a6 murder

[Graham]

Derrick,

Now hold on a minute here pal. I wasn't inferring or explicitly stating that you were making it up but that you had left important bare bones stuff out.

Have you got a copy of Woffinden?

You give the impression that anyone speaking up for Hanratty, however remotely, is to be fully believed, whereas anyone else is a damn liar.

OK, perhaps I should have written this as "Hanratty's supporters give the impression", etc. Because that is precisely the impression that has been given during the several years I've been posting to this thread. To the extent that at least one poster has openly questioned Valerie Storie's integrity.

Timing, some 6 months after the event are always going to be a bit awry. But none are more than an hour out. Mrs Walker gave an additonal statement that said her encounter was at lighting up time as the sun set, around 8:30 to 8:45.

The news vendor Charley Jones said he saw someone looking like Hanratty at about 7.30pm, which would have been impossible given the time of the arrival of the bus from Liverpool. In the event, Jones admitted he was leaned on by Terry Evans to imply that he'd seen Hanratty, but at least between the two of them they might have checked the bus times. I believe at least one other Rhyl "witness" claimed to have seen Hanratty at an impossible time.

The bus arrived at 8.19pm, so if, according to Hanratty, he went to look for Terry Evans, how long would this take him? 5 minutes? 30 minutes? An hour?

Your point 4 is just plain wrong as a Rhyl barber called Gerald Murray seems to remember Hanratty as being a customer. Mr Murray (with Messrs Dutton and Larman) wasn't interviewed by Douglas Nimmo in his oh so thorough Rhyl alibi investigation. Whitewash.

Mr Murray said he thought he'd given a haircut to someone who could have been Hanratty, but Hanratty said he'd been to a barber for a shave.

OK pal?

[Victor]

The case example posted by Derrick was an attempt to show how even relatively fresh samples of DNA can be isolated and identified incorrectly. Therefore - it is valid to question the Hanratty/Storie analysis.

Erm.. They weren't "identified incorrectly", they were misinterpreted.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

So ? So ? I can hardly believe your attitude. This man spent five in years in prison for the rape of HIS DAUGHTER.

Yes, so Julie, just how is that completely unrelated case relevent to a discussion on Hanratty? Invoking sympathetic feelings and highlighting the extreme trauma that has happened to that family over the past 5 years is just an unnecessary distraction.

For example, what about the other evidence in this case? The conviction can't be based on just the DNA evidence - what about the daughter's testimony? Did she identify her father as her rapist? That's the elephant in the room.

And again, it was the interpretation of those DNA results that were at fault, and the alternative explanation - that the father's DNA was there as a contaminant - is logical and plausible.

It's absolutely pointless identifying the odd case here or there where a misinterpretation has resulted in a miscarriage of justice because it's quite plain they do occur, but how frequent are they? 1 in 100? 1 in 1,000? Unless you do that you may as well continue the argument and let all rapists and murderers go free because their convictions are unsafe too!

KR,
Vic.

[Limehouse]

how come it is all right for Limehouse and Hanratty defenders to bring up other cases, but when i mentioned another case recently in the news it was like the Spanish Inquisition had jumped on me!

Oh yes...i forgot...hypocrisy. Silly me.

It's completely different. You mentioned the case in Bristol (Jo Yates) suggested that they might as well not do DNA as people would argue it is valueless but you were not basing your argument on a tried and tested case. You were just speculating on what people's reactions might be.

The DNA on the Hanratty/Storie samples were carried out decades after the crime and decades after a trial and court case that was open to criticism.

The case example posted by Derrick was an attempt to show how even relatively fresh samples of DNA can be isolated and identified incorrectly. Therefore - it is valid to question the Hanratty/Storie analysis.

[Derrick]

Derrick,

what I posted are not my points; they are what Hanratty told his defence regarding his claim to be in Rhyl on the night in question. You can read in Woffinden, paperback edition, Pages 127 - 8. If you don't believe it, then take it up with Woffinden, not me.

You give the impression that anyone speaking up for Hanratty, however remotely, is to be fully believed, whereas anyone else is a damn liar.

Graham

Graham

Now hold on a minute here pal. I wasn't inferring or explicitly stating that you were making it up but that you had left important bare bones stuff out.

As for your second paragraph that is complete nonsense. How have I expressed this

You give the impression that anyone speaking up for Hanratty, however remotely, is to be fully believed, whereas anyone else is a damn liar.

in this

Hanratty said he asked several people for digs, before coming upon Mrs Jones lodgings.

This has been corroborated fully by the owners of guest houses in the Kinmel Street area, including describing the mans appearance, especially his hair condition. The mention of the man's hair state being similar by more than one person and it being right alone convinces me that it was Hanratty. The other witnesses just add more weight to that opinion.

Timing, some 6 months after the event are always going to be a bit awry. But none are more than an hour out. Mrs Walker gave an additonal statement that said her encounter was at lighting up time as the sun set, around 8:30 to 8:45.

It would also have been very unlikely for Hanratty to have made up the trip to Liverpool on the Tuesday and ask for Carlton or Tarleton Road and have that corroborated by Mrs Dinwoodie. This part of his alibi never changed and the prosecution couldn't counter it in a logical fashion without resorting to fantasy.

Considering that none of the prosecution identification witnesses mentioned the state of the mans hair being similar to the state that Hanratty's was in at the time convinces me that Hanratty was anywhere other than in Rhyl on the night of the 22nd.

Also little point is made of the fact that no one sees Hanratty, with his distinctive hair, supposedly travelling to Liverpool on the Thursday to set up what would be a useless alibi!

Your point 4 is just plain wrong as a Rhyl barber called Gerald Murray seems to remember Hanratty as being a customer. Mr Murray (with Messrs Dutton and Larman) wasn't interviewed by Douglas Nimmo in his oh so thorough Rhyl alibi investigation. Whitewash.

Well am I wrong?

Where in my post (reproduced above) have I called someone else a damned liar? If that is the stength of your argument then if I were you I would give it a rest sunshine.

Derrick

[babybird67]

and...

how come it is all right for Limehouse and Hanratty defenders to bring up other cases, but when i mentioned another case recently in the news it was like the Spanish Inquisition had jumped on me!

Oh yes...i forgot...hypocrisy. Silly me.

[babybird67]

Perhaps you would like to demonstrate exactly, from the results, how Hanratty's semen was found on Valerie's underwear and how his profile was identified and made distinct from VS's and MG's?

Derrick

Why does Vic have to demonstrate that when the experts conducting the tests already have?

[Derrick]

...

JULIE

SPOT ON.

Derrick

[Derrick]

So? The Forensic results were overstated - it happens. It's wrong but it happens, that's why the defence have experts too, to highlight those issues. However, there's an obvious, logical explanation for the determined results in this case - that's not the same with Hanratty where the results clearly show Hanratty left his semen on Valerie's underwear when he raped her.

The original results in the "Mr E" case showed that it was semen. This was shown to be unreliable and could have originated from any cell type.

Perhaps you would like to demonstrate exactly, from the results, how Hanratty's semen was found on Valerie's underwear and how his profile was identified and made distinct from VS's and MG's?

Derrick

[Limehouse]

So? The Forensic results were overstated - it happens. It's wrong but it happens, that's why the defence have experts too, to highlight those issues. However, there's an obvious, logical explanation for the determined results in this case - that's not the same with Hanratty where the results clearly show Hanratty left his semen on Valerie's underwear when he raped her.

KR,
Vic.

So ? So ? I can hardly believe your attitude. This man spent five in years in prison for the rape of HIS DAUGHTER. Those charges probably destroyed a family and caused untold trauma to both daughter and father as well as other members of the family.
It is reasonable to assume that the DNA tests were carried out on reasonably fresh samples that had been protected from contamination after collection from the crime scene. As the father probably lived in close proximity to the daughter cross contamination was a high risk. Therefore scientists carrying out tests for semen should have been very sure about what they were isolating.
Such a case – coming so long after the Hanratty DNA was apparently identified – highlights the damaging and careless conclusions that are drawn from such tests.
I extracted the points I think are most telling:

"The DNA found on the front of the shorts was a weak partial profile," he said. "Statistical analysis of such weak partial profiles has no relevance.

"The DNA did not necessarily originate from semen, but may have originated from skin, sweat or even secondary transfer form such sources."

He concluded: "The conviction is unsafe...The conclusions which the Crown invited the jury to draw form the scientific evidence were overstated and of no evidential value."

[Victor]

He spent five years in jail because of it though!!!!

So? The Forensic results were overstated - it happens. It's wrong but it happens, that's why the defence have experts too, to highlight those issues. However, there's an obvious, logical explanation for the determined results in this case - that's not the same with Hanratty where the results clearly show Hanratty left his semen on Valerie's underwear when he raped her.

KR,
Vic.

[Derrick]

I don't see how that is relevent, a man's DNA could easily get into his daughter's room of the family home.

He spent five years in jail because of it though!!!!

[Derrick]

Congratulations, Derrick! I knew you'd see the light sooner or later!

Graham

oops, slight grammar error there.
Relax, I haven't seen the light at all.

[Graham]

Considering that none of the prosecution identification witnesses mentioned the state of the mans hair being similar to the state that Hanratty's was in at the time convinces me that Hanratty was anywhere other than in Rhyl on the night of the 22nd.

Congratulations, Derrick! I knew you'd see the light sooner or later!

Graham

[Victor]

Hi Derrick,

Hanratty said he asked several people for digs, before coming upon Mrs Jones lodgings.

Then why do none of the Rhyl witnesses mention his luggage? If he asked several people before coming upon Ingledene then why did Larman point him (without luggage) there.

The mention of the man's hair state being similar by more than one person and it being right alone convinces me that it was Hanratty.

How is "streaky" or "tacky", "right" for Hanratty's hair?

But none are more than an hour out. Mrs Walker gave an additonal statement that said her encounter was at lighting up time as the sun set, around 8:30 to 8:45.

How does that timing work? Arrival in Rhyl 8:19pm. Try to find Evans. Somehow get rid of luggage. Get to Mrs Walker by 8:30-8:45pm.

Between 11 and 26 minutes isn't that long to do all that.

Considering that none of the prosecution identification witnesses mentioned the state of the mans hair being similar to the state that Hanratty's was in at the time convinces me that Hanratty was anywhere other than in Rhyl on the night of the 22nd.

I'm convinced he wasn't in Rhyl too!

An interesting development in the world of DNA interpretation can be found here:
http://www.brightonwired.co.uk/news....iction-quashed

I don't see how that is relevent, a man's DNA could easily get into his daughter's room of the family home.

KR,
Vic.