a6 murder

[Victor]

Hanratty was actually extremely resourceful and "inventive" when the subject matter was of interest to him ie when he needed or wanted to be.

Hi Norma,

I agree that he seems to pay a great deal of attention when the subject is of interest to him - such as cars and fashionable suits - but that doesn't show intelligence nor imagination, it shows perseverence with the subject.

The car he said had "a red interior and a floor gear change with overdrive".These are examples of perfectly normal intelligence as was his exchanges with Swanwick when he was being cross questioned.

That's just remembering details on a subject he was particularly interested in, not intelligence - otherwise there's the issue of him remembering details like that and not remembering he allegedly slept in a room with a bath in it and a skylight, not a window.

His expertise with cars ought to illustrate too the very unlikely scenario of him having to ask where the gears were in a morris Minor which had the most basic engine on the roads.

This subject has cropped up a number of times and I'm not convinced that Hanratty was familiar with Moggies, I think he would consider them beneath him - way too unfashionable.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

I know that---but that in no way proves it hadnt been placed under the seat the previous day---we have no proof whatever of that only the word of a cleaner who could hardly admit to not having bothered to look that day and would consequently have been in danger of getting in trouble for not doing their job thoroughly enough.

Hi Norma,

I have suggested several times that Edwin Cooke may not have checked under the back seat every day, and have been pounced upon due to the dead rat part of his evidence. He seems quite insistent that he checked daily.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Well in that case why didnt France say so when he was questioned at the trial?

Hi Norma,

Well, there's the distinction between grassing your friend up, and putting the noose round his neck, or the possibility of being charged as an accomplice.

France could have had a million and one reasons for needing to go to the Police to put Hanratty in the frame for this murder couldnt he? We don"t yet know whether France was part of an organised crime. Alphon breathed a huge sigh of relief thats for sure ---[its on tape]....when he learnt France had topped himself.

Eh? Isn't that worse? Now you have France conspiring all along to incriminate someone he considered a friend! But anyway, that's a second reason, only another 999,999 for you to come up with.

What, I wonder ,was Alphon doing when he left his case at Victoria"s "Left luggage" on 22nd August?

That was common behaviour for both Alphon and Hanratty - leaving suitcases at left luggage offices - that's what they are there for!

Alphon I believe, left the Vienna at noon on the 23rd August.Caught the 36A bus at the end of the road to return to Victoria Station where he had left his stuff.And on the way to Victoria Station he deposited the gun and ammunition on said 36A bus,then returned to his locker at Victoria Station to collect bits and pieces to take to the Alexandra Ct Hotel where he was acting suspiciously and was suspected of being the A6 murderer.

There is less evidence against Alphon than against Hanratty, so "believing" him guilty and Hanratty innocent is just ridiculous to me. Where's your actual evidence rather than wild speculations?

Secondly, he was reported for "acting suspiciously" as the Police broadcast a request for hotelliers and landlords\ladies to specifically report people, but he was one of many, and they were not all "suspected of being the A6 murderer" they were reported so they could account for their whereabouts on the night of the murder - which Alphon did, he was in bed in room 6 of the Vienna when the murder occurred.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Vic,

I agree that he seems to pay a great deal of attention when the subject is of interest to him - such as cars and fashionable suits - but that doesn't show intelligence nor imagination, it shows perseverence with the subject.

There are several types of intelligence-verbal reasoning,spatial etc. We are told Hanratty could not read or write,so on a test requiring written verbal reasoning proficiency its fair to say, he would have probably scored poorly. Hanratty could actually read and was seen reading the newspapers about himself by several observers and when on remand.He could clearly read environmental print too -road signs to the North West etc .He was able to write too ,apparently,contrary to what he told people about himself and this was observed by warders ,although he seems not to have been a confident writer who had difficulty spelling as seen in the reversals he employed when writing some multitsyllabic words-examples are in Paul Foot"s book which isnt indexed very well so difficult to find and quote from right now.Reversal usually indicates some form of dyslexia which has nothing to do with intelligence.It can also indicate sound confusion with central vowels etc in words.This is frequently caused by intermittent hearing loss in childhood due to adenoidal blockage.This can also wreak havoc with the acquisition of reading and writing skills and is frequently undiagnosed still,due to its intermittent nature.

I think ,when discussing Hanratty"s intelligence or perceived lack of it ,its important to recognise that his evacuation from his doting parents at the age of seven may have contributed to a number pf his later difficulties at school,especially involving the acquisition of literacy skills [and usually it affects numeracy too especially computation skills ].So there we have a blue print for failure in the interrupted education of a seven year old child during war torn England in 1944.I am certain this would have affected his later school failure anyway as well as his ability to concentrate on the subject matter of the school curriculum.

Sherrard saw him daily over many months and his assessment of him was that he was articulate and "quite up to the mark" when it came to repartee,with which I would concur, having read several of his exchanges with Swanwick ,a man trained in "getting the upper hand " in argument,and of greatly privileged education by comparison.


Hanratty"s education was interrupted when he was "evacuated",this was when he was seven,the age when literacy acquisition is considered to be at its optimum for most children.Such interruption right in the middle of literacy maturation,would have been potentially very damaging and very likely to set back the language subskills of reading and writing considerably,especially in the context of general insecurity and parental separation.Much of reading acquisition depends on a child"s confidence in handling books,having books read to them etc.This is where,in a situation of upheaval from parents and familiar teachers Hanratty at the age of seven in particular would have been at a disadvantage.
Mechanical skills would belong to spatial intelligence---like fitting a jigsaw puzzle together.He had either average or above average skill in this area as proven by the rapidity which which he acquired new information such as driving a Jaguar which he surely would not have been familiar with during the previous 3 years ie up until March 1961 as he was in prison.

[Victor]

Could the entry in the register book of the Vienna to the effect that Alphon had paid Ł1 7s 6d as a 'deposit' be more likely to be a deposit of one night's payment, with Alphon being given the option to extend his stay by making further payments, than the tortured explanation given in Nudds's second statement?

Hi Ron,

That's possible, but I'd rather ignore Nudds completely than get embroiled in his fabrications. I still find it ironic and hypocritical that the "Alphon is guilty" believers use Nudds as the foundation for their beliefs.

Was it ever established that single occupants of Room 24 would have to pay a double room rate is the management failed to find a room-mate for them? it seems a strange system and one which you would think any single occupant would not accept. It does not seem to have applied to Hanratty who had the room to himself without paying any more than the standard rate for a single room.

The entire system of finances at the Vienna seems backwards - surely you'd expect to have to pay more for a single room than sharing a large room - or possibly sharing a large room. I can believe that you'd pay more for a large room to yourself - the single-occupancy supplement as they call it these days, but if you were prepared to share then that wouldn't apply.

Weird.

KR,
Vic.

[babybird67]

[QUOTE=Natalie Severn;155917]Ron said:[QUOTE]I am not sure how Dixie's evidence of Hanratty saying that the back seat of the bus was a good place to get rid of unwanted stuff can be said to be 'suspicious' as Hanratty himself admitted saying this to him.

On the other hand you have to admit it is a total betrayal of his "friend" to be standing up in court as a witness for the prosecution in a capital case where his friend faced death by hanging and where his friend vehemently protested his innocence to the last .
His suicide belongs to a long line of those who have betrayed their friends since biblical times ,usually for some ulterior motive.Thatswhat it smacks of to me.

In much the same way as 'Uncle Jim' betrayed France's hospitality and trust by taking his sixteen year old daughter and sleeping with her without protection behind Victoria Station perhaps?

I do not believe friendship should ever come between doing the right thing. It must have been horrific for the France family to discover that a man they had helped, housed, befriended, was actually capable of murder and rape...when you discover one of your friends is actually not the person you thought them to be, why is telling the truth about them any sort of betrayal? France would have been betraying the truth as well as the a6 victims by keeping quiet about what he knew, and as he was only confirming what Hanratty himself had admitted to, how can that be any sort of betrayal?

I believe he committed suicide because he knew his life would have been filled with accusations and recriminations like those on these boards...he MUST have procured the gun or known about it (there's no evidence for that) or he was a Judas type character. Why should honour amongst theives be any sort of honour? Why should he cover up for a murderer and rapist?

In my opinion, France did the honorable thing in speaking to the Police. He would have been a lesser man if he had not. And I feel sad for him that he was driven to suicide by, in my opinion, the sort of comments which without evidence link him to this heinous crime. Plus it always makes me laugh that Hanratty's evidential links to the crime are ignored yet links made from fantasy or could have's are created to try to implicate others.

[jimarilyn]

Hi Vic,


There are several types of intelligence-verbal reasoning,spatial etc. We are told Hanratty could not read or write,so on a test requiring written verbal reasoning proficiency its fair to say, he would have probably scored poorly. Hanratty could actually read and was seen reading the newspapers about himself by several observers and when on remand.He could clearly read environmental print too -road signs to the North West etc .He was able to write too ,apparently,contrary to what he told people about himself and this was observed by warders ,although he seems not to have been a confident writer who had difficulty spelling as seen in the reversals he employed when writing some multitsyllabic words-examples are in Paul Foot"s book which isnt indexed very well so difficult to find and quote from right now.Reversal usually indicates some form of dyslexia which has nothing to do with intelligence.

The examples you may be referring to Norma are on page 90 of Bob Woffinden's book. His lawyers set him some spelling and arithmetic tests in which he misspelt the words 'solicitor' and 'excursion' as 'sleter' and 'exchner' respectively. This suggests that he may very well have suffered from some form of dyslexia.

[jimarilyn]

RonIpstone
We're still awaiting your response Re: posts #7110 & #7128

An apology would be a good starting point.

Methinks you might be waiting a long time Black Rabbit.

[RonIpstone]

Hi Ron,

May I offer you a warm welcome to this most fascinating of threads. You come across as a very level headed and impartial person and I hope you continue to offer your thoughts on the matter.

Hello Jimarilyn

Thanks for the kind words. I shall endeavour to put the argument fearlessly. I will let you have my thoughts on various matters appertaining to this case so soon as they occur to me.

Ron

[Black Rabbit]

Methinks you might be waiting a long time Black Rabbit.

Why do you say that???

Hello Jimarilyn

Thanks for the kind words. I shall endeavour to put the argument fearlessly. I will let you have my thoughts on various matters appertaining to this case so soon as they occur to me.

Ron

Then I'm sure that you'll be only too happy to respond to my post #7110 please.

[NickB]

I'm sure that you'll be only too happy to respond to my post #7110 please.

Ron was asked the same question earlier in the thread and replied to it in post 6056.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Baby Bird,

In much the same way as 'Uncle Jim' betrayed France's hospitality and trust by taking his sixteen year old daughter and sleeping with her without protection behind Victoria Station perhaps?

I understand your point of view on this matter but even in the sixties young adults who had reached the age of consent ,which Carol France had, did quite frequently experiment with sexual intercource . Charles France may not have liked it but France himself worked very closely with gangsters in Soho and was himself a small time crook ,he had also been recently sacked from his job as Soho bouncer at the "Rehearsal Club " where,it needs to be remembered , he must have witnessed many vulnerable young women being exploited by men, I think he must have had one rule for his own daughters and quite a different one for his ex colleagues in the Rehearsal Club, so rather a hypocritical attitude to take if that was the reason he told the police about his friend"s comment about the back seat of a bus. . Finally we simply do not know whether the couple "went the full way" or whether a method of contraception was used for example young people at the time ,which was well before Aids became such a scare,--was that of "withrawal".We know he did use this method because the police pathologist removed such semen stains from his trousers.

One last thought on Charles France.If he "knew" all these things about Hanratty and the gun---why didnt he say so at the trial? Why do we know so little about this other than that Hanratty had told him the back seat of a bus was a good place to get rid of rubbish---a place known by every small time crook in london ?

[Natalie Severn]

The examples you may be referring to Norma are on page 90 of Bob Woffinden's book. His lawyers set him some spelling and arithmetic tests in which he misspelt the words 'solicitor' and 'excursion' as 'sleter' and 'exchner' respectively. This suggests that he may very well have suffered from some form of dyslexia.

Thanks James, we rely on lots of different methods as children to get to grips with the written word.Hanratty is using phonetics here, as a tool, but has left vowels sounds out and such elision may well suggest he could not discriminate very accurately between sounds probably due to the faulty listening skills he had developed as a child who suffered intermittent hearing loss [adenoidal] ---much more common than is thought especially after colds and catarrh. Had he had help with both auditory and visual discrimination exercises he would no doubt have begun to rectify the difficulty quickly.

[Victor]

he must have witnessed many vulnerable young women being exploited by men

Hi Norma,

Quite a few of them by James Hanratty - Mary Pryor I think her name was.

One last thought on Charles France.If he "knew" all these things about Hanratty and the gun---why didnt he say so at the trial?

I gave a couple of reasons earlier:-
1. Fear of incriminating himself.
2. Loyalty - not wanting to completely betray his friend. Especially not wanting to bring about his death.

Maybe this is why Dixie killed himself, maybe he thought he had revealed too much and he couldn't live with the thought of have been in some way responsible for Hanratty's execution.

KR,
Vic.

[babybird67]

Hi Baby Bird,



I understand your point of view on this matter but even in the sixties young adults who had reached the age of consent ,which Carol France had, did quite frequently experiment with sexual intercource .

I am sure they did, but not with older men whom were involved with their family in the honorary role of Uncle.

, I think he must have had one rule for his own daughters and quite a different one for his ex colleagues in the Rehearsal Club, so rather a hypocritical attitude to take if that was the reason he told the police about his friend"s comment about the back seat of a bus.

Quite. Most people find the exploitation of their own family, especially children, to be a more emotional subject than that of those more removed from them. I did not say this was the reason he told the Police. I was merely pointing out that Hanratty had betrayed the friendship France had offered him through the treatment of his daughter...it was perfectly reasonable and i would argue expected for France to co-coperate with the Police, whether this reflected well on his 'friend' or not...they weren't investigating petty crime, but rape and murder. Getting to the truth in those matters far far outweighs considerations of friendship or loyalty to anyone accused of them....would you argue for example that Maxine Carr 'betrayed' her lover when she finally came clean about his whereabouts the night those little Soham girls were murdered? You are condemning France for being honest here...yet we all condemned Carr for not being so. Sometimes loyalty can be extremely misguided and it certainly would have been in the Hanratty case, in my opinion.

Finally we simply do not know whether the couple "went the full way" or whether a method of contraception was used for example young people at the time ,which was well before Aids became such a scare,--was that of "withrawal".We know he did use this method because the police pathologist removed such semen stains from his trousers.

It makes no difference. He was seeing several women. Carole was a child and he was an older man in the role of Uncle under her father's roof. He exploited her, whether it was a full blown sexual experience or anything else, in my opinion.

One last thought on Charles France.If he "knew" all these things about Hanratty and the gun---why didnt he say so at the trial? Why do we know so little about this other than that Hanratty had told him the back seat of a bus was a good place to get rid of rubbish---a place known by every small time crook in london ?

Knew all what things? He knew what Hanratty had told him about where he disposed of items he did not want...that is what France told the Police, and Hanratty admitted it. As far as I am aware there is no evidence that he knew anything else at all about the gun, including where it came from...that is why I find the accusations against him and the suppositions that he must have been involved all very sad, and why I believe he killed himself.