a6 murder

[jimarilyn]

I've now finished reading Shadows of Deadman's Hill, and I have to say that I find Miller's viewpoint very convincing - not least because of the numerous flaws that he points to in the previous books. Maybe just a case of me believing the last thing I read ? - This was certainly true when I used to read about Jack The Ripper, many years ago. But I don't think so, because this time there's the DNA to take into account as well. I find myself in the position, after decades of telling people "No - actually someone called Alphon did it", of believing now that Hanratty was, after all, the killer. And it does seem that even Paul Foot, despite his brave "there must be something wrong with the science" comment, was coming towards the same conclusion. (Did he ever read Miller's book, does anyone know ?). I've never had a problem with Hanratty's denials to the end : he didn't want his family to think the worst (i.e the truth) of him. But wouldn't he be amused to know that, all these years later, here we all are arguing about it!

Hi Simon

I have to say that I find his viewpoint very unconvincing and flawed. He takes very many liberties, purports to get into James Hanratty's psyche and attempts to convince the reader that Hanratty was some sort of twisted psycho.
He does everyone a great disservice and his antipathy and bitterness towards Hanratty is palpable just a few pages into the book. In his book he claimed (before the questionable DNA findings were publicised) to have been convinced of Hanratty's innocence. I don't believe
this for one second.
So everything that led him to believe in Hanratty's innocence went completely out of the window when the very convenient and timely DNA findings came out. How very fickle of Miller. I bet most of the people who believed in Hanratty's innocence prior to 2002 and who were swayed by the DNA findings did not adopt such a bitter and twisted attitude towards Hanratty as Miller did. Most reasonable people I'd guess would not so readily dismiss and disregard all the very persuasive and convincing evidence that strongly points to Hanratty's innocence.

[Graham]

I've just got back from hols in (rainy) France, so am catching up.

I think Miller's book (which I concede isn't a literary masterpiece) actually contributes a great deal to the A6 debate, as it puts the opposite angle and argument to the Foot/Woffinden take on the case. I don't think Miller actually adds anything really new to the debate; he just questions a number of rather old preconceptions and puts alternative viewpoints. Nothing wrong in that. As it happens, I also used to tend towards a belief in Hanratty's innocence until the DNA results, and I still resolutely believe that his trial was in certain respects unfair; yet, at the risk of repeating myself yet again over the past 18 months I've been contributing to this thread, Hanratty was his own worst enemy at his trial. I didn't get the impression that Miller was 'bitter and twisted' towards Hanratty on any kind of personal basis; rather, he put a different point-of-view to those of Foot and, particularly, Woffinden. Hanratty doesn't come across exactly as a model citizen however you look at him, and I'm afraid that that is a fact.

I'm as baffled as anyone how Alphon seemed to be 'above the law' in many respects. He did, or so it seems, successfully sue the police for libel, wrongful arrest, whatever, and I'm sure that the police at the time were very wary of 'upsetting' him even further, and left him alone. Apart from Justice and Fox I don't think Alphon had any 'influential friends', and we have to remember that those two gents were viewed by Authority as severe pains in the arse.

JM, maybe if you have the chance, could you please list what you think is the persuasive and convincing evidence for Hanratty's innocence? This is not a challenge, it's just deep interest on my part.

The one area in which I believe questions will be asked from now until the cows come home is just what did happen in the Morris Minor that night. I for one am not prepared to place on written record my own thoughts and feelings and theories, and for reasons which I think should be pretty obvious. Just be careful, guys! I'll just say that if Hanratty didn't do it, then I don't think Alphon did either....I'm not being deliberately mysterious, I'm just following my own advice here. And no, I don't have any information that can't be found in any of the very many publications on the case.

To conclude, I certainly do not think that the A6 Case is cut and dried, even after 47 years, and that someone, somewhere, has highly relevant information which as far as we're all concerned has never been made public, and probably won't be
.
There are too many loose ends, and it's these loose ends that add to the total fascination of the case.

Cheers,

Graham

[Tony]

I've just got back from hols in (rainy) France, so am catching up.

I think Miller's book (which I concede isn't a literary masterpiece) actually contributes a great deal to the A6 debate, as it puts the opposite angle and argument to the Foot/Woffinden take on the case. I don't think Miller actually adds anything really new to the debate; he just questions a number of rather old preconceptions and puts alternative viewpoints. Nothing wrong in that. As it happens, I also used to tend towards a belief in Hanratty's innocence until the DNA results, and I still resolutely believe that his trial was in certain respects unfair; yet, at the risk of repeating myself yet again over the past 18 months I've been contributing to this thread, Hanratty was his own worst enemy at his trial. I didn't get the impression that Miller was 'bitter and twisted' towards Hanratty on any kind of personal basis; rather, he put a different point-of-view to those of Foot and, particularly, Woffinden. Hanratty doesn't come across exactly as a model citizen however you look at him, and I'm afraid that that is a fact.

I'm as baffled as anyone how Alphon seemed to be 'above the law' in many respects. He did, or so it seems, successfully sue the police for libel, wrongful arrest, whatever, and I'm sure that the police at the time were very wary of 'upsetting' him even further, and left him alone. Apart from Justice and Fox I don't think Alphon had any 'influential friends', and we have to remember that those two gents were viewed by Authority as severe pains in the arse.

JM, maybe if you have the chance, could you please list what you think is the persuasive and convincing evidence for Hanratty's innocence? This is not a challenge, it's just deep interest on my part.

The one area in which I believe questions will be asked from now until the cows come home is just what did happen in the Morris Minor that night. I for one am not prepared to place on written record my own thoughts and feelings and theories, and for reasons which I think should be pretty obvious. Just be careful, guys! I'll just say that if Hanratty didn't do it, then I don't think Alphon did either....I'm not being deliberately mysterious, I'm just following my own advice here. And no, I don't have any information that can't be found in any of the very many publications on the case.

To conclude, I certainly do not think that the A6 Case is cut and dried, even after 47 years, and that someone, somewhere, has highly relevant information which as far as we're all concerned has never been made public, and probably won't be
.
There are too many loose ends, and it's these loose ends that add to the total fascination of the case.

Cheers,

Graham

Hello Graham,

Excellent post if I may say so. Pity about the holiday weather.

Like you I also don’t think Miller adds anything new. In fact I would doubt if he did as much research as many of the contributors to this thread have done; but he did at least make the effort and write a book and actually managed to get it published.

We all well know that Hanratty doesn’t come across as a model citizen. In fact a man to be avoided if at all possible I would think. The only honest citizens to come across him would be the ones that found him robbing their houses or stealing their cars. This does not make him a rapist and murderer though.

In the case of Alphon and his light treatment by the police I would take the opposite view to you and I would think that the police, rather than being wary of upsetting him even more, would grab the very first opportunity to teach him a lesson. You don’t get one over on Plod and he just forgets about it. History shows they have very long memories.

You ask JM to list the reasons for evidence of Hanratty’s innocence he may ask you to the exact opposite I don’t know.

With regards to the happenings in the Morris Minor, without as you say being to open, are you referring to what Alphon is supposed to have told Jean Justice what happened?

To conclude; I have read all your recent posts and am I correct in saying you either have fresh doubts or are not as sure as you were a couple of months ago? I would be very interested in your reply and I am eagerly waiting for Jimarilyn’s reply to you.

Once again excellent post, well thought out and very interesting.

Try Florida next year but in November.

Tony.

[Graham]

Hi Tony.

In fairness, we did have one day at 95 deg, but the rest of the time it was British seaside weather....but you can still get a bottle of decent plonk for 4 euros!

Thanks for your comments re: my post. Regarding what was said in the car that night, I was really referring to the fact that the only witness is still alive...

I think you're right about my feelings regarding Hanratty's guilt. Post-DNA I was 100% convinced; now I'm only about 99.5% convinced. There always has to be room for doubt, especially considering the possibility (remote though it must be) that there was contamination of the exhibits, something I would definitely have ruled out until quite recently. However, this slight element of doubt in itself adds to the fascination of this case, I think.

You're right too about what JM might ask ME to do, but I think I can still point to the evidence of the DNA as being 'virtually' safe. On the old boards someone whose name I've forgotten wrote a long, highly-scientific and extremely interesting post regarding DNA profiling - if anyone (Larue? Steve?) has salvaged this post I feel it would be great to read it again.

Finally, one odd point about Alphon is that most of the time he comes across as a real manipulator, smooth and self-assured (as in his filmed interview in Paris where he had the interviewer for breakfast) yet he admitted that when he presented himself at Scotland Yard as Acott's No 1 suspect, he was scared out of his brains. I think the Alphon that we all know and love only emerged once he was eliminated as a suspect, and then he really went to town, successfully claiming damages from the police and press and doing his utmost to confound the investigation, with the support and egging-on of Justice.

Cheers,

Graham

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
If I was Valerie reading this thread, of hundreds of posts discussing the most eventful night of her life, I would be extremely anxious that so many, dispute her evidence, and her frightful recollections, that must have been nightmares ever since.
Valerie has been adamant since 1961 that she fingered her attempted killer, and that, along with positive D.N.A, surely is the end of this event.
Hanratty Was the A6 killer...
Regards Richard.

[Graham]

Hi,
If I was Valerie reading this thread, of hundreds of posts discussing the most eventful night of her life, I would be extremely anxious that so many, dispute her evidence, and her frightful recollections, that must have been nightmares ever since.
Valerie has been adamant since 1961 that she fingered her attempted killer, and that, along with positive D.N.A, surely is the end of this event.
Hanratty Was the A6 killer...
Regards Richard.

Hi Richard,

Yes, you're absolutely correct about Valerie's evidence. That's what I meant when I said we need to be a little careful (as well as respectful) here...

Cheers,

Graham

[Steve]

Hi,
If I was Valerie reading this thread, of hundreds of posts discussing the most eventful night of her life, I would be extremely anxious that so many, dispute her evidence, and her frightful recollections, that must have been nightmares ever since.
Valerie has been adamant since 1961 that she fingered her attempted killer, and that, along with positive D.N.A, surely is the end of this event.
Hanratty Was the A6 killer...
Regards Richard.

I totally agree with this. Recent postings have lacked sensitivity towards people involved in the events of the A6 murder who are still alive.

[Steve]

On the old boards someone whose name I've forgotten wrote a long, highly-scientific and extremely interesting post regarding DNA profiling - if anyone (Larue? Steve?) has salvaged this post I feel it would be great to read it again.

There were a couple of very authoritative one-off postings on the DNA evidence, (wasn’t Strunt one of them?) and I would have liked to have heard more from them because I felt their postings added to the debate. Sadly, nothing more was heard.

[Steve]

with the support and egging-on of Justice.

Hi Graham

Interesting thought, but I have a feeling that Alphon was using Justice and didn’t need egging-on!

[Graham]

Hi Graham

Interesting thought, but I have a feeling that Alphon was using Justice and didn’t need egging-on!

Hi Steve,

You could well be right there! However, Justice was a well-known and very accomplished mischief-maker who, for whatever deep-down reasons, felt he needed to have a go at the Establishment. He had the lolly, and he had the connections. And I think that once he had Alphon, he had the means, as well.
Maybe just another of the endless coincidences in the A6 Case, that Justice and Alphon seemed to have been made for each other. And ironic, too, that both of them ended up on the bones of their arse (Brummie expression for skint).

Cheers,

Graham

[Tony]

Dna

There were a couple of very authoritative one-off postings on the DNA evidence, (wasn’t Strunt one of them?) and I would have liked to have heard more from them because I felt their postings added to the debate. Sadly, nothing more was heard.

I think we may have possibly had this on before but just as a reminder here it is again:

Hanratty and flaws of DNA
I'D LIKE to take issue with the report in the Daily Mail last week that DNA profiling has proved the guilt of James Hanratty, hanged for the so called A6 murder in 1962. Reports claim that a DNA sample taken from Hanratty's exhumed body last month has been matched with two samples taken from the victim's clothes, and that the chance of a mismatch is one in 2.5 million.
I'm a geneticist and work with DNA on a daily basis. I agree with the defence lawyers that the items of clothing may have been contaminated by being in contact with Hanratty's garments during the investigation. There are serious flaws in the way DNA profiling is being employed in forensic investigations.
Techniques are based on the assumption that by special chemicals in DNA, one should in principle obtain a unique "fingerprint" of each individual. Unfortunately, things are not so simple in practice as these assessments use only a tiny fraction of a suspect's DNA. There is the possibility of finding a match with a DNA sample from the crime scene, even if the suspect is completely innocent.
A key problem is with who is carrying out the DNA profiling. In a number of cases where convictions were made on this basis it has emerged that forensic labs were disregarding real discrepancies between the two DNA samples being compared. The convictions were subsequently quashed.
In Britain forensic science is not separate from the police, but wholly dependent on it. I would have great reservations about any claims made by the institution that convicted the Guildford Four and Birmingham Six on flawed forensic evidence.
• DR JOHN PARRINGTON, East London.

Tony.

[Steve]

Hi Graham

Jean Justice does appear to have lived life with a chip on his shoulder, possibly because of his failure to become a barrister and possibly because of his sexual orientation at a time when homosexuality was illegal.

One thing is for sure, without Justice and his group of irregulars we wouldn’t be discussing the A6 murder case here today. Without the publicity started by Justice, it would have faded into obscurity. The Lord Russell book probably would not have been written, so Paul Foot’s interest would not have been raised and therefore no ‘Who Killed Hanratty?’ Without Justice, John Lennon would not have become involved; questions in the house might not have been asked. The Dateline and Frost programmes on the A6 murder would probably have never been made, which means Woffinden’s programme would not have been made, therefore no ‘Hanratty The Final Verdict.’ Miller’s book would certainly not have been written either.

Virtually all the research undertaken on the subject of the A6 murder has been as a direct result of the interest Jean Justice took in the case.

I’ve never heard the Brummie expression you quote – the Cockney rhyming slang for skint is barassic, short for barassic lynt. One campaigning character we seldom mention here is Jeremy Fox, who also died in poverty in June 1999. Ironically at the time of his death he was living in Ealing, close to where Dixie France committed suicide 37 years earlier.

Kind regards,
Steve

[Steve]

DNA Evidence

Morning Tony

There have been quite a few similar and authoritative observations, some have been posted here and others appeared elsewhere. It seems to me that professional opinion on the DNA testing is split down the middle. The scientists interviewed for the television programmes were quite adamant that the DNA results could point only in the direction of Hanratty being guilty.

Kind regards,
Steve

[Tony]

Morning Tony

There have been quite a few similar and authoritative observations, some have been posted here and others appeared elsewhere. It seems to me that professional opinion on the DNA testing is split down the middle. The scientists interviewed for the television programmes were quite adamant that the DNA results could point only in the direction of Hanratty being guilty.

Kind regards,
Steve

Hello and a very good afternoon to you Steve,

Well that’s worked out very conveniently then hasn’t it?

Tony.

[Tony]

Hanged!

Hello everyone,

Last week Barry George was released from a life sentence for the murder of Jill Dando convicted initially almost solely on police forensic evidence. If the death penalty had been available he would almost certainly have hanged.

This week Colin Stagg has been awarded compensation of over £700,000.00 for spending 13 months in custody for the murder of Rachel Nickell. The case was thrown out by the judge who accused the police of being underhand in trying to get Mr Stagg to confess in a so-called honey trap. If the judge had allowed the evidence and the jury had accepted it and we still had capital punishment Mr Stagg would also probably have hanged. After the trial collapsed the police said outside the courtroom they were not looking for anyone else thereby implying that Mr Stagg had got away with murder and effectively publicly branding him as a murderer. I wonder just what he has had to cope with. Now someone else has been charged with the murder.

In the A6 murder case, at the time, the police have been seen to have acted inappropriately on many issues and a man was not allowed time for any further investigations into his defence. He was dead within three weeks.
A case of guilty, get him out of the way quick; dead men tell no tales.

Tony.