a6 murder

[JamesDean]

I find it difficult to imagine that the cleaner pout the cartridegs in the hanky as I think there were several boxes of them.

Hi Limehouse

In the interview the cleaner says there were 5 boxes. He was asked if the gun was loaded and he said yes and there were some 'spare shots'; whatever that means I don't know! Perhaps there were some loose cartridges but I'm only guessing what he meant by that. He definitely said he put the cartridges in the hanky and carried them down (to the foreman). Maybe it was a few loose shots he put in the hanky not the boxes? I really don't know but I agree that it would seem difficult to put five boxes in the hanky.

Whether it was the boxes of cartridges or loose cartridges that he put in the hanky doesn't alter the fact that he said he put the cartridges in the hanky and carried it down. He must, therefore, have handled the hanky.

[Tony]

The ID Parade.

Hello everyone,

Putting yourself in Hanratty’s shoes for a moment on that ID parade and also assuming Hanratty was guilty and given the fact that Valerie had not been able to identify you on appearance after a long viewing; when she asked if the men could speak would you think: “wait a minute this woman doesn’t recognise me but she might know my voice; the men that have spoken so far don’t sound like I do. I know I’ll try and change my accent. I’ve only got to say these few words. Might as well give it a go I’ve nothing to lose I’m nearly home and dry now”

Just a thought.

Tony.

[JamesDean]

Hello everyone,

Putting yourself in Hanratty’s shoes for a moment on that ID parade and also assuming Hanratty was guilty and given the fact that Valerie had not been able to identify you on appearance after a long viewing; when she asked if the men could speak would you think: “wait a minute this woman doesn’t recognise me but she might know my voice; the men that have spoken so far don’t sound like I do. I know I’ll try and change my accent. I’ve only got to say these few words. Might as well give it a go I’ve nothing to lose I’m nearly home and dry now”

Just a thought.

Tony.

Hi Tony

I have had exactly those thoughts. I know Hanratty was a slow learner but in his chosen profession he was street wise. That he would not think to say those words in a way that Valerie wouldn't recognise him beggars belief.

I also think that Alphon would be perfectly capable of putting on a cockney accent if, indeed, he was in the Morris Minor on that night. Why would Hanratty introduce himself to Valerie and Michael with the words "I'm Jim and I'm on the run".

[Tony]

The cartridge cases

Don’t let us get carried away with the fact that the police are obliged to work for the defence as well as successfully prosecuting an offender. By that I mean if a man is under arrest and tells his solicitor something that could lead to proof of his innocence; the solicitor tells the police and they have to investigate and report their findings to the defence. In addition if the police uncover facts unknown to the defence that may point to the innocence of the man under arrest they are again compelled to pass this information on to the defence. This clearly did not happen in the A6 case. Just one example was the fact that did not come out for years that the mileage on the car was known to Acott and it had covered 200 miles or so.
It couldn’t have been left at Avondale Crescent the following morning and so the ‘witnesses’ to the bad driving couldn’t have seen it. Unless it went to Redbridge in the early morning and returned later that evening which is unlikely.

So we can establish that the police bend the rules to support their belief that their man is indeed the guilty man.
Let’s take this one step further and please bear with me.

Take the case of Patrick Meehan. He was arrested for the murder of a Mrs Ross in Ayr, in the early 70's I think, during the robbery of her house. He was in the area at the time and indeed on the rob but did not rob the Ross’s.
He was, however, arrested for the crime and the police were convinced of his guilt but were struggling to get enough evidence together. They went back to Mr Ross and asked to see inside his safe where, amongst other things, a diary was located.
They then went back to Meehan and asked for his clothing which he immediately gave permission for them to collect. Inside a coat pocket they ‘found’ several pieces of paper apparently torn from a diary. Guess what these matched pieces of the diary in Mr Ross’ safe. Absolute proof that Meehan had been in the house and the safe. Result: life imprisonment at Barlinie Prison.
Everyone within the prison knew Meehan was innocent the real murderer was actually also in the very same prison for another offence.
During the early part of his imprisonment Meehan asked the Governor if he knew he was innocent. The Governor said he knew that Meehan was perfectly innocent. Meehan asked what the Governor’s reaction would be if the death penalty was still in force. The Governor said he would take him across the yard and watch him hang.
Meehan refused to work and was placed in solitary where he stayed for the next seven years until the death of one of the true murderers who had left a sworn statement to his solicitor admitting the crime and the name of his accomplice. Meehan was released and pardoned.

Right back to the A6 and a possible similarity. The gun and a pile of ammunition were found almost immediately after the murder. Cartridges from the gun were found in Hanratty’s room many days after the gun was recovered.
Now do we know how many cartridges were found under the seat of the bus and were they all still there at the trial or had two got ‘lost’? Did anyone count them?

I am substituting pieces of a diary that sent Meehan to gaol for cartridge cases that helped send Hanratty to the gallows.

Tony.

[simon]

Can I just make a point that until now, as far as I can tell, hasn't been made ? It concerns the theory that JH had been hired to 'scare' the couple...in other words, to drive them apart. Surely a nightmarish experience such as this would have drawn the couple closer, if anything. In other words, a daft plan right from the start.

[Steve]

Hi Simon

That's just one of many reasons why the idea of the gunman being sent to drive the couple apart is just nonsense.

Kind regards,
Steve

[reg1965]

A6 Website

What I omitted to mention in my marathon post (which has taken a couple of powerful vodka-tonics to recover from...) is precisely how Acott & Co made the connection between 'Ryan' and 'Hanratty'. My own thoughts are that Dixie France obliged, possibly under severe pressure.

Has anyone considered an A6 Case website? Not that I for one moment would suggest removing this debate from the admirable JtR Casebook, but as time goes on I'm wondering if there is sufficient interest to start up a totally seperate site? I haven't the faintest idea how to initiate this, but if there is enough interest - and I think there is - could you let me know your feelings out there?

Cheers,

Graham

Hi all
A website dedicated to the A6 murder would IMO be a good idea. There are numerous sites that document the case in depths ranging from cursory to a Wikipaedia style treatment.
Several obvious hurdles that need to be overcome are:
1) Is the site going to be set up on a free hosting basis (not my choice) or on a paid hosting basis (much better control over site content/hierarchy). If the latter who is willing to contribute to the site and URL ownership?
2) As has been shown from the discussions here, what is going to be the focus of the site. Is it going to be a search for truths in the case or purely a documentation of what we already know or combination of both (An ongoing investigation site if you like!).
3) Who is willing to act as webmaster or editor of the content. This could cause some resentment from others over what is actually included. The views on this thread range from JH is innocent to JH is guilty. What is going to be the thrust of the sites content then.

Gathering up the points and say it goes ahead, an idea that may be acceptable to all views is a periodical magazine like update (monthly/quarterly or whatever) with news etc on what has been happening together with a wiki style outline of the case itself.

Just a few ideas on a possible venture from Graham.

Reg1965

[Steve]

Web sites like this Casebook are funded through advertising, and partly also through membership subscriptions. The good people who run our Ripper Casebook are best placed to start up a new A6 Murder Forum, so we should ask them first. If they felt that sufficient advertising funding could be gained then the idea might work.

[reg1965]

Assassin and gunman

Graham, a brilliant post. Although I am prepared to consider that Hanratty may have been hired to 'scare' the couple, I do not believe he was hired to kill them. As for Gregsten and Storie being disposed of officially, well, M15 could hardly have employed a more incompetent assassin.

The idea of Hanratty wandering around looking for somewhere to rob, perhaps first having 'cased' the area and happening across the couple does have a ring of truth. We don't know for sure that Hanratty did not carry a gun on previous robbery expeditions. Graham, your description of him setting out to rob the couple and then deciding to play them along for a while as they appeared to be 'toffs' kind of sounds possible.

The DNA evidence does not and could not convince me of Hanratty's guilt. The problems with the DNA evidence have been discussed at length by people far more qualified than me and I just do not accept that the samples could not possibly have been contaminated after more than 40 years stored God knows where.

A couple of points:
1) If the gunman was Hanratty and was hired, by whoever, to take out Gregsten, the hirers choice was perfect becasue it worked. Hanratty was convicted and hanged and no-one else was ever charged with having any involvement in the crime.
2) If Hanratty had had a gun previously then why didn't he do a post office job or something a bit more cash intensive before? He had served a full three stretch without remission for petty theft and burglary. I don't think he would be up to a 30 year prison sentence for armed robbery and I don't fink that he was as stupid as a lot of people (Leonard Miller for one) make out. He was an accomplished house breaker and car thief who knew how to get rid of his screwings. Most thieves get caught eventually. Even so, he was in Liverpool or Rhyl at the time so he just plainly wasn't there! He has a cast iron alibi for the Monday and so must have been in the Scotland Road, Liverpool in the early evening of Tuesday, as Mrs Dinwoodie has said and Rhyl later on as Grace Jones et al have said.
Regards
Reg1965

[Steve]

Reg

1) Who would want to pay good money to ‘take out Gregsten?’ He was having a casual extra-marital relationship with a girlfriend from work. Even as far back as 1961 this was not something that hit men were hired for!

2) Hanratty had no such thing as a cast iron alibi. Yes, he was certainly in London on the Monday, but there was no proof that he was in Scotland Road at all on the Tuesday. In fact Hanratty himself admitted as much when he switched his alibi to Rhyl during the trial. No positive evidence has ever shown that he was in Rhyl at the time of the murder, and some of those claiming to have seen him have changed their minds since.

Kind regards,
Steve

[Steve]

He was an accomplished house breaker and car thief who knew how to get rid of his screwings.

Yes, he was certainly accomplished - accomplished at getting caught!

[Steve]

In the interview the cleaner says there were 5 boxes. He was asked if the gun was loaded and he said yes and there were some 'spare shots'; whatever that means I don't know!

He must, therefore, have handled the hanky.

When you watch that interview with the bus cleaner it is obvious that he is very self-conscious, he’s watching someone going past over the reporter’s shoulder with a beady eye.

Also, one has to accept that, since he was gainfully employed as a bus cleaner, he was not the brightest student in his year.

[reg1965]

Reg

1) Who would want to pay good money to ‘take out Gregsten?’ He was having a casual extra-marital relationship with a girlfriend from work. Even as far back as 1961 this was not something that hit men were hired for!

2) Hanratty had no such thing as a cast iron alibi. Yes, he was certainly in London on the Monday, but there was no proof that he was in Scotland Road at all on the Tuesday. In fact Hanratty himself admitted as much when he switched his alibi to Rhyl during the trial. No positive evidence has ever shown that he was in Rhyl at the time of the murder, and some of those claiming to have seen him have changed their minds since.

Kind regards,
Steve

Dear Steve
Your points:
1) Re-read my post. That was not the point! I said 'If.....
2) Yes he has a cast iron alibi for both days. Monday...sorted. Mrs Dinwoodie and her granddaughter both said that a man closely resembling Hanratty visited the shop on 'either the Monday or the Tuesday' asking for Tarleton Road or whatever. So obviously the Tuesday was the day. Grace Jones (however harrassed by Graham Swanwick at the trial) put him up for night later on.
What would Mrs Jones (and her daughter Branda Harris' total conviction to her dying day that it was Hanratty) have to gain from testifying in a court in law for someone that they didn't know when Mrs Jones was obviously falsifying her books to take in 'extra trade' which would lead to possibly an investigation by the Inland Reveue? This is not the action of someone trying to gain some kind of advertisment value for her guest house. I admit that Mrs Jones' testimony at the trial was a disaster for Hanratty, but Paul Foots full investigation into the Rhyl alibi is far more a complete piece of detective work than that carried out by either the police or the defence at the time of the trial.
One other point that must be raised is that of Michael Fogarty-Waul who had, perhaps, Peter Alphons fingerprints wiped from his car by a police officer.
Reg1965

[Steve]

Reg

Hanratty didn't leave London on the Monday, and he only travelled as far as the Slough and Maidenhead area on the Tuesday. He did not have any alibi for the time that the murder and abduction took place, let alone a cast-iron alibi.

Sorry to say it but F-W's involvement in this case was a little strange to say the least.

KR
Steve

[reg1965]

When you watch that interview with the bus cleaner it is obvious that he is very self-conscious, he’s watching someone going past over the reporter’s shoulder with a beady eye.

Also, one has to accept that, since he was gainfully employed as a bus cleaner, he was not the brightest student in his year.

Steve
Have you ever been interviewed for a TV programme?
I find your attitude towards the bus cleaner totally patronising. We can't all be blessed with your god given gifts of intellect and perceptive powers. He comes across as a regular Joe type for sure, but is caught in what turns out to be (and at the time of filming was certainly) a part of one of the most notorious criminal cases in living memory. Have a little empathy mate!
You're not Leonard Miller posting under a pseudonym are you :-) hahahahahahaha
Kindest regards
Reg1965