a6 murder

[Graham]

Hi Nick,

Dixie France left his wife a suicide letter which, the coroner said, expressed 'great bitterness against James Hanratty'.

And if Anderson was only against Hanratty for the sake of the trial, you would expect her to be complimentary towards him afterwards. But in the News of the World interview four years later she was still anti-Hanratty.

Quite correct. Hanratty seems to me to be a largely friendless person, certainly where males were concerned. It would seem that he was viewed with a degree of cynicism at best, and contempt at worst, by other members of the criminal classes. Doubtless he did love his mother and was polite to ladies. As did the Krays, but they still nailed heads to coffee-tables.

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Nick,



Quite correct. Hanratty seems to me to be a largely friendless person, certainly where males were concerned. It would seem that he was viewed with a degree of cynicism at best, and contempt at worst, by other members of the criminal classes. Doubtless he did love his mother and was polite to ladies. As did the Krays, but they still nailed heads to coffee-tables.

Graham

'That fits ,that fits but that doesnt so it can be ignored"! Same game as Sherrard described in his opening speech in which he begins by condemning the sort of evidence they heard from Nudds,and from Langdale and the sort of performance given by Superintendent Acott.

Langdale by the way,whose evidence played a very important part in the case against Hanratty, was your Kray Graham to a "T"----not Hanratty who,btw, had never had a conviction for violence or rape or sexual assault in his life-in complete contrast to the Krays whose entire criminal career was based on violence and murder from the beginning.
When Langdale ordered his cellmate called Dean to sing "Jailhouse Rock",Langdale bound his legs,threatened him with a knife,shaved his eyebrows to make him comply.He had to be locked away from other prisoners ,in solitary confinement until his conviction that June......!
Hanratty had male friends,what are you talking about?---Can you name the members of the criminal classes who viewed him with cynicism or contempt?
David Emery and Nicolai Blythe who thankfully came forward to contradict Hanratty and in his defence and in doing so exposed Langdale"s lies..? Did they view him with cynicism or contempt ?It was they who had exercised with him and neither ever saw Hanratty with Langdale they said. In fact he had always vehemently protested his innocence to them on every occasion on which it was raised.

Terry Evans was another chap who put himself out to help Hanratty,"because he liked him"!
Then we have his warders ,his priests, Sherrard.............

[Graham]

There you go again, Norma, not reading posts...

1] I said earlier that for my money Langdale's so-called 'evidence' was contrived if not by one B Acott, then by someone close to him. I never thought it worth the paper it was written on. Langdale was low-life.

2] By friends, I mean friends outside clink. If you know he had some, any chance you might name a couple? Apart from Dixie France, who we know rather changed his opinion of our Jim?

3] I did actually mention Terry Evans in my post.

Graham

[jimarilyn]

Hi Nick,



Quite correct. Hanratty seems to me to be a largely friendless person, certainly where males were concerned. It would seem that he was viewed with a degree of cynicism at best, and contempt at worst, by other members of the criminal classes. Doubtless he did love his mother and was polite to ladies. As did the Krays, but they still nailed heads to coffee-tables.

Graham

Really ??

I've always been under the impression that the likes of Terry Evans, Donald Fisher, Charles France, David Emery, Nicolai Blythe, Laurence Lanigan, Gerrard Leonard, Fr. John Hughes, Fr. Anthony Hume and the three prison warders at Bedford [to mention just a dozen] were all males. Unless of course they were all transvestites......

On the contrary, I would say that Hanratty's natural affability and cheerfulness enabled him to make friends easily. Male and female.

[Graham]

I asked originally (which seems to have been ignored by you) why so very few people, if any, spoke up for Hanratty at his trial and afterwards.

I'll say no more, because your stupid and inane comment renders your post utterly worthless. But of course, that's what you're good at, isn't it Jim?

Graham

[Victor]

Langdale by the way,whose evidence played a very important part in the case against Hanratty

Hi Norma,

Please can you explain how you think Langdale's evidence was significant, let alone "very important"?

KR,
Vic.

[jimarilyn]

I asked originally (which seems to have been ignored by you) why so very few people, if any, spoke up for Hanratty at his trial and afterwards.

NO you didn't. Take another look at your post [it's #7021 incidentally] which I quoted from.

I'll say no more, because your stupid and inane comment renders your post utterly worthless. But of course, that's what you're good at, isn't it Jim?

Graham

Half a cough. I was half expecting some truly pathetic comment like this. Par for the course. You contradict yourself so much (especially regarding Paul Foot) it's laughable. One minute you admire him the next minute he's some left-wing anti-establishment loonie. At least I don't drone on and on and on like the scratched record that you are. You must like kippers methinks because you keep repeating the same old nonsense. Come up with something original and believable for once in your life.

[Graham]

NO you didn't. Take another look at your post [it's #7021 incidentally] which I quoted from.





Half a cough. I was half expecting some truly pathetic comment like this. Par for the course. You contradict yourself so much (especially regarding Paul Foot) it's laughable. One minute you admire him the next minute he's some left-wing anti-establishment loonie. At least I don't drone on and on and on like the scratched record that you are. You must like kippers methinks because you keep repeating the same old nonsense. Come up with something original and believable for once in your life.

Oh, shut up and get a life, pal.

[RonIpstone]

Terry Evans was definitely male and not a transvestite or cross-dresser and is a good example of how Jim formed long and lasting friendships with members of his own sex.

Let us examine how long Terry and Jim were mates, a couple of days in July 1961 if I am right. They were such good chums that Jim knew of, and referred to, Terry as 'John' a real indication of true friendship if ever there were one.

Finally we know after such a long and close friendship, Jim felt comfortable taking Terry's, or as Jim thought, John's shoes without first asking Terry or John.

Yes, Terry and Jim or, if you prefer, John and Jim, were mates, pals, chums or muckers in every sense of every word descriptive of friendship.

The cynical might say that Terry helped Jim's defence team so as to be 'in on it' and in a position to sell an inside story to the Fourth Estate. I say he did so selflessly, without any thought of financial gain, as a true friend of Jim's of the male variety.

[babybird67]

Hanratty was the first to admit he was not a model citizen. None of us is under the impression that he was.

As has often been quoted on this thread - even by those who doubt Hanratty's guilt - Hanratty told the court "I am not a man the court would approve of - but I am not a murderer and I am not a rapist."

The difference is, some people apply standards to ALL witnesses/people with equity and fairness. If Anderson's involvement in stolen goods makes her a untrustworthy witness, why doesn't Hanratty's involvement in stolen goods make him equally untrustworthy?

As i have maintained time and again on this thread, i DETEST hypocrisy, and i make NO apologies for being angry about having to read defences of rapists and murderers and the slander of rape victims. It does make me angry and I am glad and proud that i am the sort of person that this DOES make angry.

Either being a criminal makes you a liar and makes you an untrustworthy person (as is argued time and again about Anderson, Langdale etc...but from which list Hanratty himself is always so conspicuously/hypocritically missing) or it does not. Selective trust in criminals is naive and quite frankly a ridiculous position to adopt.

[babybird67]

and...

As has often been quoted on this thread - even by those who doubt Hanratty's guilt - Hanratty told the court "I am not a man the court would approve of - but I am not a murderer and I am not a rapist."

What does it matter what Hanratty said? He was a liar, a criminal, he was going to hang if he admitted what he had done...do you expect he would have done anything other than lie in those circumstances?

He was a murderer and he was a rapist and justice was done by the courts. It is just those who hero worship criminals that are flying the flag proudly for miscarriages of justice trying to deprive the victims of the justice they have achieved LEGALLY and JUSTLY through the courts systems, including appeals. Yes, it makes me angry. Yes i am glad it makes me angry. If it didnt make me angry i would worry about what sort of person i was.

[NickB]

Valerie Storie

'I picked out somebody who I thought looked like the man who had done this to me. The fact that it wasn't... OK, I made a mistake but the second time we had the identity parade at Stoke Mandeville and I was told that I could ask them to speak.

'I asked them to say, "Be quiet, I'm thinking" which was something the man had said so many times. I identified him by his voice and his eyes.'

'It has been said I couldn't possibly identify this man because I only saw him for such a short time but in that situation, where one's senses are very much heightened and one's adrenaline is flowing, it leaves an incredibly strong impression on you.

'And I had listened to him talking for the best part of six hours and again, when you are in this state of agitation and someone is talking almost continually, you do not forget that voice. I will never forget that voice.'

'I don't bear the Hanratty family any ill will. I have no grudge to bear against them. They did what they had to do. No mother would ever believe her son is a murderer . . . but every murderer has a mother.'

From an interview with Valerie Storie which appeared in the Mail on Sunday on
28th April and
5th May 2002.

It says she also gave an interview to a Channel 4 programme called Hanratty, The Final Truth. This is mentioned in an earlier post (757) here saying it ‘featured a lengthy interview with Valerie Storey, among other things showing how she copes alone at home’.

[jimarilyn]

Yes, it makes me angry. Yes i am glad it makes me angry. If it didnt make me angry i would worry about what sort of person i was.

I don't know what sort of person you used to be. I know what kind of person you have portrayed yourself to be on this these boards.... A smug, self-satisfied, ranting, intolerant, arrogant, hang-em-high, I know-better than anyone else hypocrite who understands very little about the A6 murder.

[Graham]

Hi BB,

As i have maintained time and again on this thread, i DETEST hypocrisy, and i make NO apologies for being angry about having to read defences of rapists and murderers and the slander of rape victims. It does make me angry and I am glad and proud that i am the sort of person that this DOES make angry.

Yes, and this it what makes me see red when I see some of the posts to this thread....please carry on being angry.

Graham

[jimarilyn]

Independent article 22nd September 1996

Very interesting and revealing comment by Storie in the last paragraph......

AFTER 35 years, three official inquiries, hundreds of press articles and numerous books, the fight to clear the name of the man hanged for the infamous A6 murder may be close to a breakthrough.

The conviction of James Hanratty still excites huge interest, and not just because of morbid fascination with how a married man was shot in cold blood at a spot called Deadman's Hill and his young lover left crippled.

For if, as many believe, Hanratty was wrongly convicted, there can be no belated Birmingham Six-style release for him: the small-time burglar was executed just two months after his trial in 1962.

The latest instalment in the Hanratty saga, which has been kept alive by his family and campaigners, is a potentially explosive Scotland Yard re-examination of the facts by Chief Superintendent Roger Matthews. His report is now with the Home Secretary, Michael Howard, awaiting a decision.

Although no details have been revealed, Ch Supt Matthews has intimated to people close to the case that his verdict is that Hanratty was wrongly convicted. His report is also likely to shatter the belief that just one person was involved in the killing.

Such a conclusion would almost certainly persuade Mr Howard to refer the case back to the Court of Appeal, where the conviction would be quashed. Even if he refused to refer the case, there would still be a legal hearing, because Hanratty's family say they would seek a judicial review against such an "unreasonable" act.

However, the posthumous clearing of Hanratty would not just build another plank in the argument against capital punishment, but would also raise the inevitable question: if Hanratty did not commit the murder, who did?

For many campaigners, including veteran investigator Paul Foot, the finger has long pointed at Peter Alphon, the man originally arrested for the August 1961 murder but later released.

Alphon made an alleged "confession" in Paris several years later. Foot, and others, maintain that he has - despite playing verbal games - stuck to this.

However, the former door-to-door salesman, now 66 and in poor health, claims that such people have "got the wrong end of the stick" and he wants a full inquiry into all the facts.

He told the Independent on Sunday: "I'm refusing to say whether I committed the murder or not. I do deny that I regularly confessed to it. I want a full public inquiry - I have nothing to fear."

His intention appears to be to encourage the authorities to examine all the background to the case, which is one reason why he does not want Hanratty to be granted a pardon. "I do not want everything that has transpired since to be brushed under the carpet. I want all the facts to come out," he said.

This is a clear reference to one of the most puzzling and important aspects of the A6 murder. How did the killer happen to be in the cornfield where the lovers regularly met?

The Scotland Yard report, which has taken 18 months to complete, is expected to address this point.

The apparent acceptance from the beginning that the scientist Michael Gregsten and his lover, Valerie Storie, were stalked, abducted and then attacked by a random killer - as Hanratty was described - has always seemed incredible.

One of the most implausible parts of the case against Hanratty - apart from an apparently sound alibi that he was in North Wales at the time of the murder - is what brought this urban-dwelling bit-part criminal to the cornfield near Maidenhead, in Berkshire.

Mr Alphon is unshakeable on this point. "There were other people involved. I know there were."

He believes that one of the other people was the murdered man's spurned wife, Janet Gregsten, who died recently, and at least one and possibly two others. He also maintains there was "corruption" which later prevented the wider truth coming out.

Mrs Gregsten, who certainly knew of her husband's affair, vehemently denied any involvement during a series of interviews with Paul Foot shortly before her death.

Mr Alphon insists: "I met her several times after the murder and it was always implicit between us that she was involved."

If the Scotland Yard report is as powerful and wide-ranging as rumours suggest, then the clearing of James Hanratty may not after all be the beginning of the end of the saga, but the start of a entirely new chapter.

The signs are that Mr Howard will make his decision soon, but Home Office sources, mindful of the case's long and controversial history, will not be drawn on a likely date.

Miss Storie, whose identification evidence helped convict Hanratty, told the Independent on Sunday last week that the findings were "of no concern" to her.