a6 murder

[Graham]

you what!!???

Check out those dots, Larue. They're meant to signify irony, sarcasm, what you will.

Anyway, my mom told me always to trust a copper........

Mind 'ow yer go, sir.

Graham

[Graham]

Hi Tony and welcome to the thread.

Alphon was occasionally very successful at the dogs, but seems to have just frittered his winnings away most of the time. Also, it's known he successfully sued the police for wrongful arrest, but I can't recall ever seeing how much compensation he received and if it was an out-of-court settlement. I also recall that he may have successfully sued a newspaper, and finally he must have been paid something by the papers for various interviews. Significantly, he only revealed his bank-statements to Paul Foot after sufficient time had elapsed for his, Alphon's, bank to have destroyed the records as to the origin(s) of all that dosh.

I don't think money mattered too much to Alphon, who openly admitted that he scrounged off his mother when he needed funds. And when he had a big win at the dogs he seems to have just lost it all again. He did like to stay at reasonable hotels occasionally, but also liked to leave without paying.

I've sometimes wondered if Alphon perhaps blackmailed Jean Justice, maybe over the latter's homosexuality.

Cheers,

Graham

[Steve]

Hello Tony

Where Alphon’s money came from has perplexed everyone for a very long time, and gave the pro-Hanratty campaign another reason for believing Alphon to be the real killer. He must have made some of this money for doing the A6 job!

He was paid £1,000 by the Daily Express for telling his own story about his arrest as a suspect for the A6 murder, this story was published in the Express on 4th October 1961.

At about the same time he took out a number of writs against news papers and also against Bob Acott. It seems he had a tenacious lawyer who made a lot of money for Alphon.

Kind regards,
Steve

[Steve]

I've sometimes wondered if Alphon perhaps blackmailed Jean Justice, maybe over the latter's homosexuality.

Hi Graham

It would be very interesting to know more about the relationship between Justice and Alphon, and also Fox's viewpoint on their relationship.

Alphon claimed to have hated homosexuals, and with his nazi-tendencies he probably despised Justice and Fox at first. Although it seems he later warmed towards Justice at least, as they often sat in a public bar with hands clasped together. Not a common sight today, let alone the 1960s!

KR
Steve

[Christine]

Police corruption doesn't usually involve messing about with brutal murder cases, but this may have been an exception! Unfortunately, the police are subject to wishful thinking, and their position of authority has been known to give them a false sense of justification. If the missing document didn't implicate suspect A, then that MUST have been because John and Val were in shock, right?

[Steve]

Hello Christine

The police did tamper with the evidence, this is a fact. Parts of Hanratty’s first statement were rewritten by Ken Oxford after the second statement. Hanratty told Sherrard several times that the police version of his statements was inaccurate – they included things he hadn’t said, and missed out things he had said.

It’s very unlikely the Kerr document went missing accidentally!

Kind regards,
Steve

[jimarilyn]

Prophetic words from James Hanratty

The first time that Michael Sherrard met with James Hanratty was at the court hearing of October 23rd 1961. Hanratty said the following to Sherrard :-

"The charge is ridiculous. I am not that kind of person. I don't even like talking about it. It upsets me. If I had done it I would have taken my own life rather than do this to my mother. What worries me is that ACOTT IS OUT FOR PROMOTION"

21 months later in July 1963 Acott WAS indeed promoted.

[Steve]

I have a copy of Acott's Central Record of Service and yes he was promoted to DCS on 23rd July 1963. He took up his appointment in the Research and Planning department at the Metroplitan Police on 1st August 1963 where he stayed for 14 months. His monthly pay from 1st August 1963 was 202 pounds 18 shillings and 4 pence.

[larue]

Interesting article, especially the last paragraph.

evenin' all

this is something that i have found a cause for concern for many years, namely the insistance of councel that a question is answered with a 'yes' or 'no', thus curtailing the telling of the whole truth, and possibly creating a totally false impression in the minds of the jury.

if a witness knowingly witholds evidence, they are committing an offence, morally if not legally, so how can this practice of forcing a witness to withold information be allowed in court?

[Christine]

evenin' all

this is something that i have found a cause for concern for many years, namely the insistance of councel that a question is answered with a 'yes' or 'no', thus curtailing the telling of the whole truth, and possibly creating a totally false impression in the minds of the jury.

if a witness knowingly witholds evidence, they are committing an offence, morally if not legally, so how can this practice of forcing a witness to withold information be allowed in court?

The counsel for the defense has an obligation to present the case in the best possible light, and the counsel for the prosecution has the obligation to present the case in the worst possible light. The prosecutors are required to present all evidence to the defense so that the defense can ask these questions and thus bring the whole truth to light (or not, as the case may be).

However the defense is not always obligated to give evidence to the prosecutor because the suspect is not required to incriminate himself. However if all the witnesses are obeying the law (as you mention above) the prosecutor should know everything that a witness has to say already.

At least that's how it is in the US.

It is true that sometimes something a witness thinks is important is not heard in court because the both sides think that it's not helpful to their case or perhaps the storyline they've developed for their case. Anyhow, it's not the witnesses responsibility to decide what's important and what's not, and if something obviously important is not brought out, that's grounds for an appeal.

[Limehouse]

Hello Graham and indeed all contributors to this forum which I came across a few days ago.
I was 10 years old at the time of the A6 murder and funnily enough I lived on the A6 but in Derbyshire.
When we went to play out that summer my mother used to say: “Be back by eight, they still haven’t caught the A6 murderer yet”. In our naïve and innocent young days we thought the murderer was hiding out somewhere on our road. We didn’t know it ran virtually the length of the country. I can remember my Dad and Granddad discussing it in the car on the way to the football. I can remember JH being arrested but can not recall the execution.
I became somewhat obsessed with the case in 1971 when Paul foot’s book was serialised in, I think, the Sun newspaper. He convinced me of Hanratty’s innocence. I have copies of all the main books except for Miller’s which I only found out about whilst reading this discussion. I am trying to locate a copy at the moment.
I hope I can join in and add to the discussion. I still have serious doubts about Hanratty’s guilt and so obviously have concerns about the DNA but then Michael Hanratty and Bob Woffinden seem to have remained silent since the results were made public.

One thing you may be able to help me with is the monies paid into Peter Alphon’s bank account shortly after the murder. We know it was over £7,500.00 and some would have come from press interviews but what of the majority of it? Has there ever been a satisfactory explanation as to where it came from? Somebody said it would be the equivalent of £100,000.00 in today’s money.
Well I don’t know how actual money values have increased but a friend of mine bought a bungalow in 1961 for £1,500.00 and those houses today sell for £300,000.00 or thereabouts. His wages as a qualified gas fitter were £11.00 per week. So £7,500.00 could have bought 5 bungalows and the current value would be £1,500,000.00
So Alphon had an enormous amount of money from somewhere and I would suggest he didn’t have enough stake money to win it at the dogs. So where did it come from?

Tony

Hello Tony, welcome to the thread.

Like you, I was a young child at the time of the A6 murder (I was 3, almost 4). I grew up entirely convinced that Hanratty was innocent. Even when the DNA evidence pointed to Hanratty, I was doubtful.

Then I started contributing to this thread - with people who remember the case more than I do and have studied it closely. Gradually, I came to realise that I had read books and articles that tended to paint Hanratty in a positive light. I began to wonder whether there was another side to Hanratty - one that perhaps even his parents and brothers never saw.

I still have a few nagging doubts. There are many strange twists and turns to this tale - and I am still half convinced that if Hanratty did it, he was hired to do so - but then I start to think in a different direction. Hanratty was not the brightest of chaps and he could well have found himself in this difficult situation and just kept making everything worse.

i don't want to think of him as capable of this terrible crime - but someone did it - and the only man with his DNA on the remaining evidence is Hanratty.
I hope we can enjoy exchanging posts with you.

[jimarilyn]

[QUOTE=Tony;23758]
"One thing you may be able to help me with is the monies paid into Peter Alphon’s bank account shortly after the murder. We know it was over £7,500.00 and some would have come from press interviews but what of the majority of it? Has there ever been a satisfactory explanation as to where it came from? Somebody said it would be the equivalent of £100,000.00 in today’s money.
Well I don’t know how actual money values have increased but a friend of mine bought a bungalow in 1961 for £1,500.00 and those houses today sell for £300,000.00 or thereabouts. His wages as a qualified gas fitter were £11.00 per week. So £7,500.00 could have bought 5 bungalows and the current value would be £1,500,000.00
So Alphon had an enormous amount of money from somewhere and I would suggest he didn’t have enough stake money to win it at the dogs. So where did it come from?"



Hi Tony,

Very good post and a very good question. It was me (post 235) suggesting that £5,000 in 1961 would equate to at least £100,000 today. It's probably nearer to £150,000. Whatever amount it's closer to, it was as you say an enormous sum of money, especially considering the fact that in the previous 4or 5 years Alphon had only done very occasional casual work. I agree wholeheartedly that he wouldn't have had the required stake money to have won it on the greyhounds. I would guess that at the most he won just a few hundred pounds on the dogs (not to mention the inevitable losses). Paul Foot did meticulous research for his book and reckons about £5,000 is unaccounted for. My guess is that it came from a certain 50 year old business-man (whose name could mean a large water jug) for services rendered.

[Steve]

Jimarilyn

If your certain 50 year old business man paid Alphon £5,000 for services rendered, and those services involved a gun, a Morris Minor, and a reign of terror over Valerie and Michael, then please explain to me why Alphon’s DNA wasn’t found on the fabric fragments.

Also, please explain why messrs Sweeney and Mansfield agreed that, based on the DNA evidence, Alphon could not possibly have been the A6 murderer.

Kind regards,
Steve

[jimarilyn]

If your certain 50 year old business man paid Alphon £5,000 for services rendered, and those services involved a gun, a Morris Minor, and a reign of terror over Valerie and Michael, then please explain to me why Alphon’s DNA wasn’t found on the fabric fragments. Also, please explain why messrs Sweeney and Mansfield agreed that, based on the DNA evidence, Alphon could not possibly have been the A6 murderer.

Hi

You obviously have much more faith in our "glorious Establishment" (to pinch P.L.A's* description) than I have. I suppose there's no such things as hidden agendas or protecting the political status quo. You seem to take any utterance from the "political powers that be" as being gospel. History however teaches us otherwise.

I never suggested that services rendered included a reign of terror over Storie and Michael Gregsten. I'm sure Alphon performed a lot of things spontaneously and off his own bat as he's always been prone to do.

You'll have to ask messrs Sweeney and Mansfield about that. I'm sure they can explain their own personal opinions better than I can.

[Steve]

Testing for DNA evidence on fragment samples and from Hanratty’s exhumed remains was carried out by scientists, men in white coats, people dispassionately looking for the truth. I fail to see how “political powers that be,” using your phrase, has anything to do with it.

“I'm sure Alphon performed a lot of things spontaneously and off his own bat as he's always been prone to do,” again using your phrase – please explain how you know this. There is not a single scrap of concrete evidence to prove that Alphon had anything to do with the A6 murder. Even his own ‘confessions’ are riddled with deliberate inaccuracies.

On the other hand, Hanratty was convicted at a trial by jury. The only living witness to the crime identified him as the gunman and has maintained for 46 years that Hanratty was her attacker. The DNA evidence provides the final confirmation that Hanratty was the A6 murderer.