A6 Rebooted

[caz]

I don't think that even Hanratty would have run the risk to himself by planting the gun on the bus - he admitted that he'd told France about this hiding-place.
I agree - any 'normal' person (if such exist under such circumstances) would have tossed the gun into the Thames. If France did place the gun on the bus, then it must have been for a reason, and I can only think that it was to place the blame for the A6 firmly on Hanratty. France doubtless felt that he was running the risk of being accused as an accessory for murder. OK, maybe the logic here isn't fully waterproof, but I still feel that there is a lot of doubt as to who did plant the gun.

Another puzzling aspect is that although the police admitted that prior to his suicide France had written many notes, lettes, etc., only one was ever released for publication. This letter contains the phrase, "They're going to crucify us all" which, if France was not involved in the A6, is puzzling. Anyway, we'll never know now precisely what he meant.

Graham

Hi Graham,

It’s like old times, isn’t it?

The logic here may be more waterproof than you think. If France - or anyone other than Hanratty - hid the gun on the bus, it could have been for ‘insurance’ purposes. Hanratty could hardly have complained that the gun must have been put there to frame him by the man who had supplied it to him, without dropping himself right in it. I suppose there was always the risk that Hanratty would sing like a canary and confess all, but once he had admitted using the gun to commit the murder and rape, would the police really have taken his protestations seriously that France or A.N.Other had stitched him up like a kipper? What evidence was there that Hanratty could not have hidden the gun himself?

I'd forgotten VS had said that about the gunman re-loading. It's quite an important point in my view because it suggests the killer was prepared to use the gun again if necessary. It doesn't really suggest someone who fired in panic and who was surprised and shocked by the results.

Hi Julie,

The killer had to be prepared to use the gun again. He had a long journey ahead of him in his victims’ car. What if it had broken down or run out of fuel and someone had seen blood inside, or been alerted by the police to look out for the car? Also, the fact that he left his only remaining witness alive would indicate panic and inexperience far more than a calculated crime by a gunman who knew what he was doing.

In that short introduction Derrick, Woffinden includes the following very pertinent sentence...."Our understanding of the case has naturally evolved over the years, as pieces of information have trickled into the public domain, notwithstanding the endeavours of the authorities to suppress them."

I hate that word suppress.

To suppress

prevent the dissemination of (information).

"the report had been suppressed"

synonyms:

censor, redact, keep secret, conceal, hide, keep hidden, hush up, gag, keep silent about, withhold, cover up, smother, stifle, muzzle, ban, not disclose, not breathe a word of;

Hi SH,

But note that these ‘pieces of information’ did ‘trickle’ into the public domain, in spite of any ‘endeavours’ by the authorities to suppress them.

Had the authorities really wanted to prevent information from ever surfacing, all they needed to do was destroy it then claim it never existed, or declare it ‘lost’ like certain other embarrassing dossiers.

Synonyms:

Mislaid; misfiled; shredded by mistake; lost in the post; eaten by the dog; anything but deliberately suppressed.

Suppressing is for amateurs.

Love,

Caz
X

[Sherlock Houses]

Had the authorities really wanted to prevent information from ever surfacing, all they needed to do was destroy it then claim it never existed, or declare it ‘lost’ like certain other embarrassing dossiers.

In much the same way as they did with reference to the 1989 Hillsborough disaster perhaps ?

Heaven only knows what percentage of all the original A6 murder documentation/evidence/material remains to this day.

[caz]

Isn't that ever so slightly missing the point, SH?

The implication was very clearly that the authorities possess certain 'secret' information in Hanratty's favour, which they have naughtily tried to suppress, but which has 'trickled' out over the years anyway.

The point is, they can't have been trying very hard, can they?

This is very far from needing to make sure that damaging information can never come out, which could have been achieved easily by destroying it before the first trickle was possible.

Love,

Caz
X

[Spitfire]

Isn't that ever so slightly missing the point, SH?

The implication was very clearly that the authorities possess certain 'secret' information in Hanratty's favour, which they have naughtily tried to suppress, but which has 'trickled' out over the years anyway.

The point is, they can't have been trying very hard, can they?

This is very far from needing to make sure that damaging information can never come out, which could have been achieved easily by destroying it before the first trickle was possible.

Love,

Caz
X

You are quite right there.

It seems that there is incontrovertible evidence that the murder car was seen in Matlock in Derbyshire at 8.30 am on the morning of 23 August 1961, and the driver of it was seen wearing a green, woollen pompom hat. A photograph of the car's boot was taken shortly after the car was discovered in the early afternoon of 23rd. The photograph clearly shows a green, woollen pompom hat.

The name of the witness to the sighting, William Lee, should have been disclosed to the defence. It was not. There does not however seem to have been a systematic covering up of the evidence. Lee's witness statement and the photograph were extant when Woffinden, Bindman and the CCRC went ferreting for information.

[Sherlock Houses]

Today Magazine June 16th 1962 [part 3 of Valerie Storie's story]

Attached is most of the 3rd instalment of her story.

[Sherlock Houses]

Remainder of that Today article

Attached is the rest of the article.
The article is in two parts due to the attachment size limit.

[NickB]

Well done. So the bulk of the story, from the tap on the window to the ID parade, is squashed into the previous issue of 9th June 1962.

Some of the interview was done at the cornfield entrance:
‘Because she wanted her facts correct to the last detail, Valerie Storie went with Today writer Gill Preece to the scene of the tragedy. There Miss Storie discussed the background of the crime which entangled several lives in its horrors.’

[Sherlock Houses]

Well done. So the bulk of the story, from the tap on the window to the ID parade, is squashed into the previous issue of 9th June 1962.

Yes, that's correct Nick. I've been looking [0n Ebay] for '1962' editions of the Today magazine for absolute ages. I never caught lucky with any from June 62 until fairly recently. If I hadn't have contacted the seller querying the date I would have missed out on it as he had carelessly advertised it as June 16th 1963. The middle issue [June 9th] seems to be very elusive to get hold of so far.

[NickB]

Of course Foot quotes a bit from the June 9th issue.

I got mine from here. Now you'll see how much I paid!

[Sherlock Houses]

Including the £4+ postage you paid twice as much as I did on Ebay.

[NickB]

I woz robbed, although the postage was less than that. Thought I was going to uncover something new!

The Miller book is down from £300 to £240 on Amazon, but I see one sold for £177.68 on ebay recently.

[Graham]

The Miller book is down from £300 to £240 on Amazon, but I see one sold for £177.68

I bought the Leonard Miller book (Shadows Of Deadman's Hill) when it was first published. Miller questions a number of statements by Foot and Woffinden, but I think it depends which side of the fence you're on as to whether you accept them or not. A year ago a copy was advertised by a London book-seller for £600!

[NickB]

I think Foot would write a different book now, particularly with regard to Alphon.

As for Woffinden, having changed his mind about Jeremy Bamber it would be humiliating for him to backtrack on any of the other ‘innocent victims’ he has championed.

[Spitfire]

I think that Bob Woffinden has blotted his copybook in this case by dismissing out of hand the evidence which could have been given by Mr William Lee regarding his sighting of the murder car in Matlock.

What I find strange about this case, which may be peculiar to this forum and not replicated in the outside world, is that there are two camps, one which holds that Hanratty committed the murder and was rightly hanged, and the second which subscribes to the view that Hanratty was completely innocent. There doesn't seem to be anyone expressing the view that Hanratty was most probably guilty of the offence of which he was charged and convicted but the case was not made out against him beyond reasonable doubt.

[Sherlock Houses]

You ain't seen nothin' yet !

I woz robbed, although the postage was less than that. Thought I was going to uncover something new!

The Miller book is down from £300 to £240 on Amazon, but I see one sold for £177.68 on...

Some joker on Amazon.co.uk asking nearly four and a half grand for "Murder Casebook" magazine. Seems a reasonable fellow as he's only asking £2.80 for postage. I might order a couple.