a6 murder

[Steve]

Hi Reg

Miss Storie was adamant they stopped at Heathrow. She said the gunman ordered Mike to stop there and she remembered especially because Mike normally refused to buy Regent petrol.

KR
Steve

[reg1965]

Hi Reg

Please don't take this the wrong way, I really do not want to cause offence, but would you mind making those points again? I think you are saying something quite interesting, but it is almost as if you are talking too fast! (It's probably just me not being able to read!)

Kind regards,
Steve

No offence taken but read it a bit slower because it is quite interesting (IMHO). I was typing it rather than dictating it into a voice to text translator man!

if you have been drinking then I'll see you tomorrow. If not then you will still be ugly! :-)

Reg

[jimarilyn]

Hi,

Harry Hirons on the A6 Murder Committee ? That's a new one on me !

[reg1965]

Hi Reg

Miss Storie was adamant they stopped at Heathrow. She said the gunman ordered Mike to stop there and she remembered especially because Mike normally refused to buy Regent petrol.

KR
Steve

Hi Steve
I agree that was what Valerie Storie said happened, but enough evidence has been produced on this thread to suggest that Valerie Storie was not a reliable witness.

On the BBC Horizon programme of 16/5/02

MICHAEL SHERRARD: The witness may be perfectly honest, absolutely convinced that he or she has identified the right man or woman and you're not going to be able to cross-examine them to show that they're lying "cos they're not lying, they're telling the truth as they see it.

Reg

[reg1965]

Hi all
THE A6 COMMITTEE
these are just the members I know of

James snr & Mrs Hanratty
Michael Hanratty
Justice
Fox
Foot
Trevor Dutton
Michael Fogarty-Waul (?)

any others anyone?

Reg

[Steve]

Frank Justice, Jean's brother was also a member.

[reg1965]

Hi all

I have a grave confession to make

I do truly now believe the DNA evidence is correct (caz, johnl, victor et al) have convinced me.

Now I have that one out of the way and Hanratty is truly guilty can we please see all of the documents that have been withheld from public scrutiny until god knows when (2032 or somesuch date)!

There is nothing to fear. Hanratty did it...what is there to hide!

The penitent Reg
with fingers crossed all of the time of course ;-)

[reg1965]

Frank Justice, Jean's brother was also a member.

Thanks Steve
Any more?

[Steve]

Hi Reg

Tony Mason, the Slough journalist who knew the exact location of the cornfield was a member too.

There was never a formal membership, so I suppose John Lennon & Yoko Ono could also be included. Members came and went, anyone with an interest was loosely included.

David Lewes the doctor who went daily to the trial was also considered to be a member, as was Bernard (Barney) Berkson the legal eagle.

The leading lights were of course Justice and Fox. Foot came into the picture later.

Alphon, of course, was also a very brief member!

KR
Steve

[reg1965]

Hi Reg

Tony Mason, the Slough journalist who knew the exact location of the cornfield was a member too.

There was never a formal membership, so I suppose John Lennon & Yoko Ono could also be included. Members came and went, anyone with an interest was loosely included.

David Lewes the doctor who went daily to the trial was also considered to be a member, as was Bernard (Barney) Berkson the legal eagle.

The leading lights were of course Justice and Fox. Foot came into the picture later.

Alphon, of course, was also a very brief member!

KR
Steve

Hi Steve
Wow! Tony Mason knew where the cornfield was! Was the owner of the field asked to join too. Surely he knew where the field was too. Along with the National Geographic Society too I suppose.

I am glad though to have been included in a committe that John Lennon was once member of. Wow I can't believe it! I've always loved the Beatles, but John was always my favourite.
Wait till my mum finds out she will be so proud!

Regards
Reg

[timsta]

Hi Timsta,

Colonel Mustard's jealous pal Bill for obvious reasons.

Yeah, I guessed that would be the one sentence answer.

How extensive were Bill's gangland connections? What (or who) linked him to Alphon? What hold did he have over Acott and/or Oxford that drove them to fit up Hanratty in Alphon's place? (The latter may be fairly obvious; Oxford was as bent as they come. He's dead now, so I can say that without fear of legal reprisals.)

Timsta

[caz]

Hi Reg,

Sorry, but I’m mightily confused about your contamination theories. You still appeared to be claiming in post #1882 that JH’s DNA could have shown up as a result of being accidentally transferred to the knickers when the exhibits were ‘all mixed together’ in the same box during the trial. If you were not claiming that this was how it got there, but just making a general point about contamination possibilities, then the box of exhibits becomes irrelevant.

Not only would the DNA scientists have been well aware of the possible sources of contamination, but JamesDean pointed out in post #1879 (ie before yours) that: ‘the fragment had been cut from the knickers prior to the trial so transfer would have been at an earlier stage and not during the trial’.

So the only possibility they had to consider - and did consider - was whether JH’s DNA, which was detected on the surviving knicker fragment cut before the trial, could have got there by any other means than during the process of the rape. My understanding is that they concluded that it would have been too unlikely for the original semen evidence (which was how the rapist’s blood group had been determined) to have disappeared without trace, and for DNA transferred accidentally from an innocent JH in the immediate aftermath of the crime to have taken the place of the rapist’s semen and persisted for 40 years, accompanied by surviving DNA from VS and MG, all in a distribution that was consistent with the sexual activity presumed to have taken place.

There are only a couple of ways out of this for JH now. One is for you to claim that the scientists were not only corrupt beyond belief, but diabolically clever to have stage managed the evidence to produce this result. The other is to claim that the original investigators must have been so incompetent that they cut the wrong bit from the knickers, ie not the bit with the rapist’s semen on it (but still unaccountably bearing MG’s DNA??), which accidentally got bodily fluid from JH transferred to it at some point.

And even then, if you could make one of those claims stick, it would merely confirm that there was insufficient evidence for a safe conviction. After all that, JH could STILL have been guilty!

The words ‘struggle’ and ‘uphill’ come to mind. Good luck.

Love,

Caz
X

[reg1965]

Hi Reg,

Sorry, but I’m mightily confused about your contamination theories. You still appeared to be claiming in post #1882 that JH’s DNA could have shown up as a result of being accidentally transferred to the knickers when the exhibits were ‘all mixed together’ in the same box during the trial. If you were not claiming that this was how it got there, but just making a general point about contamination possibilities, then the box of exhibits becomes irrelevant.

Not only would the DNA scientists have been well aware of the possible sources of contamination, but JamesDean pointed out in post #1879 (ie before yours) that: ‘the fragment had been cut from the knickers prior to the trial so transfer would have been at an earlier stage and not during the trial’.

So the only possibility they had to consider - and did consider - was whether JH’s DNA, which was detected on the surviving knicker fragment cut before the trial, could have got there by any other means than during the process of the rape. My understanding is that they concluded that it would have been too unlikely for the original semen evidence (which was how the rapist’s blood group had been determined) to have disappeared without trace, and for DNA transferred accidentally from an innocent JH in the immediate aftermath of the crime to have taken the place of the rapist’s semen and persisted for 40 years, accompanied by surviving DNA from VS and MG, all in a distribution that was consistent with the sexual activity presumed to have taken place.

There are only a couple of ways out of this for JH now. One is for you to claim that the scientists were not only corrupt beyond belief, but diabolically clever to have stage managed the evidence to produce this result. The other is to claim that the original investigators must have been so incompetent that they cut the wrong bit from the knickers, ie not the bit with the rapist’s semen on it (but still unaccountably bearing MG’s DNA??), which accidentally got bodily fluid from JH transferred to it at some point.

And even then, if you could make one of those claims stick, it would merely confirm that there was insufficient evidence for a safe conviction. After all that, JH could STILL have been guilty!

The words ‘struggle’ and ‘uphill’ come to mind. Good luck.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz
I'm not being funny but read my post #1882 again. You have totally misunderstood what I have written. I am talking about where has the other DNA gone from the hanky!

Regards
Reg

[Victor]

Hi Victor,

I was in this very situation in 1975 when I was just 23 years old, having fractured my cervical spine in a RTA while working as a bus conductor. Thanks to the Grace of GOD and after a period of 4 months hospitalisation and a further period of convalescence I was able to make an almost full recovery.

You really have my sympathy for what you've gone through, but I'm really glad you came out of it eventually.

I hope you didn't take offense, I'll admit I was getting the impression that certain people who were defending JH were inadvertently belittling the pain and suffering that VS went through, so I made some hasty posts highlighting this. I can't begin to understanding her ordeal, and like my earlier post where I took offense to the "No eye-witnesses (VS excepted)" quotes that seem to be all over the place - including wikipedia. She had a nightmare experience and I think that we need to be careful when highlighting the inadequacies of the original trial that we aren't overlooking her feelings.

PCR has been able to extract DNA from 10,000 year old mummies where the body would have been drained of all fluids; and even 40,000 mammoths. The whole point of PCR/LCN is that it can detect microscopic pieces of DNA from thousands of years ago. It is also one of its drawbacks in that contaminants are too easily incorporated into the mix.

Reg, Yes, that is where you have some tissues from the body - every cell in your body, including your bones, has DNA in it. On the hanky, the mucus is cells from your nose. Semen are cells. Skin flakes are cells - but these can be brushed off. You have to have some cells.

Hi Steve
I agree that was what Valerie Storie said happened, but enough evidence has been produced on this thread to suggest that Valerie Storie was not a reliable witness.

I disagree completely - she was a fabulous witness and fingered the right man!!! There are lots of examples of where she may have been mistaken, but the evidence used to do this is from other witnesses who could be equally mistaken, and let's remind ourselves SHE WAS RIGHT!

Now I have that one out of the way and Hanratty is truly guilty can we please see all of the documents that have been withheld from public scrutiny until god knows when (2032 or somesuch date)!

There is nothing to fear. Hanratty did it...what is there to hide!

Are you talking about the France families' private papers? What else? There's no guarantee that any of these papers will ever be made public, because they are private papers - they don't need a reason not to publish them, you need a reason to overturn the Data Protection Act.

There are only a couple of ways out of this for JH now. One is for you to claim that the scientists were not only corrupt beyond belief, but diabolically clever to have stage managed the evidence to produce this result. The other is to claim that the original investigators must have been so incompetent that they cut the wrong bit from the knickers, ie not the bit with the rapist’s semen on it (but still unaccountably bearing MG’s DNA??), which accidentally got bodily fluid from JH transferred to it at some point.

Hi Caz,
Well the easy part is introducing JH's DNA (from the hanky) - the difficult part is removing the real rapists DNA. And that's the thing about LCN, you can have as many extra DNA profiles as you like, the lab techs, the investigators - Reg's many examples show this - but show me a single one where a detectable profile has been removed!

[jimarilyn]

I disagree completely - she was a fabulous witness and fingered the right man!!! There are lots of examples of where she may have been mistaken, but the evidence used to do this is from other witnesses who could be equally mistaken, and let's remind ourselves SHE WAS RIGHT!

It's extremely interesting Victor that you choose the word fabulous.The literal meaning of the word fabulous is barely credible, exaggerated, of the nature of a fable. It is indeed derived from the word fable which means a story not based on fact, a false statement. a lie. Deduce from this what you will.