a6 murder

[NickB]

How about this for your Christmas list? The Live Jam album by John and Yoko, originally twinned with ‘Some Time In New York City’ as a double album set.

The first track is ‘Don’t Worry, Kyoko’ with Yoko on vocals. After“John, I love you!” the lyrics go:

“Britain, you killed Hanratty, you murderer!
You killed Hanratty!

HANRATTY!
HANRATTY!
HANRATTY!”

[julie q]

I wonder when this conversation between Hanratty and Langdale could have taken place since - despite Langdale's claim that he and Hanratty took exercise regularly together each day - othjer inmates and warders testified that Hanratty and Langdale hardly exchanged a word and certainly spent no significant time together at all.

Additionally - it makes no sense at all for a man who protests his innocense so vehemently to everyone around him - to have 'confessed' to a man like Langdale - a well-known grass.

It's also slightly worrying for a man given the task of examining the case on behalf of the Home Office to have got the name of one of the key witnesses wrong in making a conclusion about the integrity of his testimony.

I have just read this post about Dick Taverne . Lord Taverne wrote an article in the Daily Mail in 12 March 1998 restating his belief in Hanratty's guilt, he had been a junior home office minister for several years in Harold Wilson's Labour goverment and had been supportive of the Hawser report. He stated in his article that he found the Langdale evidence convincing because it contained detail not in the public domain at the time his statement was given.
and that the London criminal John Mcvicar had told him that Hanratty was undoubtly guilty.
I sent a letter to Lord Taverne at the time suggesting that his article had been inaccurate,the detail given by Langdale had in fact been published in several newspapers.
To his credit Lord Taverne replied to me and in the most courteous manner ,While he stiil felt he had been correct at the time to support the Hawser report He had this to say
""I am afraid my article was not very satisfactory .I was rung up by the Mail and gave my best recollection on something I had not looked at for about 28 years and had no time to check and then found to my suprise they had turned it into an article .Some of it I corrected before it went out .Some errors remained.
Of course the Mcvicar statement was not evidence ,so it was an error to have quoted it .On reading Hawser I am reminded that Hanratty stressed his innocence to 2 other prisoners who were called by the defence "
Two weeks later Paul Foot wrote an article in Private Eye Under the heading Lord Taverne ---What A Dick, in which he strongly criticised him for his Daily Mail Article.

[Natalie Severn]

Many Thanks to Simon and Julie reminding us of the 1995 articles which I have still not read.
Meanwhile I am aware that one or two posts indicate I have not made myself clear enough on an issue.

Vic,
The "eye witness" testimony I was referring to is the eye witness testimony of the victim of a violent assault or rape, not that of eye witnesses remembering something that happened that they were not involved in or that was not particularly traumatic to witness at the time . It is with regard to the victim themselves remembering their assailant accurately from when the event was talking place that I was quoting from the recent American statistics gathered from one state only .

In my view Sherrard was right to ignore the nonsense spouted by the Rhyl witnesses, and it is right that we should likewise ignore them in pretty much the same way as we would ignore the local 'sightings' of the Loch Ness Monster

Right.So why not have done with it and ignore all the witness statements by proven liars viz Nudds;Langland; Anderson?
Lets throw out too the utter nonsense of Skillett"s statement [like the police had done incidently when they had Alphon in custody and were only using Blackhall to help with the identikit].
Blackhall ,importantly, was much closer to the driver of the Morris Minor and got a proper view and insisted the driver he saw looked "nothing like Hanratty"
Lets ignore Trower too ,lets bin that utter nonsense---he was just making it up as he went along as Hogan,his mate ,had inferred.According to Paddy Hogan he was far too late that morning to have seen the driver,so he was either "imagining things "--at best-- or a liar at worst---anyway no way,could he have seen the driver of the Morris Minor that morning at the time he said he did.

But you are being disingenuous aren"t you Vic?
Ofcourse Sherrard had problems.You know full well he did! He was desperately trying to plead for his client"s life in the final weeks of the trial when Hanratty decided he had nothing to lose but tell the truth about Rhyl---even though he was in a complete fog about those couple of days ---the 50 year old landlady with the green bath in her house and no front garden---how would anyone ever find her?Even his mate had moved his taxi from the place he remembered ,and he hadnt managed to track him in the hope he could point him to where he could get some much needed cash from the sale of his bits and pieces.
Can you remember everything you did six months before with crystal clarity Vic?
Neither Sherrard nor Kleinman had sufficient time anyway to follow up these witnesses in the thorough way they needed to be followed through. The trial was almost over.
But hurrah for Nudds and Langland !They both had such " versatile" memories didnt they just?----just give the go ahead and they would say anything Mr Acott wanted them to say!
And didn"t they just come up trumps , Bless them!
Where would British justice have been without them .
So Thank God for Nudds and Langland!

[Victor]

The "eye witness" testimony I was referring to is the eye witness testimony of the victim of a violent assault or rape, not that of eye witnesses remembering something that happened that they were not involved in or that was not particularly traumatic to witness at the time . It is with regard to the victim themselves remembering their assailant accurately from when the event was talking place that I was quoting from the recent American statistics gathered from one state only .

Hi Norma,

The Rhyl witnesses were eye witnesses, from your post I take it you are implying that the trauma of the experience would worsen the memory, but I believe the opposite to be the case, the trauma focusses the mind, whereas the Rhyl witnesses have no reason to remember one man enquiring about lodgings at a guest house 6 months previously in the busy holiday season.

Right.So lets ignore all the witness statements by proven liars viz Nudds;Langland; Anderson;

Why exclude Hanratty from that list?
Why include Anderson? I'm not saying I trust her, just why is she a proven liar?
Also, it's Langdale.

Lets throw out too the utter nonsense of Skillett"s statement

Why? He was driving, focused and alert, and had issue with the driver - shouting obsenities at him.

Lets ignore Trower.According to Paddy Hogan he was far too late to have seen the driver,or "imagining things "at best or a liar at worst---anyway no way,could he have seen the driver of the Morris Minor.

Why believe Hogan over Trower?

But you are being disingenuous aren"t you Vic?

I think you mean Ron!

the 50 year old landlady with the green bath in her house and no front garden

Yeah, Mrs Jones - who took money and illegally let people sleep in her bathroom, why not ignore her too?

Even his mate had moved his taxi from the place he remembered

He was dodgy too wasn't he? Why not ignore him too?

Can you remember everything you did six months before with crystal clarity Vic?

Not crystal clarity, but I remember the major factors like staying in 2 different rooms, wandering round in the dark asking lots of people for lodgings when I'd already got a fallback position, trying to fence jewelry on the streets (and not just at a billiard hall in Liverpool), &tc.

Neither Sherrard nor Kleinman had sufficient time anyway to follow up these witnesses in the thorough way they needed to be followed through. The trial was almost over.

Now you are trying to turn the tables in classic "ambush alibi" style. Hanratty gave the late alibi but fortunately didn't get away with murder.

But hurrah for Nudds and Langland !They both had such " versatile" memories didnt they just?----just give the go ahead and they would say anything Mr Acott wanted them to say!
And didn"t they just come up trumps , Bless them!

I agree, let's ignore the two of them and just use Hanratty's evidence that he stayed in the double bed in the basement room of the Vienna where the cartridge cases were later found.

Where would British justice have been without them .

Exactly where it is now.
Michael Sherrard: The wrong man was not hanged.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

How about this for your Christmas list? The Live Jam album by John and Yoko, originally twinned with ‘Some Time In New York City’ as a double album set.

The first track is ‘Don’t Worry, Kyoko’ with Yoko on vocals. After“John, I love you!” the lyrics go:

“Britain, you killed Hanratty, you murderer!
You killed Hanratty!

HANRATTY!
HANRATTY!
HANRATTY!”

Hi Nick,

It was John Lennon that got my mother interested in the case, and I read her copy of Foot which sparked my interest.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Vic,
I am not going through your post point by point -at least not right now as I have to go out.
Unfortunately victims of violent assault including rape have been proven to be wrong in their identification time and again.The statistics I gave on this thread some time ago from the American state found 215 inaccurate eye witness statements leading to wrongful identification of a suspect in one state alone recently.I will find it again and put it on the thread.

I was not talking about Mrs Jones,specifically but people who corroborated each other such as Mrs Walker,Mrs Betty Davies ,her mother in law Mrs Margaret Davies and Mrs Ivy Vincent.Mrs Betty Davies and her husband Noel remembered the incident well. She had been alone in the house,her husband was out and a young man called "without a suitcase".She had not liked it that he called so late on in the day---it was getting dark,asking for digs yet with no case.
It was remembered also as Tuesday 22nd August ,by this particular couple because Mrs Betty Davies was recovering from losing a still born baby and had only just come from the nursing home where she had been recovering.However she went straight through the back door to South Kinmel Street to see her mother in law,Mrs Margaret Davies,who was with Margaret Walker who had also spoken to Hanratty about Digs. Mrs Vincent also spoke to the young man,neatly dressed in a dark suit 5ft 8.She had seen him speaking to Mrs Walker.Both directed him back to the parallel street,Kinmel Street.
Also you are quoting totally decontextually about Michael Sherrard and what he said. Read his book and you will see he is still to the time of writing the book ie 2009, very,very doubtful about Hanratty"s guilt and every scrap of "evidence" the police ever came up with about Hanratty ---right up to the knickers and hanky that were,he says, "kept[?]on ice for 31 years-why,he wonders? Why?
Moreover Michael Sherrard totally denounces the behaviour of the police on the case , he states they had 'tampered with witness statements," withheld evidence , altered Hanratty"s statements making him out to be a liar and thus ,reading between the lines,were so determined to get a conviction they therefore used proven and dishonest means to build a case against Hanratty to present to the prosecution.He doesnt say a word against Swanwick,who one is left to believe,only used the "evidence he was presented with.
Oxford in fact lost a case against the Liverpool police woman for "fabricating documents" against her, so such questionable practices as Sherrard points out would seem to have been nothing new.

[babybird67]

hi Vic

Hi Norma,

The Rhyl witnesses were eye witnesses, from your post I take it you are implying that the trauma of the experience would worsen the memory, but I believe the opposite to be the case, the trauma focusses the mind, whereas the Rhyl witnesses have no reason to remember one man enquiring about lodgings at a guest house 6 months previously in the busy holiday season.


Why exclude Hanratty from that list?
Why include Anderson? I'm not saying I trust her, just why is she a proven liar?
Also, it's Langdale.


Why? He was driving, focused and alert, and had issue with the driver - shouting obsenities at him.


Why believe Hogan over Trower?


I think you mean Ron!


Yeah, Mrs Jones - who took money and illegally let people sleep in her bathroom, why not ignore her too?


He was dodgy too wasn't he? Why not ignore him too?


Not crystal clarity, but I remember the major factors like staying in 2 different rooms, wandering round in the dark asking lots of people for lodgings when I'd already got a fallback position, trying to fence jewelry on the streets (and not just at a billiard hall in Liverpool), &tc.


Now you are trying to turn the tables in classic "ambush alibi" style. Hanratty gave the late alibi but fortunately didn't get away with murder.


I agree, let's ignore the two of them and just use Hanratty's evidence that he stayed in the double bed in the basement room of the Vienna where the cartridge cases were later found.


Exactly where it is now.
Michael Sherrard: The wrong man was not hanged.

KR,
Vic.

Sorry but this is simply a round of applause for an excellent post. I know that's sometimes frowned upon but i couldn't resist this time.

Jen

[Victor]

Unfortunately victims of violent assault including rape have been proven to be wrong in their identification time and again. The statistics I gave on this thread some time ago from the American state found 215 inaccurate eye witness statements leading to wrongful identification of a suspect in one state alone recently.I will find it again and put it on the thread.

Hi Norma,

A couple of points:-
1. Your statistics are meaningless without context - i.e., quoting the percentage figure, or the relating number of accurate statements. 215 might be a large~ish number, but is that different witnesses, or different crimes? Comparing to how many violent crimes in total for that state?
2. You also seemingly jump from victims eye witness statements to eye witness statements, the latter being relevent to the Rhyl witnesses whereas the former are not. It is uncertain whether they separate out witnesses who see the assault, and those who witness later events, and those who are victims, we can only meaningfully compare if the last 2 groups comparative figures are used.

I was not talking about Mrs Jones,specifically but people who corroborated each other

You singled out a few of the less savoury prosecution witnesses, yet ignored the lass savoury defence witnesses - why?

Also you are quoting totally decontextually about Michael Sherrard and what he said. Read his book and you will see he is still to the time of writing the book ie 2009, very,very doubtful about Hanratty"s guilt and every scrap of "evidence" the police ever came up with about Hanratty ---right up to the knickers and hanky that were,he says, "kept[?]on ice for 31 years-why,he wonders? Why?

But that fact is innaccurate! He is wrong. Is he lying or is he misremembering? What else has he misremembered or lied about? You give a perfect example of another innaccurate statement later...

Moreover Michael Sherrard totally denounces the behaviour of the police on the case , he states they had 'tampered with witness statements, withheld evidence , altered Hanratty"s statements making him out to be a liar

and thus ,reading between the lines,were so determined to get a conviction they therefore used proven and dishonest means to build a case against Hanratty to present to the prosecution.

And thus, reading between the lines, Sherrard is either dishonestly hyping his book to promote sales or his memory has become so confused and innaccurate that the rest of the book isn't worth the paper it is written on. Which is a real shame because knowing what was actually going on would have been very useful if it had been accurate.

KR,
Vic.

[jimarilyn]

Why include Anderson? I'm not saying I trust her, just why is she a proven liar?

You've got a very selective memory Victor. Louise Anderson told Mirror reporter Edward Vale on October 9th 1961 [ in an interview that was very complimentary to Hanratty] that she was not scared of Hanratty. However, 3 months later she told Michael Sherrard at the Bedford trial ...."I was forced to give him money ( approx £600) . Things were left and they were given to Scotland Yard because I was frightened of the man."

So yes, she was a proven liar and totally untrustworthy.

[babybird67]

You've got a very selective memory Victor. Louise Anderson told Mirror reporter Edward Vale on October 9th 1961 [ in an interview that was very complimentary to Hanratty] that she was not scared of Hanratty. However, 3 months later she told Michael Sherrard at the Bedford trial ...."I was forced to give him money ( approx £600) . Things were left and they were given to Scotland Yard because I was frightened of the man.".

So yes, she was a proven liar and totally untrustworthy.

Unlike Hanratty of course, who always told the truth...

apart from when he signed into hotels under assumed names, presumably for totally innocent purposes of course...

oh and apart from when he was burglariing and robbing people...

oh and stealing cars...

oh and telling his parents it was safe for them to invest their entire fortune in him because honest he was going to go straight from now on...

and apart from when he was fencing stolen goods to said Louise Anderson...

and apart from when he was 'really' in Rhyl, when he said he was in Liverpool...

and apart from when he was raping and murdering people.

Honestly. Get a grip. Apply your standards to people UNIFORMLY not SELECTIVELY. I am all for disbelieving criminals, but it applies to ALL proven liars, not just the ones you don't seem to like.

[jimarilyn]

Honestly. Get a grip. Apply your standards to people UNIFORMLY not SELECTIVELY. I am all for disbelieving criminals, but it applies to ALL proven liars, not just the ones you don't seem to like.

Hey listen here, little Miss angry Baby, I was responding to a question from Victor. Judging from the content of your post you should have been a comedienne.

[jimarilyn]

How about this for your Christmas list? The Live Jam album by John and Yoko, originally twinned with ‘Some Time In New York City’ as a double album set.

The first track is ‘Don’t Worry, Kyoko’ with Yoko on vocals. After“John, I love you!” the lyrics go:

“Britain, you killed Hanratty, you murderer!
You killed Hanratty!

HANRATTY!
HANRATTY!
HANRATTY!”

Yes, a very perceptive genius was my friend John.

[Natalie Severn]

Yes, a very perceptive genius was my friend John.

John Lennon-your friend? I am impressed.

[NickB]

Mr and Mrs Hanratty with John & Yoko

Photo from the Express.

[babybird67]

thanks )

Hey listen here, little Miss angry Baby, I was responding to a question from Victor. Judging from the content of your post you should have been a comedienne.

No comments on why you apply such hypocritcal standards in your evaluations then?

No. Didn't think it could possibly be justified. Would sure as hell be interesting to see you try though lol.