a6 murder

[NickB]

I suppose the description could fit Alphon.

Was your quote from Woffinden? It is strange that he cut out that crucial bit.

It would be good to see the complete trial transcripts, rather than Woffinden's selected excerpts. Might throw a new light on the Bedford jury!

[caz]

Now I wonder why I am thinking of pots and kettles, Caz?

I'm wondering too, Nats. You do know what the expression means, I take it?

You were the one telling tales down the Pub about my behaviour here, as if I were the board school bully.

I didn't deserve that and I think you know it. All you've done since your arrival on this thread is throw your weight around and shout about everyone and everything - including the victim, the jury, the DNA and the appeal court - being wrong and you being right. Can you not even hear yourself doing it? I'm not expecting you to stop, in fact I mostly enjoy the spectacle. But at the same time I didn't expect the gratuitous swipe while I was minding my own business elsewhere.

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

I'm wondering too, Nats. You do know what the expression means, I take it?

You were the one telling tales down the Pub about my behaviour here, as if I were the board school bully.

I didn't deserve that and I think you know it. All you've done since your arrival on this thread is throw your weight around and shout about everyone and everything - including the victim, the jury, the DNA and the appeal court - being wrong and you being right. Can you not even hear yourself doing it? I'm not expecting you to stop, in fact I mostly enjoy the spectacle. But at the same time I didn't expect the gratuitous swipe while I was minding my own business elsewhere.

Love,

Caz
X

Actually Caz I believe,like Claire does, that you can be very offensive in your rush to judgment about what people are actually saying. I would remind you too that I have as much right as you to be on that thread and that I can join in when I want .I have been posting on Casebook since 2003,thankyou.
Your preferred tactic with me here seems to be to be very selective about picking out the issues I have raised and that you choose to reply to; where,for example have you addressed the two Michael Sherrard QC [Hanratty"s trial barrister] statements, I quoted verbatim on here - quoted verbatim in order to avoid the impression that its just a few posters on here who view the trial and execution of 1961 as deeply flawed and therefore unfair?
So you select the issues you wish to address and avoid addressing other,equally serious issues such as the above Sherrard statement I may have raised -yesterday"s Alphon"s interest in Black Magic and its pointer to a schizoid personality type , or Napper"s "virgin" rapes to take more recent examples , while all the time you adopt this combative , offensive, personalized stance , throwing out questions to me of the "answer me at once type"-- while sarcastically insisting that I never answer any of your questions anyway .
Why can you not approach this discussion in a more courteous manner instead of choosing to make personal attacks or allegations about what you perceive are my attacks on Valerie Storie ,to take one example that you chose to raise yesterday on the Burka thread ?
I , like Claire, have found you to be deeply offensive on such occasions. So ,instead of moralizing about other people"s posts and going round the boards picking on people and making personalized attacks on them ,why not go back and read some of your own replies to people who have not , until now, chosen to engage in any sort of personalized dispute with you and think out why they have responded the way they have?
Best Wishes
Norma

[Graham]

Couple of small points:

1] I can find that Alphon had plenty to say about his claimed Fascism, but can't locate anything to confirm that he had an interest in black magic (unless it was the chocolates, of course...)

2] With regard to Juliana Galves' claim to have seen black gloves at the top of Alphon's suitcase, it's always struck me that this claim was made when the police were hot and heavy on Alphon's trail; once he'd been cleared, the black gloves aren't mentioned again. Apart, of course, from Louise Anderson's claim that a pair of gloves had been stolen from her - Valerie described the gunman as wearing black gloves, so as far as the police were concerned this was a good bit of concrete evidence, providing they could give it some provenance, so to speak. I rather suspect that the Galves' sighting of gloves and the Anderson claim that she'd had a pair pinched originated in the fertile mind of Basil Acott.....

Just thoughts, that's all...

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

1] I can find that Alphon had plenty to say about his claimed Fascism, but can't locate anything to confirm that he had an interest in black magic (unless it was the chocolates, of course...)

Maybe in Jean Justice"s book there is some reference to it.Alphon seems to have involved himself in all sorts of hanky panky and led Justice and his friend Fox a right old dance.

I rather suspect that the Galves' sighting of gloves and the Anderson claim that she'd had a pair pinched originated in the fertile mind of Basil Acott.

I think you may be right There!

[Natalie Severn]

I suppose the description could fit Alphon.

Was your quote from Woffinden? It is strange that he cut out that crucial bit.

Yes,it was from Woffinden---I was a bit surprised I must say when my attention was drawn to the bit he left out.
The trial transcripts would definitely help clarify things like this.

[jimarilyn]

That old black magic.......

1] I can find that Alphon had plenty to say about his claimed Fascism, but can't locate anything to confirm that he had an interest in black magic (unless it was the chocolates, of course...)

There are two references in Paul Foot's book to Alphon's fascination with black magic, Graham. On page 304......(line 6).."He had become interested in witchcraft and black magic."
On page 349 Paul quotes Frank Justice [referring to Alphon]...."And then he talked about black magic as he always used to.....He was more vicious than I ever remember."

Quite a violent character. by the sound of it.

Anyone else think that Deadman's Hill was deliberately chosen beforehand as the intended final destination for MG and VS ?

[RonIpstone]

Anyone else think that Deadman's Hill was deliberately chosen beforehand as the intended final destination for MG and VS ?

Hanratty certainly knew Bedford and probably knew the surrounding area but, as I do not think he intended to kill anyone when he held up MG and VS at the Dorney Reach cornfield, I do not think that the Deadman's Hill name or location has any significance.

[Graham]

There are two references in Paul Foot's book to Alphon's fascination with black magic, Graham. On page 304......(line 6).."He had become interested in witchcraft and black magic."
On page 349 Paul quotes Frank Justice [referring to Alphon]...."And then he talked about black magic as he always used to.....He was more vicious than I ever remember."

Quite a violent character. by the sound of it.

Anyone else think that Deadman's Hill was deliberately chosen beforehand as the intended final destination for MG and VS ?

James,

I have to own up and confess that I usually turn to Woffinden for information regarding the A6....no disrespect to Paul Foot, but Woffinden's book is much more in-depth (usually).

Re: Deadman's Hill, VS says that they first pulled into a lay-by further down the hill, but were ordered to move on.

Graham

[Victor]

Maybe in Jean Justice"s book there is some reference to it.Alphon seems to have involved himself in all sorts of hanky panky and led Justice and his friend Fox a right old dance.

Hi Norma,

Why do you repeatedly resort to this "friend" euphemism? They were partners\lovers and Justice deliberately flirted with Alphon to gain his confidence.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Norma,

Why do you repeatedly resort to this "friend" euphemism? They were partners\lovers and Justice deliberately flirted with Alphon to gain his confidence.

KR,
Vic.

"Repeatedly" Vic ?---I dont think I have ever referred to Fox previously! However I have no problem whatsoever with Justice and Fox being lovers---and I am aware of how Justice tried to gain Alphon"s confidence.
Norma

[Victor]

"Repeatedly" Vic ?---I dont think I have ever referred to Fox previously! However I have no problem whatsoever with Justice and Fox being lovers---and I am aware of how Justice tried to gain Alphon"s confidence.

Hi Norma,

I thought I'd seen you do it several times now, but I've not gone back through the thread to check so if not I apologise.

KR,
Vic.

[Derrick]

According to Professor Keith Simpson's book the bullets that killed Gregsten and wounded Storie were .32 calibre.

This testimony, according to Bob Woffinden was never contested at trial.

Simpson did not perform the operation on Storie to remove any bullets but must have formed this judgement based on his most considered opinion of bullet wounds when he inspected the body of Gregsten and the wounds on Storie.


I am no gun expert but I am sure that a .32 would be an automatic pistol and a .38 would be a hammer action manual firearm with a certain amount of recoil and a noticeable suspended refire time.

Could a .38 have made the entry wounds so close together on both Gregsten AND Storie? I don't think it could unless the killer was a very experienced gun user, or the gun was an automatic which would fire repeatedly once the trigger was pulled. This explains the wounds with more sense as Simpson's examination found.

When the gun was found on the 36A bus it was linked to cases found at Deadman's Hill and declared the murder weapon. This was before Storie was operated on to remove bullets from her upper neck and shoulder.

Were the police that convinced of the providence of the gun that they overlooked the actual bullets in the surviving victim and did not contest Simpson's evidence in court?

Derrick

[Graham]

Hi Derrick,

this has been raised before on this thread, and IMHO I think Simpson just made a mistake, that's all. There are revolvers of 0.32 calibre, but the .38 found on the bus was very definitely and convincingly found to be the gun that fired the shots at Deadmans Hill. The firing-pin mark on the crime-scene cases were precisely the same as those on test cases. Once the bullets had been removed from Valerie the residual rifling patterns on them would have been matched to test rounds fired from the gun.

If there'd been any serious doubt on Sherrard's part that the gun on the bus and the one used at the crime scene were different, he'd have said so during the trial, I'm sure.

Graham

[Zodiac]

I am no gun expert but I am sure that a .32 would be an automatic pistol and a .38 would be a hammer action manual firearm with a certain amount of recoil and a noticeable suspended refire time.

Could a .38 have made the entry wounds so close together on both Gregsten AND Storie? I don't think it could unless the killer was a very experienced gun user, or the gun was an automatic which would fire repeatedly once the trigger was pulled. This explains the wounds with more sense as Simpson's examination found.

Hi Derrick,

The A6 case is NOT my area of expertise at all, but as regards handguns perhaps I could help clearify a few points.

1. .32 revolvers were actually quite common and most of the major arms manufacturers produced them, Colt, Webley, S&W etc.

2. An "automatic" in this sense is, in fact, a misleading shorthand for "Semi-Automatic". One pull of the trigger fires one round, no more. The semi-auto bit is that the exhaust gases/recoil of the fired round blow back the slide, thus ejecting the spend cartridge, chambering the next round and re-cocking the hammer ready for the gun to be fired again, which requires you to pull the trigger again and so on.

3. While "Single Action" revolvers, such as the 1873 Colt SAA that you see in all those old westerns, require the shooter to manually recock the hammer/align the next chamber (one action) after every shot, the trigger only performing the "single action" of releasing the cocked hammer, thereby firing the gun. The double action revolver, by far the most common type of revolver in use since the beginning of the 20th century, requires the shooter only to pull the trigger, which performs two (i.e. double) actions. Cocking the hammer/aligning the next chamber (one action) and releasing the now cocked hammer thus firing the gun. Both semi-autos and double actions can be emptied very rapidly, at such short range one wouldn't exactly be worrying too much about accuracy!

Sorry that I've rambled on! I hope that I've helped in some way and haven't gone and confused the issue even more for you!

Best Wishes,

Zodiac.