a6 murder

[Graham]

Found this recently:

Haven't heard of these witnesses before.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/hanratty-witnesses-go-public-1279254.html

I wonder if this couple's car was clocked by the census further down the road?

Hi Julie,

yes, the story of the Deadman's Hill couple was put around some years ago, but I can only say that if this couple felt so strongly about what they claim to have seen, then why didn't they identify themselves to a JH supporter such as Woffinden? Also, the census was at the southern end of the lay-by, and I would honestly doubt if the census-takers were able to note the numbers of passing cars at night. I'm sure the census was merely to count the traffic. Finally, I wonder how many Morris Minors drove up and down Deadmans Hill during an average night in the early 1960's?

Regards,

Graham

[Graham]

Sherrard said on at least one occasion that he was concerned about some people wanting to "get in on the act", and I think this also applies to at least some of the Rhyl "Witnesses".

Sherrard initially said this, or words along these lines, reference one of the men from Lime Street Station left-luggage who, he felt, fancied a bit of "lime" light of his own - maybe his 15 Minutes of Fame. I also think - and stand to be corrected - that he said much the same about Mrs Grace Jones. And I am sure he regretted calling her as a witness...

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Sherrard initially said this, or words along these lines, reference one of the men from Lime Street Station left-luggage who, he felt, fancied a bit of "lime" light of his own - maybe his 15 Minutes of Fame. I also think - and stand to be corrected - that he said much the same about Mrs Grace Jones. And I am sure he regretted calling her as a witness...

Graham

Yes,William Usher was the left luggage assistant at Lime Street station, and the man with the "withered hand"---in fact his hand was missing two fingers and the bones had probably drawn together as they healed ,giving it a "withered" appearance.The prosecution did not even take a statement from him until 19th January and when they had they did not disclose it.It seems they considered him "too ready to assist".

[Natalie Severn]

Yes,William Usher was the left luggage assistant at Lime Street station, and the man with the "withered hand"---in fact his hand was missing two fingers and the bones had probably drawn together as they healed ,giving it a "withered" appearance.The prosecution did not even take a statement from him until 19th January and when they had they did not disclose it.It seems they considered him "too ready to assist".

Just to add that there is no statement anywhere that suggests that Sherrard was unhappy with Mrs Jones .
The owner of the print shop three doors away from Ingledene knew Mrs Jones for many years and speaks very highly of her guest house."It was always scrupulously clean,everything was always spotless and in its place",she was a very good neighbour and very nice woman" she said.People who knew her appear to have been very surprised indeed at the way she was treated by the prosecution and especially about the inference that the house was in a shambles.

[Natalie Severn]

Don't the statements from the Rhyl witnesses (though not available at the trial) surely cast a shadow of doubt over the 'guilt' of Hanratty?

They can't all be mistaken or lying

Well said Black Rabbit.All eleven can"t surely , not ALL eleven of them ,have been lying or mistaken !

[julie q]

Hi Julie,

yes, the story of the Deadman's Hill couple was put around some years ago, but I can only say that if this couple felt so strongly about what they claim to have seen, then why didn't they identify themselves to a JH supporter such as Woffinden? Also, the census was at the southern end of the lay-by, and I would honestly doubt if the census-takers were able to note the numbers of passing cars at night. I'm sure the census was merely to count the traffic. Finally, I wonder how many Morris Minors drove up and down Deadmans Hill during an average night in the early 1960's?

Regards,

Graham

hi
Perhaps I can be of some help of here ,The couple approached the police in the aftermath of the murder and gave a statement. It was found by Bob Woffinden when he gained access to the Bedfordshire police files on the case ,he traced and interveiwed them and they reiterated the statement they gave in 1961. They had been out for a meal that evening and had left the restaurant when it closed , their journey home had taken past Deadmans Hill at around midnight,this was still some time before the murder car had arrived there, for this reason it was concluded that their evidence was irrelevant.
REGARDS julie q

[Graham]

hi
Perhaps I can be of some help of here ,The couple approached the police in the aftermath of the murder and gave a statement. It was found by Bob Woffinden when he gained access to the Bedfordshire police files on the case ,he traced and interveiwed them and they reiterated the statement they gave in 1961. They had been out for a meal that evening and had left the restaurant when it closed , their journey home had taken past Deadmans Hill at around midnight,this was still some time before the murder car had arrived there, for this reason it was concluded that their evidence was irrelevant.
REGARDS julie q

Julie,

Thanks for this. The Independent article doesn't mention the time of the couple's encounter with the Morris driver. I've got a vague feeling that I read something along the lines of your post ages ago, but can't remember where. Woffinden was honest enough to accept that the couple's evidence was not relevant to the A6 Case.

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

hi
Perhaps I can be of some help of here ,The couple approached the police in the aftermath of the murder and gave a statement. It was found by Bob Woffinden when he gained access to the Bedfordshire police files on the case ,he traced and interveiwed them and they reiterated the statement they gave in 1961. They had been out for a meal that evening and had left the restaurant when it closed , their journey home had taken past Deadmans Hill at around midnight,this was still some time before the murder car had arrived there, for this reason it was concluded that their evidence was irrelevant.
REGARDS julie q

Hi Julie q,
I noticed your post yesterday but I was in Rhyl until today only returning to London this evening,so I would like you to know I was not ignoring you and that I noted your comments and appreciated your concerns.Your posts have been most instructive, not only shedding new light on the case,especially on witness testimony ,but also asking penetrating questions that often get to the heart of a mystery ---especially about a character such as Alphon-----you noted a month or so ago that of all Supt Acott"s twelve reasons why Alphon couldn"t have been the gunman,his crucial omission from that list of 12 points was that he never had an alibi for the night of the murder! Quite right- and Juliana Galves in her second statement of 13th September 1962 also said she did not see him at the Vienna Hotel until about 11.30 on 23rd August ----and that he looked dishevelled and jumpy and she saw him move to close his open case which had a pair of black nylon gloves lying on top of the case which was full of dirty clothes!
Well Julie,lets indeed hope this thread will be less acrimonious from now on,
Best Wishes,
Norma

[Victor]

Graham,

Michael Sherrard did indeed say this,but he was referring to the evidence given by Valerie Storie

Hi Norma,

Why reply to a post of mine and address it to Graham?

Secondly why doesn't the Sherrard quote apply equally to everyone, including those Rhyl "witnesses"?

And even though she had first stated that Michael Clark was her rapist and Gregsten"s killer.

She did not "state" that, she picked him out of a ID parade.

KR,
Vic.

[Derrick]

...so, as a way of moving the debate on, what are the possible events that are supported by the evidence we have for the night of the murder?

Hi JP56
You put forward a very good idea that has not been examined in much depth here.
What is supported by other evidence for the times between MG and VS leaving the Old Station Inn at Taplow and VS being found sometime after 6am at Clophill on the morning of the 23rd?

A man on a motorcycle saw a Morris car in a different field just before 10pm.
Apart from that no one reports any sightings of the Morris car until after MG is reported to have been murdered.
The Regent garage near London Airport (where VS says thay stopped for fuel) did not report any sighting of a Morris Minor and Hirons (Shell garage near Kingsbury) was wrong about seeing the car.

I suggest it as a path to be explored, an intellectual exercise… and I’m STILL puzzled by the initial statement from VS “We PICKED UP a man in Slough…”

You put forward a hypothesis of MG and VS being the only occupants of the car. Yet who shot VS?
The "We PICKED UP a man in Slough…" line is interesting though.

We would have to imagine a scenario along the following lines to make any sense of it at all.

VS cannot accept that MG is going to end their relationship and hatches a plot to do him in. She gets a gun from a new boyfriend at the RRL at Slough. She persuades him to come along in case MG overpowers her.

VS and the new man have had sex earlier that day. VS has not changed her clothing.

VS and MG go to the usual Dorney haunts and VS persuades MG to go on the proposed rally route and they "pick up" the boyfriend at Slough. They head for Bedford as part of the proposed route. They stop at Deadman's Hill for a leak.

VS is in the back and shoots MG twice. A fight breaks out and the boyfriend shoots VS.

He drives off.

VS cannot pick out the new boyfriend for fear of being implicated.

Although no other evidence backs up VS's story as to what happened that night, there are many problems with this particular idea.

• The gun being found on the bus. It needs Dixie's testimony.
• The cartridge cases at the Vienna Hotel. Found, nearly 3 weeks after, in a room that Hanratty stayed in.
• William Ewer phoning Scotland Yard after seeing Hanratty in Burtols in late August 1961. Ryan/Hanratty was then known to the police.
• Dixie's apology to William Ewer. Why?
• Dixie's suicide. Why?
• Alphon's ability to cause mischief with protection from imprisonment. Why?

Was the testimony of the couple who say they saw a man by a Morris car on Deadman's Hill dismissed because it didn't fit in with VS's story?

That is the problem I find. Not only with this case but with other cases. Who makes the decision as to what is relevant and what is not. And as the police are the investigators in chief and can and do withhold evidence then that will always leave the defence in an impossible position especially when only armed with limited resources. Swanwick said takes what fits....etc after all!

Concerning witnesses who "want to get on the act". In Hanratty the initial defence investigations were by private agents who should have just gathered what evidence they could, rather than making value judgements on it, and left the gravity of the evidence to Mr Sherrard alone.

James Hanratty snr always blamed Kleinmann for not interviewing Mrs Dinwoodie personally.

Derrick.

[Zodiac]

Hi Norma,

Why reply to a post of mine and address it to Graham?

Secondly why doesn't the Sherrard quote apply equally to everyone, including those Rhyl "witnesses"?

And even though she had first stated that Michael Clark was her rapist and Gregsten"s killer.

She did not "state" that, she picked him out of a ID parade.

KR,
Vic.

So let me get this straight, Vic.

When Valerie picked Michael Clark out of the ID Parade, as being the man who had murdered her lover, then raped her, shot her and then left her paralysed and for dead, she wasn't actually "stating" that she believed him to be the man who had murdered her lover, then raped her, shot her and then left her paralysed and for dead???

Best wishes,
Zodiac.

[Black Rabbit]

Hi Norma,

Secondly why doesn't the Sherrard quote apply equally to everyone, including those Rhyl "witnesses"?
Vic.

Surely, if the 'Sherrard' quote applied to everyone, then all witness testimony in all Court cases could be dismisssed out of hand?

[Victor]

Surely, if the 'Sherrard' quote applied to everyone, then all witness testimony in all Court cases could be dismisssed out of hand?

Hi BR,

Then why does it apply to Valerie? It applies to every identification witness, which includes all the Rhyl "witnesses".

KR,
Vic

[Victor]

When Valerie picked Michael Clark out of the ID Parade, as being the man who had murdered her lover, then raped her, shot her and then left her paralysed and for dead, she wasn't actually "stating" that she believed him to be the man who had murdered her lover, then raped her, shot her and then left her paralysed and for dead???

Hi Zodiac,

Technically yes she did not state that, she selected him from a lineup, and was then informed that it couldn't have been him. But then that's the difference in Culprit-Absent ID Parades.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Norma,

Why reply to a post of mine and address it to Graham?


She did not "state" that, she picked him out of a ID parade.

KR,
Vic.

1]Because I was more concerned about the subject matter.Graham had followed your post with some reinforcement and I was covering both posts.

2]]Valerie "stated" by implication.The main issue was perfectly clear on that page that Michael Sherrard made the statement about Valerie Storie---not about say the failure of Blackhall to identify the same man as Skillett for example.By raising the more general point about other witness statements you are failing to appraise each of their statements in context.Valerie said herself she only had a fleeting glimpse of the gunman in the darkness [when she saw his "blue" eyes in the headlight of a passing car].She also said after only two weeks that the features of the gunman"s face were fading from her memory and she composed an identikit picture that looked nothing like Hanratty but was the image of Alphon! Blackhall composed the other image---and is on record as saying the man Skillett and he saw looked nothing like Hanratty.