A6 murder and the 1967 Nimmo Inquiry

[Graham]

Hi Julie,

come on, own up - which bits don't you agree with?

Regards,

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Over the years, there has been no concrete and inarguable evidence to prove his innocence, despite the worthy efforts of at least some of his supporters. No new evidence to support even a suggestion of his innocence has been forthcoming, not a whisper. Not even a death-bed confession from P L Alphon (but who'd believe it anyway?). Not a squeak from his defence-team, or his surviving relatives. Not a single syllable from some retired copper who wants to clear his conscience before he goes to meet his Maker. Not a single tap on the pipes from anyone who knew him (and there must be at least some still drawing breath) prepared to speak up for him. No-one, it seems, wants to know him any more. Except, for some weird reason, us.

Graham,
I really don"t understand you here.
Over the years there has been not only an acceptance that the original trial was seriously flawed but also a lengthy Police Report from Detective Chief Superintendent Roger Matthews in which he concluded James Hanratty was entirely innocent---29 May 1996.
Alphon as you well know confessed several times including in his Paris confession which BTW ensured he could claim no damages from the various summonses etc he had taken out against individuals and newspapers---in other words he lost heavily because of his Paris "confession" financially.
And a small army of Rhyl people [U]who were and still are appalled and bewildered [/U]by the way their statements have been treated from the very beginning by various authorities/reports/appeals .
The Rhyl witnesses have never wavered in their conviction that Hanratty was here in Rhyl on 22nd August 1961.They included Mrs Margaret Walker,Mrs Ivy Vincent, Mrs Betty Davies and Mrs Jones and her daughter Brenda Harris.Also Mr Trevor Dutton and Mr Christopher Larman.
As for death bed confessions why would Nudds or Langdale want to stir up a hornets nest?

[Graham]

Graham,
I really don"t understand you here.
Over the years there has been not only an acceptance that the original trial was seriously flawed but also a lengthy Police Report from Detective Chief Superintendent Roger Matthews in which he concluded James Hanratty was entirely innocent---29 May 1996.
Alphon as you well know confessed several times including in his Paris confession which BTW ensured he could claim no damages from the various summonses etc he had taken out against individuals and newspapers---in other words he lost heavily because of his Paris "confession" financially.
And an army of Rhyl people who were and still are appalled and bewildered by the way their statements have been treated from the very beginning by various authorities/reports/appeals .

Hi Norma,

well, I think you know already what I'm going to say -

I don't accept that the trial was flawed, but I do accept that it is difficult to see how the jury came to a guilty verdict on the prosecution evidence placed before them. Having said that, I do know that some people would say that a guilty verdict was inevitable, largely on the basis of Valerie's i.d.

Roger Matthews was speaking pre-DNA, as we all were in those days.

Peter Louis Alphon was a manipulative nutter, a person who became involved in the A6 Case via a very, very bizarre coincidence. He had nothing to do with it, nothing whatsoever. His 'confessions' were merely his rather shallow attempt to keep his name to the forefront of something that had been profitable for him. Had he not been a total weird-o and not upset his fellow guests at the Alexandra Court, we'd never have heard of him.

The Rhyl Evidence is worthless. An 'army' of Rhyl people, you say? Maybe one or two, but an 'army'? Don't think so. The evidence is worthless because Hanratty's claimed presence in Rhyl cannot be proved - and Sherrard knew that. That is why Sherrard got Hanratty to sign a disclaimer before he, Sherrard, introduced the Rhyl Alibi to the court. Sherrard was not a fool. I will say again, for the nth time, that had Hanratty stuck to his Liverpool Alibi, there is a possibility he would have been believed by the jury.

I have to say, this is better than the crap currently on TV....

Graham

[Limehouse]

Hi Norma,

you missed all the fun!

In all honesty, I don't think anyone who posts here is a "hang 'em and flog 'em" merchant. Babybird did say convicted rapists and murderers, rather than suspected same. Speaking personally, I am totally and completely agin capital punishment, something imposed in my opinion by societies lacking in any humanity regarding those found guilty of murder. I lived in the USA for a few years, where it was an almost everyday occurrence to hear of some poor bugger being electrocuted/gassed/shot/injected - but having said that, I will say again that a former warden of San Quentin Prison once said, quote, "there are no guilty men on death row". How many genuinely-innocent people have been executed in America over, say, the last 50 years, is open to argument. I would say very few, but that's just my opinion.

For what it's worth, my own interest in the A6 Case stems from (a) I remember it; (b) I remember Paul Foot's tireless efforts to have the case reviewed; (c) I wondered myself if an innocent man had been executed, and I continued to do so until the DNA results; (d) a particular interest in the history, the society and the morals of the time; (e) why it happened.

Graham

Hi Graham

As you know - I have at times wavered concerning my doubts about Hanratty's guilt - that is why I am always careful to say that I doubt his guilt. However - it has never been the DNA that has got me wondering - it has always been a good debate with someone like yourself. The problem for me is - all the doubts I had concerning the quality of evidence presented cannot be negated by the DNA evidence. Surely the doubts you had prior to the DNA evidence must still linger? Do you have absolute faith in the LCN DNA method?

Be honest - if this case with its neatly fitting circumstancial evidence was presented as - say - an Inspector Morse or a Frost episode people would be writing to the Radio Times in droves saying what a weak script it made!

I am glad you are against capital punishment. I am too. Always have been and always will be. My reasons are not just that an innocent person might be executed - it is that I do not believe the state should exercise judicial execution. I can understand people who don't hold that view - especially if they or their families have suffered at the hands of a vicious criminal.

The bits of your post above I didn't fully agree with are those concerning the Birmingham Six. I don't think justice was done and perhaps one reason why the guilty have not been arrested now is that the Good Friday Agreement has allowed some guilty of 'crimes of war' (if that's what they want to call them) have been released from their sentences and no further good (or peace) would come from going after those really responsible for Birmingham and Guilford and so on.

With regard to the Bakewell case - I don't believe the boy arrested was responsible and - like a good few others at the time - he was duped into signing a confession. He was another poor boy with learning difficulties who 'fitted' the idea of a sex killer in much the same way as Stefan Kiszko did.

Would I believe the death-bed confession of PLA? No. I wouldn't. But I often wonder if there isn't someone out there - perhaps alive - perhaps dead who was responsible for the A6 crime and who escaped notice all together.

Now who wants to run with that idea?

But please - let's make it a nice clean and polite debate...

[Limehouse]

Graham,
I really don"t understand you here.
Over the years there has been not only an acceptance that the original trial was seriously flawed but also a lengthy Police Report from Detective Chief Superintendent Roger Matthews in which he concluded James Hanratty was entirely innocent---29 May 1996.
Alphon as you well know confessed several times including in his Paris confession which BTW ensured he could claim no damages from the various summonses etc he had taken out against individuals and newspapers---in other words he lost heavily because of his Paris "confession" financially.
And a small army of Rhyl people [U]who were and still are appalled and bewildered [/U]by the way their statements have been treated from the very beginning by various authorities/reports/appeals .
The Rhyl witnesses have never wavered in their conviction that Hanratty was here in Rhyl on 22nd August 1961.They included Mrs Margaret Walker,Mrs Ivy Vincent, Mrs Betty Davies and Mrs Jones and her daughter Brenda Harris.Also Mr Trevor Dutton and Mr Christopher Larman.
As for death bed confessions why would Nudds or Langdale want to stir up a hornets nest?

Hi Norma - I read that Matthews Report again recently and I must say I was impressed all over again by his conviction that the police had not conducted an honest investigation in any sense of the word.

Yes Graham - it was pre DNA - but the DNA result does not negate the fact that there were elements of dishonesty in that investigation.

Let's face it - if there was absolutely no agument over the integrity of Acott's investigation and the quality of the prosecution case - why on earth were there - what three appeals? And one as late as 2002?

The Rhyl witnesses simply cannot be dismissed just because a bus ticket or a signature in a hotel book does not prove Hanratty was in Rhyl on those days.

[babybird67]

I notice you have only submitted 22 posts though. Where are the many hours of passionate debate ?




Eh ? She even admits to being a ranter.
The following excerpt is from an unbelievably long tirade from just over a year ago (the one where she is extremely insulting and offensive towards Julie) ....................


No wonder she kept a low profile after this.
One has to feel sorry for her long suffering better half.

LOL! Yes that post was a rant, in response to the bullying i had suffered at the hands of you Reg and Julie. I am happy to admit that. Which i see has started again with the sexist comments about my private life. LOL! Just get a life Jim...or is it marilyn?

[babybird67]

Thank you for your compliments, I must be doing something right.

You sound just like your lapdog Victor....oo...er...oo..... 'I don't have my books with me to verify if what I'm spouting is true or not'. What a kop out.

Anyone who has closely studied this case wouldn't need their books, they would know automatically that Hanratty asked Mrs Dinwoodie only for directions to a Carlton/Tarleton Street or Road.

What you know about the A6 Murder case can be written on the back of a postage stamp.

Nobody who knows this case can remember every single detail about the case. They weren't compliments by the way although in Hanratty is martyr land i understand everything is topsy turvey and you may well have got your little self confused.

[babybird67]

Graham and Hatchett

thank you for your kind words and defence of my posts. Much appreciated.

Hatchett it is good to see you posting again and i would like to ask you to give us the benefit of your legal experience regarding the original trial. Would be nice if you started a thread on the subject?

best

Jen x

[Graham]

Hi Julie,

before I say another word, let me just emphasise that I have never had the slightest reason to suspect that you are anything but totally honest where the A6 Case is concerned.

1] I lost a very good friend in the Birmingham Bombings, and believe me if I'd have got my hands on the bunch that were eventually arrested I'd have seen them off with my own bare hands. But - there's always a but - it does seem that the original suspects were fingered by some dodgy forensics courtesy of Dr Frank Skuse - I don't even pretend to know the ins and outs of this, except that traces of nitro-glycerine found on their hands could have come from a fresh pack of playing-cards. What does give me pause, however, is the apparent lack of energy amongst the UK and Irish Republic police to go after those who apparently owned up to the bombings. Do the police of two countrie know something that we don't?

2] the thing about the Bakewell Case is that it's much more recent than the A6 case, and I do know for a fact that Stephen Downing is not considered innocent by quite a few people around and about. This conflicts with Norma's argument that there are people in Rhyl, 50 years after the A6 Case, who are convinced that they saw Hanratty at the critical time. Not for a moment am I suggesting that Norma is mistaken - but I am strongly suggesting that her argument is a non-starter. With the Bakewell Case, the police had over 15 suspects (I think that figure is about right), including at least one person with a genuine interest in silencing Wendy Sewell, but none of those suspects are currently being investigated. The police could not link anyone else to the murder, nor could they completely eliminate Downing, so the case is closed, even though Downing remains the prime suspect.

3] Is there someone still alive who knows something about the A6 Crime? I would have to say - yes. But I don't think that that 'someone' could be responsible for the crime. Hanratty got about a bit - apart from the Rehearsal Club he moved around Soho criminal society. He knew people, and people knew him. He was very gregarious - his brother Michael said that if he needed money he could just go and get it. He travelled rather more than the average person in 1961. Hanratty knew a lot of people. I would be very surprised if there is not some aged gent, some former denizen of the Soho underworld of the 1950's and 1960's, someone now in his seventies or eighties, who does not know something about Hanratty's involvement; something that we don't know and people before us never knew. I think maybe that there is still some possibility of a death-bed confession....

Graham

[Graham]

What you know about the A6 Murder case can be written on the back of a postage stamp.

Why do you find it necessary to say something like that?

[Natalie Severn]

Graham,
Will return to this later.Meanwhile the Rhyl witnesses are worthless? The Rhyl witnesses came forward only days before the "trial" if it can seriously be called as such,was due to end.That is the real reason they were not called.There was no time for the defence to investigate their claims.
I seriously wonder at your sense of justice.
Surely you can"t seriously claim Nudds was a more reliable witness than the four Rhyl women,Mrs Walker,Mrs Vincent and the two Mrs Davies"s who corroborated each others statements and were supported by Mr Noel Davies?
The Rhyl witnesses less reliable than Langdale? A long term felon detested by his fellow prisoners because of his predilection for Kray like torture games?
The Rhyl witnesses worthless compared with Skillett whose ID Blackhall"s negated ?And Graham, dont forget, Blackhall was the one trusted by police originally and requested by them to draw up an ID because it was he who had gone to them to report seeing the car and it was he who described the car accurately saying it had three red strips of sellotape on the back?
Well Blackhall it was who said the driver of the Morris Minor he himself saw
[I]looked nothing like Hanratty [/I]
As for Trower----talk about scraping the barrel.His own mate said ,in as many words the man lied!

[jimarilyn]

Nobody who knows this case can remember every single detail about the case. They weren't compliments by the way although in Hanratty is martyr land i understand everything is topsy turvey and you may well have got your little self confused.

98.734 % of people would know my 'compliment' remarks were tongue in cheek. Sadly, you have no sense of humour, just like a good few other jimdiditites (Da doo Ron Ron excepted).

My final response to you......you're just not worth time and effort arguing with. Your logic most of the time, just like Mr Nasal Spray's, defies belief.

[Graham]

Hi Norma,

Surely you can"t seriously claim Nudds was a more reliable witness than the four Rhyl women,Mrs Walker,Mrs Vincent and the two Mrs Davies"swho corroborate each others statements supported by Mr Noel Davies?

Ain't claiming no such thing - your words, not mine. Nudds' testmony was relative worthless - the police knew that, and Sherrad knew that. The dear ladies from Rhyl may well have been very worthy, but they basically didn't know what they were talking about and Michael Sherrard equally dismiissed them because he knew that anything they said could not be proved.

The Rhyl witnesses less reliable than Langdale? Along term felon detested by his fellow prisoners because of his predilection to Kray like torture games?

Have already stated that I don't think Langdale holds much water - he was a set-up.

Have also already said that I don't hold much faith in any of the so-called Redbridge witnesses. They may have been right, they may have been wrong. Impossible to tell, either then or now. But I'm not legally trained, so can't tell how much either Sherrard or Swanwick thought their evidence was worth.

Must stop for a few tix to get a drinkie....

Graham

[Limehouse]

LOL! Yes that post was a rant, in response to the bullying i had suffered at the hands of you Reg and Julie. I am happy to admit that. Which i see has started again with the sexist comments about my private life. LOL! Just get a life Jim...or is it marilyn?

This is my absolute last word concerning this nasty business. I have never bullied anyone. I simply replied to a post of yours and stated that - in my opinion - you sounded smug and arrogant. Well - you did. And sometimes you still do. For my trouble - I received a torrent of abuse and unfounded accusations from you and some of your buddies and you have continued to do that ever since. Well no more. I'm not going to engage in it any more. I want an decent debate or nothing. It might as well end here and now - we've both said our bit - now let it rest.

[Dupplin Muir]

Hello All

The reason the police don't bother looking for the real Birmingham bombers, the real killer of Carl Bridgewater, the real killer of Jill Dando, the real killer of Billy-Jo Jenkins, and a host of other unsolved crimes, is that they will never admit that they got it wrong. Even after a judge threw out the case against Colin Stagg for the murder of Rachel Nickell, the police in the case were still insisting that he was guilty - though I haven't noticed any apologies for this, following the conviction of Napper for the crime.

Another egregious example of police arrogance and stupidity is the Christie case: many members of the police (and their toadies in the general population) profess to believe that while Christie was responsible for most of the murders, Timothy Evans actually committed one of them. This isn't based on any real evidence, but is just so that they can delude themselves into believing that they hadn't hanged an innocent man.