a6 murder

[Victor]

She can introduce a girl to hanratty despoitre knowing he had access to a gun; he had apparently told her (based on what you have written) he'd kliled someone and he had threatened her in the past.

Not even sure why we are even looking at her evidence and even less why she is being defended. perhaps Hanratty was guilty - I think now he was - but for sure LA is not a credible witness if only because of glaring inconsistencies you have pointed out - leaving aside the fact she had everything to gain from helping the police. Hardly a loyal friend Vic(!)

Hi Viv,

If we examine the relationship between LA and JH from early-61 they were associated as burgular and fence so must have developed some sort of understanding - Hanratty kipping on the 2 armchairs in her flat, &tc. There are some newspaper reports that call LA Jim's "girlfriend" too.

I can further believe that JH leaned on LA for more money from his ill-gotten gains from time to time, but that on the whole she considered him a quite decent crook. She therefore defended and shielded him as much as was reasonable.

Later as the evidence mounted she came to consider him a danger to women generally and herself in particular because he was capable of rape and murder, so turned against him.

I see nothing strange in that, people fall out and lyalties change.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Norma

that is the pertinent point - what happened to change her mind?

I don"t know Viv. However it has been suggested that she must have feared going to prison as a receiver of stolen goods,now the cops were on her trail and would no doubt take a trip to Soho to see what she was attempting to sell at a profit,goods that the police knew were stolen.One way to avoid going to prison would surely have been to help with the prosecution case, by trashing Hanratty---she certainly would not have endeared herself had she persisted along the lines of,"Well I rather liked him, he had lovely clear skin and a slim body" which one newspaper reported her as saying at the beginning.
So self protection is the answer in my view---to avoid going to jail.
Norma

[Natalie Severn]

perhaps Hanratty was guilty - I think now he was

Well Viv,
As I read the accounts of how Hanratty conducted himself after the A6 murder I cannot make this tally.
How do you account for the complete lack of forensic evidence to link Hanratty with that car? No blood [of Hanratty"s]plenty otherwise; no fingerprints [of Hanratty"s] plenty of other finger prints---;no hairs or fibres after the rape that could be linked to Hanratty[but there were hairs and fibres-just none of his in the actual car.
Moreover, he was accused of wearing his new dark coloured Hepworth suit for the murder, yet we know for a fact that there were no blood stains whatever on the suit"s trousers and he was here ,there and everywhere in his new dark-coloured , Hepworth suit[including wearing its jacket] that September,that he dated Mary Meaden in it in early September [after the murder],and Gladys Deacon in both cases he also took them, separately , to West End shows and for rides in his new car. When the police lab got hold of the suit"s trousers they couldnt"s find any blood on them and they had not been dry cleaned,as there were semen stains on the inside of the fly--- from his activities with Gladys he said.
So how come?

[NickB]

he was accused of wearing his new dark coloured Hepworth suit for the murder

But not proven guilty. He could easily have worn another suit.

[Natalie Severn]

But not proven guilty. He could easily have worn another suit.

He didnt have another dark suit Nick.At any rate it is accepted in the appeals that the Hepworth suit is the one referred to and that he wore on the 22nd August when he left the Vienna Hotel in the morning and it was the Hepworth suit he was seen in many times by witnesses who saw him after the 23rd August and during the month of September ,ie after the murder was committed,when he took out at least four of his friends,including his girl friends and his then friend , 57 year old Louise Anderson , for rides in the country in his new car .

[jimornot?]

Well Viv,
As I read the accounts of how Hanratty conducted himself after the A6 murder I cannot make this tally.
How do you account for the complete lack of forensic evidence to link Hanratty with that car? No blood [of Hanratty"s]plenty otherwise; no fingerprints [of Hanratty"s] plenty of other finger prints---;no hairs or fibres after the rape that could be linked to Hanratty[but there were hairs and fibres-just none of his in the actual car.
Moreover, he was accused of wearing his new dark coloured Hepworth suit for the murder, yet we know for a fact that there were no blood stains whatever on the suit"s trousers and he was here ,there and everywhere in his new dark-coloured , Hepworth suit[including wearing its jacket] that September,that he dated Mary Meaden in it in early September [after the murder],and Gladys Deacon in both cases he also took them, separately , to West End shows and for rides in his new car. When the police lab got hold of the suit"s trousers they couldnt"s find any blood on them and they had not been dry cleaned,as there were semen stains on the inside of the fly--- from his activities with Gladys he said.
So how come?

Hi Norma

I agree that there are lots of questions and very few definitive answers which is why the thread exists I suppose. The one fact we can be sure of is that none of the posters here know for certain. Aren’t we all merely disseminating the information, contradictions, coincidences and gaps and coming to an opinion?

On the forensics in the car, given some of the police actions during the investigation (not least naming Alphon as the suspect) I am not altogether confident they were competent to carry out a full check. Were the hairs and fibres you refer to linked to Valerie or Michael or even his aunt who I believe owned the car? I am nowhere near as well; versed as most on this thread but I don’t recall Foot or Woffinden making any great points about other hairs or fibres being present (but open to be corrected). I think you have stated you believe Alphon is the guilty party – if so where were his fibres and hair in the car?

I don’t trust eye witness statements – eg the TV documentary Unsolved History about Roswell showed an incident and people’s recollections only a fairly short while after, which mainly bore very little resemblance to what actually happened. I agree that some of those fingering Hanratty were less than credible but clearly those giving evidence for the defence were unconvincing at the trail and at the subsequent appeals. I don’t accept that the establishment has ordered a cover-up in this.

Was Hanratty really wearing the Hepworth suit afterwards as reported? Would the trousers have had blood on them anyway? And really, what did happen to the jacket - I know his version but should anyone place faith in the tales of a proven liar? I admire your tenacity and faith in, for example, the Rhyl witnesses, but 6 months after the events, how could they be sure? Valerie herself was not even reliable in her identification – she pointed the finger to at least one innocent man. If her testimony is so flawed are we simply being selective in taking her word for things that the gunman was wearing dark coloured suit at all? Her recollection of detail has been ruthlessly challenged in the past – eg on eye colour

For a long time I believed Hanratty innocent and most here seem to agree he did not get a fiar trial. My interest was piqued all those years ago by Paul Foot’s book and it had, I think, influenced my thought processes. This thread has changed my mind finally, after some wavering; the key to me was the DNA and I just choose to believe the DNA was not from a contaminated source. I have not been convinced by any arguments put forward to explain how someone else’s sample has mysteriously been subsumed. And when did this occur anyway? Where are the facts rather than the theories - apart from broken glass from a phial (with apparently no indication of leakage from t
he sealed containers) there are no facts to show that Hanratty’s DNA was transferred to the knicker fragment. There is speculation but I don’t think we actually know what was in the broken glass container do we?

I find it odd too that supporters for Hanratty have been so quiet since the DNA results became known.

I can quite believe that the police were led to Hanratty by his acquaintances and we can only speculate why that might have been the case. I think the whole tragedy was a chance encounter that got out of control – certainly not an attempt to warn MG / VS off.

For all this I really enjoy the cut and thrust of this thread and your own big contribution to it. I wonder what new evidence would make you change your mind on this case? I asked some while ago if anyone had more info on Dixie France’s suicide notes and wonder if they ( or a newly discovered one) hold any clues.

all the best

Viv


PS I am intrigued to know where Michael Sherrard definitively indicated he accepted that the right man had been hanged. You raised this before and I thought it had been cross referenced on the past but as far as I recall no-one has provided you with the answer.

[jimornot?]

Hi Viv,

If we examine the relationship between LA and JH from early-61 they were associated as burgular and fence so must have developed some sort of understanding - Hanratty kipping on the 2 armchairs in her flat, &tc. There are some newspaper reports that call LA Jim's "girlfriend" too.

I can further believe that JH leaned on LA for more money from his ill-gotten gains from time to time, but that on the whole she considered him a quite decent crook. She therefore defended and shielded him as much as was reasonable.

Later as the evidence mounted she came to consider him a danger to women generally and herself in particular because he was capable of rape and murder, so turned against him.

I see nothing strange in that, people fall out and lyalties change.

KR,
Vic.

thanks Vic. Just wonder where she got the evidence about Hanratty prior to the court case being heard. It is a dramatic turn of events especially when 6 months ofrless before the court case, she was introducing a friend to him as a date for Hanratty

atb

viv

[Natalie Severn]

Hi viv,
I haven"t got a lot of time today to address all the questions you ask-I would need to search through the various documents pertaining to the trial for the info on the suit and regarding the other fibres and fingerprints found in the car,You are right,Alphon"s fibres were not found in the car but Juliana Galves told police on September 13th 1961 that she saw Alphon"s open case on the 23rd August and it revealed a pair of black nylon gloves which tallies with what Valerie Storie said viz that the A6 killer wore black nylon gloves,removing one only during the rape.Moreover Alphon confessed on several occasions to the A6 murder,but significantly he never confessed to any other murder later on,[which would signal a crank confession]---so in my view Alphon was at least in there somewhere or other.

I can quite believe that the police were led to Hanratty by his acquaintances and we can only speculate why that might have been the
case.

Can you explain how the police went from looking for Ryan to Hanratty ,viv, I still can"t work that one out actually?

I have not been convinced by any arguments put forward to explain how someone else’s sample has mysteriously been subsumed

All we know about these tests is what those who were responsible for Hanratty"s execution tell us [ie those who are acting on behalf of the state prosecution service] .None of us has seen or had any updated opinion ie 2010 expert up to the minute ,scientific opinion, on the credibility of this fragment compromised as it must be as a piece of allegedly "uncontaminated " evidence ;evidence that has been stored in conditions that don"t remotely comply with modern requirements.Yet we are expected to believe,on face value ,the machinery of the state on this matter[think for example of the "expert [bogus] doctor" used by the state very recently to defend the death of Ian Tomlinson], which has a similar need and obligation to defend the state killing of Hanratty. We are expected to believe that they have discovered that this mysterious sample magically contains the DNA of Hanratty, Valerie Storie Michael Gregsten ---and nobody else"s mark you.Read up on how quickly such DNA can disappear from such a sample---I can provide a link later to such examples if you wish

Best
Norma

[NickB]

Juliana Galves told police on September 13th 1961 that she saw Alphon"s open case on the 23rd August and it revealed a pair of black nylon gloves

That was in the discredited second statement where she claims Alphon didn’t arrive until after the event. The reception book entry contradicts this and provides Alphon with the alibi evidence Hanratty lacks.

[Natalie Severn]

That was in the discredited second statement where she claims Alphon didn’t arrive until after the event. The reception book entry contradicts this and provides Alphon with the alibi evidence Hanratty lacks.

Sherrard QC states that modern tests show there was widespread tampering and fiddling with witness statements by police . The Hotel entry appeared to have been altered -see Foot .

[Natalie Severn]

I think the whole tragedy was a chance encounter that got out of control – certainly not an attempt to warn MG / VS off.

viv,
I only noticed this just now.It is Michael Sherrard QC, Hanratty"s trial barrister who is still asking, in his book published only last year,:

" Had the jury speculated on why Gregston and Storie had gone to this particular country field in the first place,if not set up to it , perhaps by his family,wanting to frighten her off?

[Limehouse]

viv,
I only noticed this just now.It is Michael Sherrard QC, Hanratty"s trial barrister who is still asking, in his book published only last year,:

" Had the jury speculated on why Gregston and Storie had gone to this particular country field in the first place,if not set up to it , perhaps by his family,wanting to frighten her off?

Indeed Norma - it appears that - despite originally parking elswhere that night and deciding to move - they had actually been in that location before. When VS and MG were interviewed by their employer about their affair and Valerie was warned she might ruin MG's career (funny how they were not concerned about MG's marriage being ruined or VS's career come to that!) she persuaded another male colleague to take her out. One evening she took him to the field and told him that it was the place she and MG sometimes used.

This indicates that their courting spots might not have been all that secret. In fact - given the circumstances and the events as they finally unfolded - I would say the chances of someone being sent to find them were stronger than a random encounter by a petty thief who fancied a change in his criminal career.

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Julie. Thats quite right,I remember reading about the young man at Valerie"s office saying he had been shown the place by Valerie.So if he knew all about it,others no doubt did too.
Norma

[jimornot?]

Hi viv,
I haven"t got a lot of time today to address all the questions you ask-I would need to search through the various documents pertaining to the trial for the info on the suit and regarding the other fibres and fingerprints found in the car,You are right,Alphon"s fibres were not found in the car but Juliana Galves told police on September 13th 1961 that she saw Alphon"s open case on the 23rd August and it revealed a pair of black nylon gloves which tallies with what Valerie Storie said viz that the A6 killer wore black nylon gloves,removing one only during the rape.Moreover Alphon confessed on several occasions to the A6 murder,but significantly he never confessed to any other murder later on,[which would signal a crank confession]---so in my view Alphon was at least in there somewhere or other.

Can you explain how the police went from looking for Ryan to Hanratty ,viv, I still can"t work that one out actually?

All we know about these tests is what those who were responsible for Hanratty"s execution tell us [ie those who are acting on behalf of the state prosecution service] .None of us has seen or had any updated opinion ie 2010 expert up to the minute ,scientific opinion, on the credibility of this fragment compromised as it must be as a piece of allegedly "uncontaminated " evidence ;evidence that has been stored in conditions that don"t remotely comply with modern requirements.Yet we are expected to believe,on face value ,the machinery of the state on this matter[think for example of the "expert [bogus] doctor" used by the state very recently to defend the death of Ian Tomlinson], which has a similar need and obligation to defend the state killing of Hanratty. We are expected to believe that they have discovered that this mysterious sample magically contains the DNA of Hanratty, Valerie Storie Michael Gregsten ---and nobody else"s mark you.Read up on how quickly such DNA can disappear from such a sample---I can provide a link later to such examples if you wish

Best
Norma

hi Norma

thanks for your comprehensive reply

I'm not really able to answer your questions I'm afraid. I think there were stories as to how Ryan became Hanratty (wasn't there supposedly a telephone call to the police from a guy hiring Hanratty a car in Ireland? I've never been convinced by the tenous links on this

Re Alphon it is just as incredible his fibres etc were not found in the car. I am not convinced about the confessions - eg the televised one took place outside this country and I gather there were inaccuracies in his statements which undermined them - could have been a clever ploy. as we've speculated before, why did he get away with so much antisocial behaviour, was his alibi sound at all, what about the gloves (although as Nick replied julai Galves' evidence may not be all that sopund - it is a choice as to which of her 3 statements we might accept. BUT, his DNA was not found, he had no links to the gun or hanky etc. If the internet had only existed in the early 70's .... it would have been interesting to have him post here. even if he had no role in the crime, he became (and remains) an interesting player

re the DNA, you believe the sample has been contaminated - but that can only be an assumption on your part. If it wasn't contaminated then arguments about the mystery sample magically containing the DNA is invalidated. Why would the sample contain no other DNa than JH, VS and MG?

I also don't see why the establishment in the 2000's would seek to cover up for a case tried some 40 years before as has been raised in the past - do you believe that yourself? if so why?

all the best

viv

[jimornot?]

Indeed Norma - it appears that - despite originally parking elswhere that night and deciding to move - they had actually been in that location before. When VS and MG were interviewed by their employer about their affair and Valerie was warned she might ruin MG's career (funny how they were not concerned about MG's marriage being ruined or VS's career come to that!) she persuaded another male colleague to take her out. One evening she took him to the field and told him that it was the place she and MG sometimes used.

This indicates that their courting spots might not have been all that secret. In fact - given the circumstances and the events as they finally unfolded - I would say the chances of someone being sent to find them were stronger than a random encounter by a petty thief who fancied a change in his criminal career.

Hi julie

It's a good point but they clearly had the other venue in mind originally which to me indicates the cornfield was not necesasrily a) the only choice b) even the first preference. Seems hit and miss at best to be waiting on the off chance they'd go to that particular field before warning them off. akso it's a bit of a leap to assume that because a friend was told about the field that such info was very widely known and even more of a stretch to assume that knowledge extended to people dedicated to helping janet out.

The fee supposedly paid to Alphon is ridiculously high (but I also think it an extraordinary amount to win on the dogs too - wonder if there was ever any evidence he had similar lucky streaks before or after?)

all the best

Viv