a6 murder

[Natalie Severn]

Solid unadulterated evidence? Oh you wish Caz! Do tell me how a bunch of the most loathsome and untrustworthy ex-convicts from London"s 1960"s underworld could possibly have provided the police with "solid unadulterated evidence" in this murder trial !Are you having us on or what?
Lets keep the real flag flying shall we.
All the Best
Norma

[Victor]

Hanratty certainly let his father down by walking out on the window cleaning business, funded by his father's pension fund, but it was his father's decision to start the business and so it is unfair to describe Hanratty as having 'squandered the money on the business' as if he did so single handedly.

Hi Julie,

The window cleaning business was started as a joint venture between James Sr and Jr, funded entirely by Sr pension fund. Sr and Mary went on holiday for a week leaving Jr to tend the business whilst they were away, and James left the ladders &tc in a customers drive and did a bunk. I stand by the statement that James Jr squandered the opportunity single handedly.

In no way can Hanratty's prison record be considered worse than Nudds. Hanratty did have a bad record for such a young man but Nudds had spent his whole youth and adult life in criminal activity. You make much of Hanratty not getting time off for good behaviour but it does not follow that he was badly behaved in jail. Good behaviour included attendance at educational classes - something Hanratty m,ay have been unprepared to undertake due to his learning difficulties which were, in all probability (as Norma points out) due to dyslexia. What we do know is that whatever behaviour Hanratty displayed in prison, he had no record of violence towards others.

Hanratty was one of only 5 people who got no time off. I can't believe that there were only 5 illiterate or learning-disadvantaged prisoners.

Hanratty had no history of violence as an instigator, but there are a number of occasions where he has been the victim of violence - not that this reflects badly on him.

Let's get one point straight about Anderson's dishonesty v Grace Jones'. It is clear to me that Louise Anderson had everything to gain by testifying AGAINST Hanratty - immunity from presecution for receiving stolen goods - goods stolen from people's homes. Grace Jones, however, exposed her dishonsety (for tax evasion) by testifying FOR Hanratty - something she did not have to do. If she was really so dishonest, when the investigators came knocking, she could have denied ever having such a man in her home.

Point taken, but it is still the case that neither were prosecuted, and both technically committed crimes.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

I havent seen any evidence about Mrs Jones having " defrauded the tax man " but if she did then she was hardly the only one nor was she in the same league of "defrauding" as our numerous MP"s who do it regularly and as of right

Hi Norma,

She took money from guests staying at Ingledene and did not declare the income - that's a textbook definition of defrauding the taxman. Just because it's not unique nor as bad as modern MPs doesn't make it any less of a crime.

Ever wondered why the "mini" villain on the periphery of London"s underworld, Mr France , topped himself ,Vic? His "gun story" helped send Hanratty to the gallows remember.

Yes I have wondered and I believe that France was the gun owner and Hanratty stole it from his airing cupboard. Furthermore I think it's entirely possible that France helped Hanratty with the aftermath before he found out that someone had been killed, someone had been raped and shot and left for dead. I think France felt responsible and it was guilt for the victims, and the burden of knowing the truth (rather than what he gave in evidence which implicated Hanratty but didn't seal his fate) that lead to his suicide.

Each and everyone of them could be bought for a handful of silver----or less.

How do you reconcile this comment with the £5,000 you think Alphon demanded? Why was Alphon thousands of times more expensive?

The witnesses from Rhyl who came forward during the trial were, to all intents and purposes, decent reliable perfectly straightforward folk

Apart from Terry Evans\Starr and Charlie White the newspaper seller who admitted that Evans convinced him to lie to the Panorama team for money, yes they were.

though it may have been a bit late in the day.There were objections from Acott and the prosecution were there not ?

The only reason it was so late in the day is because Hanratty only revealed it at the trial - it's a classic ambush alibi that is now not admissible, which means that the objections from the prosecution have been listened to and enshrined in law.

The whole thing stinks to high heaven if you ask me.

It does, but Gregsten and Storie deserve justice. To quote Michael Sherrard "the wrong man was not hanged" and if he thinks so it should speak volumes.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Hanratty did not stay in Room 4 .On the first night he stayed in the bathroom cum bedroom at the top of the house-the one he described as having a green bath which it did indeed have.The second night he stayed in a "proper room" which had been vacated that morning by the "Such family"who had left early

Hi Norma,

Why didn't Hanratty say any of this? He never claimed to:-
1. Sleep in the bathroom
2. Change rooms - sleep in different rooms on each night.

Hanratty did not breakfast with the other guests as he was supernumerary

By your account, he was for the first night, but not for the second.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Norma,

She took money from guests staying at Ingledene and did not declare the income - that's a textbook definition of defrauding the taxman. Just because it's not unique nor as bad as modern MPs doesn't make it any less of a crime.

Hi Vic,
by any scale of comparison---any at all, with the evidence of the prosecution witnesses who had served extensive prison sentences and were notorious London gangsters----there was nil comparison in fact!

Yes I have wondered and I believe that France was the gun owner and Hanratty stole it from his airing cupboard. Furthermore I think it's entirely possible that France helped Hanratty with the aftermath before he found out that someone had been killed, someone had been raped and shot and left for dead. I think France felt responsible and it was guilt for the victims, and the burden of knowing the truth (rather than what he gave in evidence which

Pure speculation Vic!

Quote:

T[Q

UOTE]he only reason it was so late in the day is because Hanratty only revealed it at the trial - it's a classic ambush alibi that is now not admissible, which means that the objections from the prosecution have been listened to and enshrined in law.

[/QUOTE]

The reason given and the most likely one by far ,was the renewed interest generated by the trial in February.

To quote Michael Sherrard "the wrong man was not hanged" and if he thinks so it should speak volumes.

Michael Sherrard actually said :
"I really couldn"t bring myself to take in that those who had concealed evidence in a capital case could have been as wicked as that"

and he also said:

"No hair,no blood, no fibre, NOTHING linked Hanratty to that motor car"

Best
Norma

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Norma,

Why didn't Hanratty say any of this? He never claimed to:-
1. Sleep in the bathroom
2. Change rooms - sleep in different rooms on each night.

Vic,
I was merely disputing Alexi Sayle"s version which claimed that Hanratty said he slept in room number 4----the same room as his father had stayed in on one of the nights in question.But neither Mrs Jones nor Hanratty made any claim about room number 4.Hanratty had clearly been shown the bathroom cum bedroom because he vividly remembered the green bath there.

Hanratty did not breakfast with the other guests as he was supernumerary
By your account, he was for the first night, but not for the second.

Mrs Jones simply said he had breakfasted with them----she was almost certainly over full as such places are in August.


Cheers
Norma

[Victor]

by any scale of comparison---any at all, with the evidence of the prosecution witnesses who had served extensive prison sentences and were notorious London gangsters----there was nil comparison in fact!

Hi Norma,

Comparing her to Al Capone...

Pure speculation Vic!

Absolutely, but then so is any reason for France's suicide including the "testifying against his friend" theory.

The reason given and the most likely one by far ,was the renewed interest generated by the trial in February.

Gillbanks, the defence investigator had spent months in Liverpool investigating that aspect of Hanratty's alibi, it was only after Hanratty mentioned Rhyl for the first time that Gillbanks was diverted there and the witnesses started coming forward. Gillbanks found Evans very quickly and Evans helped him hunt round guest houses.

Michael Sherrard actually said :
"I really couldn"t bring myself to take in that those who had concealed evidence in a capital case could have been as wicked as that"

and he also said:

"No hair,no blood, no fibre, NOTHING linked Hanratty to that motor car"

The quote I gave is after the DNA results. I presume that your first quote includes Hanratty himself and how he concealed his whereabouts in Rhyl at the crucial time. He sort of signed his own death warrant, or at least was a major contributer.

As for the second quote. Why would there be any of Hanratty's blood in the car? And of course there was his semen dribbling all over Storie's knickers, so that means the "NOTHING" is dead wrong.

KR,
Vic.

[NickB]

Alexi Sayle"s .. father had stayed in on one of the nights in question.

Didn't Mr Sayle stay there for three nights?

I presume he is the person referred to in the appeal:
"... the records which revealed only one single room in which James Hanratty could have stayed (room 4, occupied on 21, 22 and 23 August by a witness called in rebuttal) ..."

[Victor]

I was merely disputing Alexi Sayle"s version which claimed that Hanratty said he slept in room number 4----the same room as his father had stayed in on one of the nights in question.But neither Mrs Jones nor Hanratty made any claim about room number 4.Hanratty had clearly been shown the bathroom cum bedroom because he vividly remembered the green bath there.

Hi Norma,

Joseph Sayle may have embellished the story when he told Alexei, and Alexei relayed it verbatim, or the emellishment could be Alexei.

Hanratty made no claims whatsoever about any room, he couldn't even remember the name "Ingledene". All the details given are general - a green plant and coat stand in the hallway - a grey haired lady. The single, solitary specific detail is the green bath in the attic - but he doesn't qualify that by mentioning the bed in the attic, nor that he slept there.

Mrs Jones simply said he had breakfasted with them----she was almost certainly over full as such places are in August.

Presumably this would be extra work for her, cooking breakfast and serving it in 2 different places, so why wasn't Hanratty sent back to the main dining room on the 2nd night when he stayed in a normal room, and why didn't he mention this, and why would this be necessary at all? Unless of course it wasn't strictly legal, and Mrs Jones knew this, and was covering her backside?

KR,
Vic.

[CliveEnglish]

Afternoon everyone.
I find the arguments and counter arguments over the relative honesty of each and every bloomin' witness somewhat pointless when the known facts are put forward.
Fundamentally, Hanratty's reliability is a moot point. Hanratty could quite legitimately have keep his mouth shut. Nowadays the judge must ensure that the defendant is aware of the impression that not giving evidence may impart upon the jury. I don't agree that this is necessary as the onus was then and is today on the crown to prove the defendants guilt. The prosecution resorted to relying upon the testimony of 3 ne'er-do-wells.
Even so the most important and undeniable facts are that Langdale received extremely lenient treatment in courts because of his usefulness to the police. It is beyond belief that a known fence such as Louise Anderson did not face any criminal charges whatsoever for receiving and passing on stolen goods. As for Nudds, his lies were legendary even before the A6 murder happened. In fact because of his lies Nudd's evidence must be considered fully in the context of all the first hand witness testimony of the Vienna staff.

Hello Victor.

As far as I am aware Anderson and France were never prosecuted, and Grace Jones received the same immunity from prosecution as Anderson.

In her evidence Grace Jones admitted to keeping 3 different sets of books, and essentially defrauding the taxman. I get this information from Woffinden page 229, only he puts a very pro-Hanratty slant onto the events. The most obvious example of this being when he talks of Swanwick dropping the book... "Michael Hanratty has always remembered..."

She took money from guests staying at Ingledene and did not declare the income - that's a textbook definition of defrauding the taxman. Just because it's not unique nor as bad as modern MPs doesn't make it any less of a crime.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Mrs Jones was ever investigated let alone given any immunity for any criminal activity. Because she had 3 seperate books does not mean she was defrauding anybody. In fact where is it documented that Mrs Jones did not declare all of her income? At worst she would have been in contravention of local authority rules over beds in bathrooms but still no evidence exists to show that she was ever penalised for that.

Nudds was definitely a career criminal, but he never served his full term on any of the occasions he was imprisoned, Hanratty always served his full terms.

Hanratty received 4 seperate convictions. He only served the full term once, when he got out in 1961. September 1954 saw him receive a 12 month probation order along with a similar driving ban. In October 1955, he got 2 years and served less than 18 months. In July 1957 he was sentenced to 6 months and served 4 months.

Presumably this would be extra work for her, cooking breakfast and serving it in 2 different places, so why wasn't Hanratty sent back to the main dining room on the 2nd night when he stayed in a normal room, and why didn't he mention this, and why would this be necessary at all? Unless of course it wasn't strictly legal, and Mrs Jones knew this, and was covering her backside?

If Hanratty did indeed take breakfast at all on the morning of the 23rd in Mrs Jones guesthouse then that causes a lot more problems as it would make it very difficult for Hanratty to be in 2 places at once doesn't it?

Clive

France have definitely paid the price of Thierry Henry's handy craft against Ireland. There is justice in this world after all!
I've heard that this countries exports of food have been boosted recently. 23 cases of vegetables recently arrived in South Africa..Boom Boom:-)

[Victor]

Hi Clive,

These two quotes seem to refer to similar outcomes to me:-

It is beyond belief that a known fence such as Louise Anderson did not face any criminal charges whatsoever for receiving and passing on stolen goods.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Mrs Jones was ever investigated let alone given any immunity for any criminal activity.

There is no evidence either were investigated nor that they were specifically given immunity, but both had committed crimes and neither were prosecuted.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Victor,
The LCN DNA test in question is a type of test that not only the FBI refuse to touch because of its unreliability but also most of the European Courts refuse to have anything to do with----and it is getting more precarious ,not less, in terms of its reliability, as each day passes.It has been obvious to me that a tiny 40 year old sample of cloth kept we dont know where but strongly suspected of having been kept in the locker with Hanratty"s trousers and other exhibits from the same trial.Originally these trousers were stained with semen.It has been suggested they may have been washed and the wash liquid kept in a vial ,the vial that at some point broke and dispersed its contents over other exhibits including the knicker sample.The LCN DNA test is very questionable.
Best
Norma

[Natalie Severn]

Victor , can you please be specific here.What crime was Mrs Jones convicted of exactly---when and where can we look it up? Or can you provide the source and the detail?Thanks

[Limehouse]

Hi Norma,

As for the second quote. Why would there be any of Hanratty's blood in the car? And of course there was his semen dribbling all over Storie's knickers, so that means the "NOTHING" is dead wrong.KR,

Vic.

Good evening Vic and all,

Valerie testified that she removed her knickers before the rape. Given that the rape took place on the back seat of a MM car, it is strange indeed that no semen at all was found on the seats of the car or the floor.

The car was clean of any sign of the killer, Hanratty or no Hanratty.

It is interesting to me that all of the physical evidence that 'apparently' links Hanratty to the crime actually left the scene of the crime before it became evidence. Moreover, evidence that could be wiped of evidence (gun, cartridges) was wiped of evidence but was then helpfully left in a room occupied by Hanratty or left with a Hanratty 'signature' (hanky). Not only that, but any gaps in the evidence were generously supplied by Anderson or Nudds.

Even allowing for all this 'evidence' the case was still so shaky that to be double sure there was maximum contempt for the accused, the case was moved from the Old Bailey back to Bedford.

And you wonder why people doubt the DNA evidence?

[Victor]

Victor , can you please be specific here.What crime was Mrs Jones convicted of exactly---when and where can we look it up? Or can you provide the source and the detail?Thanks

Hi Norma,

Nothing, as I've said a few times, just like Louise Anderson.

KR,
Vic.