a6 murder

[Victor]

Statement of William Nudds 21 September 1961.

No matter Vic which of his three different statements that you choose to accept as the truth ---the fact remains he made this second statement at Scotland Yard in the presence of Acott and Oxford

Hi Norma,

As I keep saying the 3rd statement basically says the 2nd is a pack of lies, and the 1st is correct, therefore I don't accept there were 3 different statements. I accept there were 3 statements but only 2 different accounts.

I asked you specifically for any evidence that corroborates the 2nd statement which is the only link between Alphon and room 24. The Vienna Guest book puts Alphon in room 6 and Hanratty in room 24, I don't have to rely on Nudds to put Hanratty in the room where the cartridge cases were found, but you do to put Alphon there, therefore your comments on Nudds reliability are pertinent.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

This guy has made three statements.Why does he change his story?

[Victor]

This guy has made three statements.Why does he change his story?

Hi Norma,

Because he's a police informant and gives them what he thinks they want to know - a connection between the cartridge cases and their only suspect (at this time). He does it to score points, to win a favour, whatever. And when the victim doesn't pick the person he set up in the ID parade, his lies (the 2nd statement) are exposed and the police get the truth out of him - the 3rd statement, which this time they corroborate as best they can by questioning Snell seperately.

It's the only reasonable explanation for the facts we have available to us.

KR,
Vic.

[Graham]

Also Vic (and forgive me if you've mentioned this earlier) at the time of Nudds' first statement Alphon was still the only suspect, and there's every possibility that Acott leaned on him somewhat in order to 'fit' Alphon in, thus resulting in Statement No 2.

Cheers,

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Vic,
I think Sherrard summed Nudds up best when he suggested he would dance to any tune!
Juliana Galves answering through a Spanish interpreter had at first said ,on 6th September 1961 that she remembered a man ringing up about 11.30 am on 22nd August,that Durrant/Alphon arrived at 11.30 pm and said he was the same man who had phoned up in the moring for a room in the name of Durrant.He was shown his room and in the morning he declined breakfast and left about 12.10 pm.
However,in her second statement ,on 13 September ,Mrs Galves clarified her position :

13/09/1961:The only time I saw this man [Durrant/Alphon], about whom I have alreadybeen asked by police,was .... at about 11 am on the day he left .I did not see Durrant on his arrival.According to the register he stayed one night on 22 August,. [Statement of Juliana Galves 13 September 1961.]

In his statement, Crocker referred solely to Durrant/ Alphon, and pointed out that he was booked in at the hotel on 22/23 August and suggested that the cartridge cases "may have had some connection with him.[Statement of Robert Crocker ,11 September1961].

[Limehouse]

Hi Norma,

Because he's a police informant and gives them what he thinks they want to know - a connection between the cartridge cases and their only suspect (at this time). He does it to score points, to win a favour, whatever. And when the victim doesn't pick the person he set up in the ID parade, his lies (the 2nd statement) are exposed and the police get the truth out of him - the 3rd statement, which this time they corroborate as best they can by questioning Snell seperately.

It's the only reasonable explanation for the facts we have available to us.

KR,
Vic.

Hi Vic,

So, he was at first trying to create a connection between evidence and a suspect. Isn't that an attempt to pervert the course of justice? A very serious offence?

[RonIpstone]

Hi Norma,

Because he's a police informant and gives them what he thinks they want to know - a connection between the cartridge cases and their only suspect (at this time). .................................................. .................................
.................................................. ............................................
It's the only reasonable explanation for the facts we have available to us.

Hello Vic

If Nudds had pitched up at the Yard voluntarily on 21 September 1961 in order to make his second statement which contradicted his first, then I might be inclined to agree with you. But it is suggested by both Foot and Woffinden that Acott pulled Nudds in on the morning of 21 September for several hours questioning, which led to the second statement. Mrs Snell was interveiwed the following day and gave a statement which confirmed Nudds's new statement.

The only reasonable explanation for this is that Detective Superintendent Basil Acott wanted something different from Nudds, something which would put a noose round the neck of Alphon and this he got with Nudds's second statement. Acott could rely on Nudds to appraise Mrs Snell of what he had said in his new statement and would be confident that Flo Snell would confirm Nudds's new version.

Acott's plan was scuttled by the failed identification by Val Storie so he was obliged to get Nudds and Snell to go back to their original versions of events which represented a reasonable version of the truth given honestly by two essentially dishonest individuals.

With the benefit of hindsight it seems so simple. The person who left the cartridge cases was the murderer. Therefore an occupant of Room 24 was the murderer. Hanratty, as J Ryan, had stayed in Room 24; Alphon, as F Durrant, had stayed in Room 6.

Acott's desire to manufacture the evidence had far reaching consequences as it muddied the waters of the investigation. It has allowed others to suggest that Alphon could have committed the offence and that he could have left the empty cartridge cases in Room 24.

It gave Alphon a reason (or another reason) to drag the name of British Justice through the dirt.

Any subsequent public inquiry would have to censure Acott for his browbeating of Nudds, and to my mind this is one of the reasons why several Home Secretaries, Conservative or Labour, never held such an inquiry.

Ron

[Graham]

Ron,

But it is suggested by both Foot and Woffinden that Acott pulled Nudds in on the morning of 21 September for several hours questioning, which led to the second statement. Mrs Snell was interveiwed the following day and gave a statement which confirmed Nudds's new statement.

As I suggested in my previous post. I'd have thought it was fairly common knowledge.

Any subsequent public inquiry would have to censure Acott for his browbeating of Nudds, and to my mind this is one of the reasons why several Home Secretaries, Conservative or Labour, never held such an inquiry.

Maybe, but in the aftermath of the Oz trial and the uncovering of links between the police and East End porn barons, the authorities removed over 400 policemen of all ranks up to Detective Chief Inspector. In fairness, this happened 10 years after the A6 Crime, but I think it does illustrate that the police weren't totally sacrosanct when they'd been up to no good.

Graham

[jimarilyn]

A very welcome return to you Jim. Lots to think about there. Once again, whether Hanratty was guilty opr innocent, I cannot help but doubt greatly that this was a random attack.

Julie

Thank you Julie and Norma for your kind words.

I too greatly doubt that this was a random and motiveless attack. In fact I am 100% convinced that Gregsten's and Storie's movements had been monitored for some time and that they were deliberately targeted. At the time of the murder the police tried to suggest that the murderer was some kind of 'moon maniac' who was hungry for sex. If sex had been the motive the murderer certainly displayed enormous self-discipline. So much so in fact he was able to control this strong sexual urge for a full 5 hours ! Truly amazing !

regards,
James (call me 'Peter')




Here's hoping that Rafa turns it on at Wimbledon this afternoon. A truly fantastic player with an amazing forehand.

[Limehouse]

Thank you Julie and Norma for your kind words.

I too greatly doubt that this was a random and motiveless attack. In fact I am 100% convinced that Gregsten's and Storie's movements had been monitored for some time and that they were deliberately targeted. At the time of the murder the police tried to suggest that the murderer was some kind of 'moon maniac' who was hungry for sex. If sex had been the motive the murderer certainly displayed enormous self-discipline. So much so in fact he was able to control this strong sexual urge for a full 5 hours ! Truly amazing !

regards,
James (call me 'Peter')




Here's hoping that Rafa turns it on at Wimbledon this afternoon. A truly fantastic player with an amazing forehand.

Hi James/Peter?

If you are hungry for sex, wandering around a cornfield in the middle of nowhere seems to be a strange place to look for it!

[Limehouse]

Hello Vic

If Nudds had pitched up at the Yard voluntarily on 21 September 1961 in order to make his second statement which contradicted his first, then I might be inclined to agree with you. But it is suggested by both Foot and Woffinden that Acott pulled Nudds in on the morning of 21 September for several hours questioning, which led to the second statement. Mrs Snell was interveiwed the following day and gave a statement which confirmed Nudds's new statement.

The only reasonable explanation for this is that Detective Superintendent Basil Acott wanted something different from Nudds, something which would put a noose round the neck of Alphon and this he got with Nudds's second statement. Acott could rely on Nudds to appraise Mrs Snell of what he had said in his new statement and would be confident that Flo Snell would confirm Nudds's new version.

Acott's plan was scuttled by the failed identification by Val Storie so he was obliged to get Nudds and Snell to go back to their original versions of events which represented a reasonable version of the truth given honestly by two essentially dishonest individuals.

With the benefit of hindsight it seems so simple. The person who left the cartridge cases was the murderer. Therefore an occupant of Room 24 was the murderer. Hanratty, as J Ryan, had stayed in Room 24; Alphon, as F Durrant, had stayed in Room 6.

Acott's desire to manufacture the evidence had far reaching consequences as it muddied the waters of the investigation. It has allowed others to suggest that Alphon could have committed the offence and that he could have left the empty cartridge cases in Room 24.

It gave Alphon a reason (or another reason) to drag the name of British Justice through the dirt.

Any subsequent public inquiry would have to censure Acott for his browbeating of Nudds, and to my mind this is one of the reasons why several Home Secretaries, Conservative or Labour, never held such an inquiry.

Ron

Hello Ron,

It sounds like they were all trying to pervert the course of justice then, doesn't it?

[Natalie Severn]

Hi James/Peter?

If you are hungry for sex, wandering around a cornfield in the middle of nowhere seems to be a strange place to look for it!

---and carrying a gun in one of his gloved hands!

[Natalie Severn]

I too greatly doubt that this was a random and motiveless attack. In fact I am 100% convinced that Gregsten's and Storie's movements had been monitored for some time and that they were deliberately targeted.....
If sex had been the motive the murderer certainly displayed enormous self-discipline. So much so in fact he was able to control this strong sexual urge for a full 5 hours !

Was anything discovered about his other extra marital relationships-did any run concurrent with his relationship with Valerie? Did any of them end with an unwanted pregnancy or were any with married women ?
Cheers
Norma

[jimarilyn]

Hi James/Peter?

If you are hungry for sex, wandering around a cornfield in the middle of nowhere seems to be a strange place to look for it!

Exactly, Julie. A very strange place indeed.

regards,
James


PS. I was just having a little fun with the 'call me Peter' quip.

[jimarilyn]

Was anything discovered about his other extra marital relationships-did any run concurrent with his relationship with Valerie? Did any of them end with an unwanted pregnancy or were any with married women ?
Cheers
Norma

Hi Norma,

Unfortunately we're all in the dark about his extra-marital affairs. All Janet had to say was that his affair with Valerie Storie wasn't his first. Perhaps there were only two, I can't say.

Further to an earlier post of mine where I mentioned Mike Gregsten's stating that 'he had a general feeling that he ought to be dead', it's interesting to note what his brother-in-law William Ewer said in one of his statements............

"[Michael Gregsten] was not a robust person and always a bit of a mother's boy....there was talk of a separation [from Janet] which was discussed with us....There were no great scenes and rows, but Gregsten had a guilt complex about his association with Valerie, and on occasions said that he wondered why he had not been struck down"

Not much warmth there for his deceased brother-in-law.......

regards,
James