eagles pulled off the greatest comeback of all time in the FpT20 last night. Styris is a local hero now! We can't mess up qualifying now, can we?

[Graham]

Hi All,

I haven't posted recently, because I've been busy elsewhere, and also I think the thread is going round one of its periodic circles - all of what's being debated at the moment, interesting though it it, has been discussed before.
The best recent post is John's second post above - I totally agree with what he says. Just reading the 2 'classic' books on the case and then repeating what one has read in them gets boring. Even more boring when some of what Foot and Woffinden wrote is either mis-quoted or just not understood!

John hits the nail on the head when he asks for some further research into aspects of the case. I believe the egregious Reg1965 tried to contact Michael Hanratty (who now lives in Spain), but whether he was successful or not, I don't know. Also, was it Larue who wrote to Sherrard to ask him his current opinion on the case, but didn't receive a reply? Reg1965 also claimed to be in touch with Woffinden, who apparently told him that a new DNA test would be made at some point in the future (financed by who?) and it will be interesting to see if this ever comes off.

I would suggest that even those who support Hanratty read Leonard Miller's little book (if they can find a copy). It's not the best written piece of literature, and in truth he doesn't come up with any new facts or evidence, but he does at least put opposite views to those of Foot and Woffinden, and argues with their assumptions.

I wonder how many people directly involved in the A6 Case are still alive? Valerie, John Kerr and Carole France certainly are. Valerie has stated that she refuses to be interviewed further about the Case, which is fair enough, and John Kerr probably couldn't add anything to what he said at the time and since. Someone posting to this thread quite a while ago claimed, if I recall correctly, to be a relative of Carole France, but we never heard from him/her again. What I would really like to know is precisely what convinced the jury to return a guilty verdict based on the evidence given - one of the enduring mysteries of the A6 Case (to my mind, at least) is how Hanratty was found guilty on the evidence placed before the court. I truly believe that had he not changed his alibi and kept out of the witness box, he'd have been found not guilty. It always surprised me that his defence team agreed to those two actions. Still, had he been let off, there'd have been a guilty man released back into the community...

Cheers,

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Hi John,
Yes,there was certainly the issue of "unprotected sex" and it fits in with his irresponsible attitude to life generally and the probablility that he didnt "like to do it with his socks on' to put it crudely. James Bond was the hero then apparently and he certainly didnt like doing it with his socks on.The sex up against a back wall......she liked it,he liked it----neither were married,Carol had reached the age of consent, they could have got married-----whats the problem?
Sorry if you find this offensive but I dont.Dads ,however much we love them can act like tyrannical monsters at times regarding their 16 year old daughters who are just as eager as their sons mostly, to sample the delights and "Vivre la Vie"!

But betrayal in a marriage when young children are involved is different.It requires a person to practice a particular type of deceit towards their partners and involves the betrayal of trust-and often leads to the wreckage of a marriage causing a lot of pain and distress not least for the children.
Sincerely
Norma

[Natalie Severn]

Graham,
Well I am sorry to have come a bit late to this ongoing discussion but there you are.Others have been quite ok about it.
Best
Norma

[Natalie Severn]

hi Victor,
Thankyou for your posts.I can only say that my interpretation of the most recent Woffinden article in "The Oldie" is different.He makes the following statement unequivocally :LCN testing has never been used in the US or in the majority of jurisdictions in continental Europe .

If you read my post to John,you will see my opinion regarding the ethics and painful consequences to children and each other of the kind of sexual affairs indulged in by the people we speak who conducted secret and not so secret rendezvous to indulge in their extra marital affairs.