a6 murder

[jason w]

Thanks Limehouse.

It is really intriguing this case and from my limited knowledge so far I think it is fair to say that the whole story hasn't been told.

What I do wonder though is that even though many people here seem to accept that the DNA results have closed the issue on Hanratty's guilt, there must still be a fair amount of doubt on everyone's part to still be debating the issue six years on, musn't there?

Jason

[Steve]

Hi Jason

Speaking for myself I have always believed there is more to be told about the A6 murder, Dixie France’s involvement for instance. The DNA evidence only really served to confirm my belief that Hanratty was the gunman. I think we have to give lot of credence to the testimony of the only surviving witness to the murder, Miss Storie, and she has remained totally convinced that Hanratty was her attacker for approaching 50 years.

Yes, we still debate the case. There are several posters to this thread who still believe that Hanratty was innocent and that Alphon was possibly the murderer. However, I think the fascination with this case goes beyond the question of Hanratty’s guilt or otherwise.

Kind regards,
Steve

[jason w]

Steve,

Yes, that is a fair point you make I guess. It is so interesting, so many unanswered questions.

Jason

[jimarilyn]

Alphon's familiarity with Northolt.

The circulated description of Peter Louis Alphon which was issued by the police on 22nd September was very detailed. In addition to his physical description, age, place of birth and dress mode the Daily Telegraph of 23rd September 1961 printed the following :-

"He is known to frequent Streatham, Victoria, Putney, Kilburn, NORTHOLT and KINGSBURY. It is known also that he is a keen student of of theology, theosophy and astrology and has been a frequent visitor to public reference libraries in London, borrowing books on these subjects. He is also a regular attendant at greyhound tracks in London and the Home Counties, particularly at Slough (Bucks) and Southend (Essex)."

This is very interesting indeed, particularly as Valerie Storie (in her account of the kidnapping and ensuing journey in the Morris Minor) stated that the gunman wanted to go to a cafe (which he was familiar with) near NORTHOLT, where they could get some food.

Peter Alphon certainly knew his native London, particularly NORTHOLT it would seem........

[Tony]

Hello everyone,

I am a relative newcomer to the A6 Murder, I stumbled upon the case in a very random manner and have been utterly fixated by it since.

I first bought Paul Foot's book in March and have just started reading Bob Wofinden's. I have also only just stumbled across this excellent forum at the weekend.

So far I have read about 17 pages worth of the threads (a lot more to get through I know!).

Anyway, I just wanted to say that from what I have read so far (and admittedly I have much reading to do on this case yet) I geniunely do not have a clue as to who the A6 killer was!

Although I think it is obvious that Hanratty should never have been convicted on the basis of his trial.

Also, the DNA is fairly damaging to the pro Hanratty campaign but I feel there is enough evidence to suggest these DNA results cannot be taken as read given the very real possibility of cross-contamination and the considerable gap in time and science that there has been.

Anyway, I have lots more reading to do on this case, and I just hope that by the end I will have an idea myself as to who the A6 killer was.

This is an excellent forum and the depth of knowledge many of you posess on this subject is staggering and I believe you are all a real asett to society.

I am a young man, so young in fact that my parents were not even alive (just) when this crime occurred and have only the written word to rely on whereas a great deal of you have some recollection/knowledge of the case happening.

I fear I have rambled on too much, but I just wanted to share my basic opinion on this case and congratulate you all on the magnificent effort you have put in.

Jason

Hello Jason and a very warm welcome.

I too am fairly new on here but you can rest assured that everyone will treat you with respect and kindness. Don’t be afraid of asking anything; someone will be able to help you.
Why only yesterday we had an engrossing discussion on the merits of tripe.

But if you are anything like me, and I suspect 99% of the contributors here, after you have read Woffinden and close your mind for the moment regarding DNA I am fairly certain you will think Hanratty was innocent. OK the DNA has changed things but is it reliable after 40 years in the circumstances in which it was found? I really don’t know.
There are still, 47 years on, some things that the authorities will not disclose because it’s not in our interests to know. Well personally I’d rather like to decide that for myself.

At the time there was no motive for the murder, no forensic evidence found. On the first ID parade Valerie picked out a completely innocent man.
Hanratty, a loner, was alone. In the other corner were Nudds, Langdale, Dixie France, Anderson and in the background Alphon and Ewer. How do you think Hanratty with his learning disabilities could have coped with that bunch?

Tony.

[Steve]

Hi Tony

It is very easy to be beguiled by Foot and Woffinden into believing that Hanratty was innocent of the crime and just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The truth is that if had been innocent he would have been able to provide an alibi that could be proved, and he would have had no need to change his alibi in the middle of the trial. An innocent man would have had no need to act in this way.

Kind regards,
Steve

[jason w]

Hi Tony

It is very easy to be beguiled by Foot and Woffinden into believing that Hanratty was innocent of the crime and just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The truth is that if had been innocent he would have been able to provide an alibi that could be proved, and he would have had no need to change his alibi in the middle of the trial. An innocent man would have had no need to act in this way.

Kind regards,
Steve

I don't know if that is entirely true Steve. Hanratty changing his alibi was foolish, and it appears to have been his undoing, but it doesn't necessarily imply guilt on his part.

Many people find themselves in situations where they can't find someone to corrobarate their whereabouts yet are entirely innocent.

I don't think having a less than cast iron alibi necessarily implies guilt.

Jason

[Tony]

Hi Tony

It is very easy to be beguiled by Foot and Woffinden into believing that Hanratty was innocent of the crime and just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The truth is that if had been innocent he would have been able to provide an alibi that could be proved, and he would have had no need to change his alibi in the middle of the trial. An innocent man would have had no need to act in this way.

Kind regards,
Steve

Good Morning Steve,

Hope you are keeping well.

Remind me, please, of Alphon’s alibi.

Thanks.

Tony.

[downonwhores]

Midnight Assassin

I noticed that someone put on about the Midnight Assassin murders and Austin Texas. This is not true at all. Midnight Assassin murders took place in Iowa in 1900 where as the Austin murders were 1884-1885 and dubbed "The Servant Girl Annihilator"

who typically dragged his victims from their beds and raped them before slashing or axing them to death. Several victims were stabbed by some sort of spike in the ears or the face. His first victim was Mollie Smith on New Year's Eve, 1884.

S

[Graham]

I don't know if that is entirely true Steve. Hanratty changing his alibi was foolish, and it appears to have been his undoing, but it doesn't necessarily imply guilt on his part.

Many people find themselves in situations where they can't find someone to corrobarate their whereabouts yet are entirely innocent.

I don't think having a less than cast iron alibi necessarily implies guilt.

Jason

Hi Jason,

JH's original 'Liverpool' Alibi was seen by the court to be worthless and unsustainable, and his defence team spent a lot of time searching unsuccessfully for the men he named and where they were supposed to live.
When JH realised that this alibi was blown apart he changed it to the 'Rhyl' alibi, something he'd not be allowed to do today. What was really JH's undoing was Valerie Storie's i.d. and stupidly choosing to go into the witness box.

Cheers,

Graham

[Graham]

I noticed that someone put on about the Midnight Assassin murders and Austin Texas. This is not true at all. Midnight Assassin murders took place in Iowa in 1900 where as the Austin murders were 1884-1885 and dubbed "The Servant Girl Annihilator"

who typically dragged his victims from their beds and raped them before slashing or axing them to death. Several victims were stabbed by some sort of spike in the ears or the face. His first victim was Mollie Smith on New Year's Eve, 1884.

S

Was this on the A6 Case thread?

Graham

[Rigby]

[QUOTE=Tony;28847]...
There are still, 47 years on, some things that the authorities will not disclose because it’s not in our interests to know. [/QUOTE

Can I suggest a nice, succinct list ? Or perhaps not even a nice list but a list all the same. And as succinct as it pleases you.

[jimarilyn]

I don't know if that is entirely true Steve. Hanratty changing his alibi was foolish, and it appears to have been his undoing, but it doesn't necessarily imply guilt on his part.

Many people find themselves in situations where they can't find someone to corrobarate their whereabouts yet are entirely innocent.

I don't think having a less than cast iron alibi necessarily implies guilt.

Jason

Hi Jason,

Nice to hear from someone new with fresh ideas. A very good post. The Liverpool part of Hanratty's alibi was maintained and never altered. I believe that Hanratty knew deep inside that he was innocent of this crime and thought that there was no way he could ever find himself in this nightmare situation of having to fight for his life.

Hanratty made the fatal mistake early on by lying about staying with three criminal friends in Liverpool. By persisting in this lie he made things impossibly difficult for himself. He explained why he had lied (in his phonecall to Acott in early October) about staying in Liverpool....."at that stage I made up a lie, and, to cover the lie, I made up previous other lies to cover the lies which I had already said in the first place"

By his own admission he had allowed himself to become entangled in a web of lies to cover up the initial lie. When the gravity of his situation finally hit home, Hanratty realised he would have to stop the lying and tell the full truth of his Liverpool aibi. It was at this stage that the Rhyl part of the alibi was revealed. The Rhyl part of the alibi holds much water and was corroborated by very trustworthy citizens who had no axe to grind with anyone and no reason to lie. For some unfathomable reason their testimony was either disbelieved or ignored. They were fobbed off with comments to the effect that it had been 5 months since these alleged encounters with Hanratty and that they were mistaking him for someone else or were remembering an earlier visit to Rhyl by Hanratty.

James Hanratty only visited Rhyl twice since his release from prison in March 1961. The first time was on July 25th 1961 when he stayed there one night at Terence Michael Evans's house. The other occasion was when he stayed 2 nights at Ingledene on the 22nd and 23rd of August 1961.

[Tony]

Hello my friend, Jimarilyn.

Do you know Alphon's alibi?

Tony.

[Graham]

JH claimed that he was in Liverpool at the critical time staying with criminal friends and trying to fence some stolen jewellery. These men would support his alibi that he was with them on the night of the murder. However, he wouldn't name any of the men he was supposed to be with because that would mean they'd be identified for previous crimes (including non-payment of HP on a TV set!). This I suppose is honour amongst thieves. Joe Gillbanks, a P.I. hired by JH's defence, spent a good deal of time trying to locate the place JH claimed he stayed at, but drew a blank. There is simply no evidence to support his claim that he was in Liverpool when he said he was.

However, I will concede that such supportive evidence is not easy to find. If, for example, I went to London for a day's sight-seeing and didn't exchange more than a few brief words with anyone, it would not be easy for me to establish beyond any doubt that I was in London. Unless I was caught on CCTV that is.... I'm pretty sure JH was aware of this difficulty, hence his invention of the three old lags he stayed with.

What I don't understand is, if the 'Rhyl' alibi is genuine, why didn't he use it in the first place?

As far as Alphon's alibi goes, as he wasn't charged with the A6 murder, he wouldn't need one. But I reckon when he stood on the ID parade in front of Valerie Storie, his mind and memory were working overtime....

Cheers,

Graham