a6 murder

[babybird67]

I have studied linguistics at post-graduate level and several times a year I give lectures to teachers training to be literacy specialists on aspects of linguistices - including dialects. I think I am more than qualified to comment on accents and their distribution and distinctions at this particular time in our recent history.

By all means do so then. I look foward to reading your next posting with your references and figures relating to how conversant the Liverpudlians of the 1960s were with Scots, Welsh and London accents.

If you think that Welsh and Scottish accents sounds similar you'd better get your lugholes examined.

They do to some people. Because they are both Celtic dialects.

http://www.cs.stir.ac.uk/~kjt/general/scots.html

See especially:

A visitor to Scotland is most likely to come across standard English pronounced in the local fashion. However Scotland has its own distinct language, with similar roots to English but also affinities to Scandinavian languages. Apart from the Scots Tongue, Scotland also claims a second language - Gaelic (which has affinities to Irish Gaelic, Welsh, ancient Cornish and Breton). (my emphasis)

Hmmmm broad London accents don't seem to have the same affinities though. Strange for a self professed expert linguist not to understand that Gaelic languages and dialects can share commonalities and maybe sound similar to some people.

Acott was convinced that Mrs Dinwoodie had indeed met Hanratty. How many people do you think were asking precisely for 'Carlton or Tarlton Road' in sweetshops in Scotland Road in the summer of 1961?

Acott was also convinced Hanratty did it. So can we accept his certainty on that now too?

[Natalie Severn]

Graham,
There were several writers who contributed and its not clear who wrote the chapter.Why do you have to rubbish Colin Wilson now?
I know that the taxi belonging to Terry Evans had been moved that week as it has been written about by both Foot and Woffinden.
Hanratty stayed with Terry one night in Rhyl and not only did he keep the shoes Terry loaned him he also let him down over the job.I just can"t understand why you think it would have been that easy for Hanratty to go knocking on his door!
As it was Terry proved a good friend and spoke up for Hanratty in court ---though he was not willing to admit to the police that he knew people who would have bought the gold watch Hanratty was trying to sell.

[Graham]

Hi Norma,

There were several writers who contributed and its not clear who wrote the chapter.Why do you have to rubbish Colin Wilson now?

I wasn't rubbishing him, not at all. But you ought to know as a Ripper afficianado that Colin sometimes, shall we say, lets his enthusiasm overtake him. If Evans really was away during the week commencing 22 August 1961, then I'd very much like to see some proof of that claim.

Hanratty stayed with Terry one night in Rhyl and not only did he keep the shoes Terry loaned him he also let him down over the job.I just can"t understand why you think it would have been that easy for Hanratty to go knocking on his door

Evans was known as a fence of stolen goods. If Hanratty really was in Rhyl when he claimed to be, then what more natural than to try and contact a bloke who could help him to shift his watch and whatever else he had on him?

Yes, Evans did speak up for Hanratty, and I don't knock him for that. Maybe it was a case of 'honour amongst thieves'.

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Yes,apparently Hanratty did try to find Terry and he wasn"t around!He wasn"t in Rhyl that week.
So Hanratty goes round to his house and explains to his wife he is the bloke who nicked Terry"s shoes and let him down over the job he got him at the Fairground.He needs to contact him about a gold watch thats burning a hole in his pocket----I think he might have got the order of the boot from a baffled Mrs Evans!

[Graham]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes,apparently Hanratty did try to find Terry and he wasn"t around!He wasn"t in Rhyl that week.

Neither was Hanratty.

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

How do you know? Perhaps you would like to tell that to some of the people still there who know he was definitely there because they saw him there---together with those who have sons and daughters still aggrieved about hearing their dead parents called liars-and believe me they are quite angry about it and I don"t think they would be too chuffed to hear you telling them their mothers or fathers didnt see someone they were or are quite certain they did see! You might get biffed like a certain Mr P did in Rhyl a few years back!

[Graham]

How do you know? Perhaps you would like to tell that to some of the people still there who know he was definitely there because they saw him there---together with those who have sons and daughters still aggrieved about hearing their dead parents called liars-and believe me they are quite angry about it and I don"t think they would be too chuffed to hear you telling them their mothers or fathers didnt see someone they were or are quite certain they did see! You might get biffed like a certain Mr P did in Rhyl a few years back!

Yeah, yeah...etc.

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Yeah, yeah...etc.

Graham

I didn"t know you were the Town Crier !

[babybird67]

How do you know? Perhaps you would like to tell that to some of the people still there who know he was definitely there because they saw him there---together with those who have sons and daughters still aggrieved about hearing their dead parents called liars-and believe me they are quite angry about it and I don"t think they would be too chuffed to hear you telling them their mothers or fathers didnt see someone they were or are quite certain they did see! You might get biffed like a certain Mr P did in Rhyl a few years back!

One: nobody is saying they were liars, Norma. There is a difference between being mistaken and being a liar.

Two: You use the phrase that these witnesses were 'quite certain'. I dont have the books i will try to order them from somewhere, but from recollection from when I borrowed Graham's, none of them were certain, bar Mrs Jones, that the man they saw was Hanratty. They all used vague language such as, could have been, might have been, looked like him.

Three: If you uphold the Rhyl witnesses, you are calling Valerie Storie a liar aren't you? Unless you are accepting that witnesses can be mistaken. However we have on the one hand the Rhyl witnesses, only one of whom could say with any certainty the man she had seen WAS Hanratty...and evidence shows she was mistaken. And on the other hand we have the victim of the crime, who spent hours in the rapist's company, who was able to pick him out by looks/voice from a line up and whose evidence stood up in court, and has now been vindicated by the DNA evidence which supports her identification completely.

It really is a no-brainer.

[Victor]

a]what else was a glass vial with a rubber stopper , of the kind kept in a chemistry lab ,likely to contain in that particular drawer,since we know that a "wash" was done on Hanratty"s trousers by the police pathologist and since other item"s taken from Hanratty such as his trousers were also in the drawer and several "forensic" materials that had been kept viz hair samples etc all such fibres known to have been taken from Hanratty"s person when he was in custody?

Hi Norma,

1. A wash was done of the fly aea of Hanratty's trousers, but it is unlikely to have been stored in a flask or tube like that.
2. Hanratty's trousers were not in that drawer.
3. The hair samples were from Alphon.

b]You are mistaken here.The brown paper envelope the fragment of knicker was kept in had been sealed in the normal way and was found to have come apart at the edges "at some time" and then resealed itself----as paper and glue do when brought into contact with water.

Nope, you're the one who is mistaken. Mr Greenhalgh, the scientist who examined them said...“As I examined the item, the piece of blue material from the knickers was in a sealed packet inside the two envelopes. I did not observe any damage to that packaging which I considered likely to be a risk of contamination. As far as I was concerned they were sealed, although the outer envelopes were not sealed there was no indication of any liquid damage on the brown paper envelopes, as might have been expected if a liquid sample had leaked onto them.”

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Hanratty was under huge stress trying to cope with Mr Swanwick ,an eminent lawyer, born into privilege and wealth with all the advantages in law that that brings.

Hi Norma,

That's pure speculation.

Swanwick ,in contrast to Hanratty was thoroughly at ease in the court room,linguistically and socially,an Oxbridge graduate and an experienced prosecutor.He knew exactly what would take Hanratty by surprise who was struggling throughout against the trial"s fatal outcome.

Really? Hanratty was well used to the inside of a courtroom having been tried multiple times, admittedly not as accustomed as Swanwick. Foot and Woffinden both point out how calm he seemed to be giving evidence.

Swanwick used the very same attack with Mrs Jones over her guest books, and all but destroyed her testimony.

I've pointed out before that neither Foot nor Woffinden say Swanwick did drop the books and destroy Grace Jones evidence - they both say "Michael Hanratty always remembers..." which is blatantly destorting the truth.

KR,
Vic.

[Derrick]

Hi Victor

That's pure speculation.

A bit harsh mate. Hanratty was on trial for his life. How would you feel having pleaded not guilty.

Really? Hanratty was well used to the inside of a courtroom having been tried multiple times, admittedly not as accustomed as Swanwick. Foot and Woffinden both point out how calm he seemed to be giving evidence.

I don't know about calm but from the transcripts I have read Hanratty gave as good as he got in his joust with Graham Swanwick.

I've pointed out before that neither Foot nor Woffinden say Swanwick did drop the books and destroy Grace Jones evidence - they both say "Michael Hanratty always remembers..." which is blatantly destorting the truth.

To be fair, I am not sure that court transcripts would record anything but what was actually said unless asked to do so by the judge. So it would appear that the dropping of the book wouldn't have been seen by either Foot or Woffinden because they were not there, unlike Michael Hanrattty who was. I have no reason to doubt his word. Do you?

Derrick

[Derrick]

Because he was thick. He couldn't steal cars properly, he couldnt steal anything properly he was always getting caught. He thought people would fall for the, 'I might be a criminal but i'm no killer trick' and he was right, some people have!

Hi Babybird

Hanratty didn't get caught long enough to keep Louise Anderson in business with cheaply fenced goods.

He properly stole a Jag to head north when wanted for the A6 murder. Who knows how many other cars Hanratty pinched to order?

He also didn't get caught for the Stanmore robbery which proved that Hanratty had stolen a jacket, although the plod were thick enough to not record this offence properly.

His last letters to his family convince me of a man trying bravely to come to terms with a fate that a petty thief in the 20th century didn't deserve.

Derrick

[Derrick]

1. A wash was done of the fly aea of Hanratty's trousers, but it is unlikely to have been stored in a flask or tube like that.

Hi Victor

So what was likely to be have been important that it would have been stored in the broken vial that was found?

Derrick

[Derrick]

By all means do so then. I look foward to reading your next posting with your references and figures relating to how conversant the Liverpudlians of the 1960s were with Scots, Welsh and London accents.

Hi Babybird

There is no need pet as Mrs Dinwoodie identified James Hanratty visually in court in 1962 as being the man who came into the shop.

Derrick