a6 murder

[P.L.A]

What is being covered up?

Greetings one and all

The Court of Criminal Appeal seems quite happy to quash the convictions of people such as Derek Bentley, etc. But not that of James Hanratty.

Why?

If our glorious establishment know that he is innocent, then just what is being covered up and why?

Peter

[P.L.A]

George Kelly

Greetings one and all

Posts 40, 41, 42 and 44 seem to miss the point that George Kelly’s conviction was quashed.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/2978838.stm

Peter

[Graham]

The charge of murder against Bentley was quashed, because he hadn't pulled the trigger. However, I think (may be wrong) that he was still deemed guilty of being an accessory to murder.

Hanratty remains guilty as charged, and unless the Home Office orders a re-run (highly unlikely) of the possibly-contentious DNA analysis he'll remain guilty as far as the law is concerned. I think the chances of any new evidence supporting him coming to light after 46 years is pretty remote - unless of course there is evidence amounting to dynamite hidden away in some dusty old filing-cabinet somewhere (but in all honesty I'd doubt this, too). I think if there really was a serious, genuine chance to prove his innocence, then even after all these years his family legal-team would still be on the case, and unless I've missed something it would appear that nothing is happening on that front. However, who knows what goes on behind the scenes, so to speak?

Cheers,

Graham

[Tony]

Hello Graham,

Derek Bentley was guilty. There was not a miscarriage of justice in that case. Then, as now, it doesn’t matter who fired the shot. All who took part in the murder are equally guilty. The case hinged on the “let him have it” remark from Bentley to his accomplice Christopher Craig. Did he mean shoot or hand over the gun? Either way it did not matter, two men were on the roof of a warehouse and a police officer was shot and killed in the execution of his duty. It was soon discovered that Bentley had a very low mental age and on that fact alone should not have hanged. Craig was under the legal age to hang. Somebody had to drop and it was the unfortunate Bentley. He was, however, guilty as charged.

Going back to the A6 case, I do think it is significant that Michael Hanratty and Bob Woffinden have remained silent since the Court of Appeal delivered its judgement. But, as you say Graham, we don’t know what is happening behind the scenes. Maybe there is some dynamite in a dusty old filling cabinet and maybe Peter Alphon might leave some letters or documentation when he finally clocks off. I suspect though that these would be locked away because they were not in the public’s interest.

See you later.

Tony

[simon]

Hi Tony,
Not entirely true that Michael Hanratty has remained silent. In the TV programme I watched again recently, he - like Paul Foot - was insisting there must be something wrong with the DNA testing. The programme made the point that Alphon's DNA was tested as well - and didn't match.

Simon

[Steve]

Hi Simon

Which was this TV programme? Was it the Horizon programme made immediately after the CCA ruling?

KR
Steve

[simon]

It was either that one or the programme which featured a lengthy interview with Valerie Storey,among other things showing how she copes alone at home. Still no doubt in her mind that the right man was convicted. It was called 'Hanratty - The Truth', I believe.

[Steve]

Alphon's DNA

Hi Simon

This programme was made, I think, for Channel 4. Both of them were shown at about the same time and both were very good. Valerie was interviewed for the C4 programme, I believe.

Michael Gregsten's sons were also interviewed, one in one programme, the other son in the second programme.

The reason I asked was that I don't specifically remember the point being made that Alphon's DNA was also tested.

Kind regards,
Steve

[Tony]

Hi Tony,
Not entirely true that Michael Hanratty has remained silent. In the TV programme I watched again recently, he - like Paul Foot - was insisting there must be something wrong with the DNA testing. The programme made the point that Alphon's DNA was tested as well - and didn't match.

Simon

Hello Simon,

Did Alphon give a DNA sample? If so when and why.

Tony.

[P.L.A]

What is so different about the Hanratty case?

To remain focussed on the point I was trying to make, a less controversial case than Bentley would have been a better example. On the other hand, it demonstrates that the system is capable of coming down in favour of the appellant in a high profile controversial case.

To continue with my point, the Court of Appeal Criminal Division quashed the following cases (as examples):

- Derek Bentley, because of the attitude of the trial judge, who was no less a person than the Lord Chief Justice at the time. (Fenton Bresler did a good job in justifying Goddard’s behaviour)

- George Kelly, because of police behaviour.

- The Birmingham Six, due to serious doubts about the forensic evidence.

So why is the establishment conspiring in a whitewash over Hanratty? What exactly is it that the Hanratty supporters believe is being covered up, and why?

Back to Bentley – the Appeal Court quashed his conviction, but said there was still a case for him to answer. In the ideal world he would have faced a re-trial.

The law relating to the case wasn’t clear cut. Statute dealt with responsibilities when a joint venture is embarked upon. However, it hadn’t anticipated the circumstances in this case and didn’t define at what point a joint venture ceases to be one. It is the courts’ interpretation of the loose ends in statute that become case law. Statute can’t foresee every eventuality – especially a scenario of two people burgling a premises, one of them then acting as a human shield to allow a police officer to get safely off the roof and being under arrest for fifteen minutes on the ground before the fatal shot was fired.

Assuming that Bentley did say “let him have it, Chris” – the point of contention is whether his subsequent actions nullified the utterance. In the ideal world of a re-trial, that is what prosecution and defence lawyers would have been arguing over.

If Craig had been eighteen, both would have hung and there probably would have been little controversy.

Back to the A6 murder. On his release, Craig lived in Clophill, which is at the bottom of Deadman’s Hill.

Peter

[Steve]

Alphon's DNA

Simon and Tony

The Court of Appeal makes the following statement on the subject of Alphon and DNA evidence:

"By way of postscript we should record that it has been agreed by Mr Sweeney and Mr Mansfield that on the evidence now available Peter Alphon could not have been the murderer. It is understood that this agreement arose out of the DNA evidence. "

Unfortunately it gives no further information and leaves it unclear as to whether Alphon's DNA was tested or not.

Kind regards,
Steve

[P.L.A]

Dna

One of the scientists in one of the TV programmes broadcast in the week of the Appeal Court’s decision (it may have been Jonathan Whitaker), said that the first suspects DNA had been compared to the profile obtained from the exhibits and did not match.

The second suspect’s DNA gave a perfect match.

The scientist didn’t say how the first suspect’s DNA was obtained. I wondered at the time whether they still had his personal samples from 1961.

Peter.

[Steve]

Pla & Dna

Hi Peter

That's it, then.

Your namesake's DNA was probably tested using old material, and it seems he probably didn't volunteer to have the DNA tested for the CCA.

KR
Steve

[Steve]

Dna

It seems that PLA and DNA when typed into the Title box is automatically converted to Pla and Dna.

[simon]

And I see I mis-spelt Storie..