The Rhyl Alibi

[Victor]

Of course this then leads also to the discrediting of at least three witnesses, all of whom state they saw Hanratty and spoke to him in Rhyl at 7.30pm, when according to his own testimony, he was still in Liverpool at that time.

Hi Jen,

Bob Woffinden and Paul Foot both go to very long lengths to prove how unreliable Identification evidence is, only of course they use it to undermine Skillet, Trower and Storie's identifications but everything they say applies just as well to those alleged sightings in Rhyl.

KR,
Vic.

[babybird67]

Hi bb,

Hanratty knew he would hang if found guilty. An innocent man who knew he was nowhere near the crime scene at the time would have told the truth about his real whereabouts and stuck to it, regardless of what minor naughties he may have been up to. Changing his story was the last resort of a desperate man caught out in the lies he needed to tell if his neck was to be saved. The jury saw through him - we were not there.

And his DNA mingled with his victim's eventually confirmed it.

Love,

Caz
X

Caz i quite agree but there are people who seem to think this alibi was 'true' which is why i am looking at it in more detail...how can it be true that Hanratty left Liverpool for Rhyl at 7.30pm when the bus left much earlier than that?

Of course this then leads also to the discrediting of at least three witnesses, all of whom state they saw Hanratty and spoke to him in Rhyl at 7.30pm, when according to his own testimony, he was still in Liverpool at that time.

It is no wonder the jury found him guilty!

[Bob Hinton]

Hi Caz,
Iin absolute agreement, unfortunately this thread is all about prolonging the truth.
.

Totally with Richard on this one.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Caz,
Iin absolute agreement, unfortunately this thread is all about prolonging the truth.
I have summed up this case many times, its quite easy really. Hanratty was guilty as charged, he appears to have been the type that would have sworn on his familys lives to have saved his own, he knew his family believed in him , and that knowledge, and an increasing public awareness had him plead his innocence right to the end.
Simply it was his only chance.
Ii would bet a pound to a penny, if Valerie Storey was to read this post , she would nod her head in agreement.
Regards Richard.
My flak jacket is now in place.

[caz]

Hi bb,

Hanratty knew he would hang if found guilty. An innocent man who knew he was nowhere near the crime scene at the time would have told the truth about his real whereabouts and stuck to it, regardless of what minor naughties he may have been up to. Changing his story was the last resort of a desperate man caught out in the lies he needed to tell if his neck was to be saved. The jury saw through him - we were not there.

And his DNA mingled with his victim's eventually confirmed it.

Love,

Caz
X

[babybird67]

I am currently looking in greater detail at the Rhyl alibi, and this thread is to discuss issues thrown up in the matter.

There seem to be quite a few inconsistencies in the Rhyl alibi to my mind.

For example, the bus from Liverpool to Rhyl left at 6pm and arrived at 8.19. Hanratty would have had only 75 minutes between his stated time of arrival in Liverpool and the time the bus to Rhyl left to do all of the following, which he describes as doing:

got off the train;
had a wash in the station;
put property in the left-luggage office, and made enquiries outside the station about Carleton, Tarleton or Talbot Road;
got on and off a bus;
gone to the sweet shop in Scotland Road, walked back to Lime Street, looked for but been unable to find the road;
gone for a meal;
discussed the sale of a watch;
decided to go to Rhyl, presumably collected what he had left at the left luggage office, found the bus station and got on the bus. (this is from the Appeal Judgement,

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/judgmentsfiles/j1166/HANRATTY.htm

article 188)

Is it credible that he was able to do all these things in that period of time before the bus to Rhyl departed?

This is without even considering the contradiction in his evidence that he didn't leave Liverpool for Rhyl until 7.30pm, at which time there was no bus departing to Rhyl anyway! In fact, from what i have read so far regarding the Rhyl alibi, it could double as quite a handy collander!

What do other contributors think? (more to come)