A6 Rebooted

[moste]

That’s a good point but that would mean buying all 4. The Harriman book is considered heavy going on the DNA stuff so I’m concerned at buying a book with 50% of the content only of real interest to people with a science background or who have a real interest in science. Which of the ‘Hanratty is guilty’ books would you recommend as 1st choice? At the moment I’m favouring getting the Stickler book 1st.

And just out of interest Moste are you ‘innocent’ or ‘guilty’?

I thought I had seen you on this board more than I actually had . Maybe the Wallace site confused the memory.

Anyhow , I too read the two books you alluded to, Foot and Woffinden, and was convinced of his innocence , I read Leonard Miller but found him to be unfairly biased , and have never understood the aggressive stance and unwillingness to consider various options of people who follow the ‘It is what it is’ attitude .So much of the entire saga is completely dependent on Valerie Storie’s word which has been unreasonably etched in granite in my opinion, leaving little or no room for doubt for most people.
I would urge you to read her story ,supposedly in her own words, on this site I think uploaded by Sherlock Houses, from a Today magazine ‘supplement . Dispute her surviving a horrendous experience , The woman has always left me with a feeling of ‘all is not being told’.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I read Harrimans book ,or tried to, He comes across if I remember as something of an expert on DNA, and consequently a lot of his explaining on the problems of the use of that particular exhibit went over my head.
on other aspects of the case he has some interesting comments , obviously a person in favour of Hanrattyâs innocence, you would have a balance of 3 and 3 if you read these four in terms of for and against guilt.

That’s a good point but that would mean buying all 4. The Harriman book is considered heavy going on the DNA stuff so I’m concerned at buying a book with 50% of the content only of real interest to people with a science background or who have a real interest in science. Which of the ‘Hanratty is guilty’ books would you recommend as 1st choice? At the moment I’m favouring getting the Stickler book 1st.

And just out of interest Moste are you ‘innocent’ or ‘guilty’?

[moste]

I’ve been considering another dip into the Hanratty case lately but I’m undecided on what I might go for. I’ve read Foot and Woffinden and found them both fascinating but for someone that knows next-to-nothing about the case like me it’s easy get persuaded. I came away thinking “surely there’s more than enough here to doubt his guilt,” but of course that’s the opinion of someone that knows zilch who’s just read two books by committed ‘pro-innocence’ authors (and I’m not denigrating those two authors)

So I was wondering if I could get a few opinions on the 4 books that I’ve seen available (apart from an essay by someone called Lamb which I’m dismissing as an option) Everyone on here knows there stuff but I know that there’s a mixture of guilty and not guilty supporters which will give me a balance. Thanks in advance to anyone that replies.


1. Hanratty’s Guilt: The A6 Murder and its Aftermath by Leonard Miller


2. Executed: But Was Hanratty Innocent by Robert Harriman


3. The Long Silence: The Story of James Hanratty….by Paul Stickler


4. Hanratty - The Inconvenient Truth by Alan Razen

I read Harrimans book ,or tried to, He comes across if I remember as something of an expert on DNA, and consequently a lot of his explaining on the problems of the use of that particular exhibit went over my head.
on other aspects of the case he has some interesting comments , obviously a person in favour of Hanratty’s innocence, you would have a balance of 3 and 3 if you read these four in terms of for and against guilt.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I’ve been considering another dip into the Hanratty case lately but I’m undecided on what I might go for. I’ve read Foot and Woffinden and found them both fascinating but for someone that knows next-to-nothing about the case like me it’s easy get persuaded. I came away thinking “surely there’s more than enough here to doubt his guilt,” but of course that’s the opinion of someone that knows zilch who’s just read two books by committed ‘pro-innocence’ authors (and I’m not denigrating those two authors)

So I was wondering if I could get a few opinions on the 4 books that I’ve seen available (apart from an essay by someone called Lamb which I’m dismissing as an option) Everyone on here knows there stuff but I know that there’s a mixture of guilty and not guilty supporters which will give me a balance. Thanks in advance to anyone that replies.


1. Hanratty’s Guilt: The A6 Murder and its Aftermath by Leonard Miller


2. Executed: But Was Hanratty Innocent by Robert Harriman


3. The Long Silence: The Story of James Hanratty….by Paul Stickler


4. Hanratty - The Inconvenient Truth by Alan Razen

[Pcdunn]

Michael and Maureen Hanratty's son, Darren, was recently interviewed by Metro. He has some very interesting and thought provoking things to say.
Here is the link to that article.....

https://metro.co.uk/2024/06/02/uncle...cent-20923858/

Fascinating article, thank you for the link!

[Sherlock Houses]

Michael and Maureen Hanratty's son, Darren, was recently interviewed by Metro. He has some very interesting and thought provoking things to say.
Here is the link to that article.....

https://metro.co.uk/2024/06/02/uncle-one-last-executed-uk-innocent-20923858/

[Sherlock Houses]

Was it the 1m22 video at at https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GgBbV_SckxA

No, this exhaustive 1min 22 second video is definitely not the video I watched DJW. The one I watched at the time was much longer and I think it was an accompaniment to his book "The Long Silence". It doesn't appear to be available on youtube anymore which is no surprise to me.

[djw]

I was able to view this Sky History documentary ['The guilty innocent'] last night and for me it left loads to be desired. I could hardly believe the amount of screen time that was allotted to the smug ex-policeman Paul Stickler, he seemed to take over proceedings. It's clear to me that his knowledge and understanding of this complex murder mystery is superficial and he is definitely not a stickler for accuracy. Rhyl is definitely not a 40 minute drive from Liverpool Mr Stickler and Michael Gregsten was not shot through the back of the head but through his left temple and lower left ear. That's besides all the errors and assumptions he made in a youtube video of his which I watched about a year or so ago.

Was it the 1m22 video at at https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GgBbV_SckxA

I'd be interested in any inaccuracies including in the Eryberrie video as I'll likely go to the Chichester talk.

[caz]

I've just finished watching this documentary...

A shocking miscarriage of justice which has caused untold damage and suffering to an innocent man incarcerated for so long.
Lasting shame on the Greater Manchester Police. Unforgivable.
Lasting shame on the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Unforgivable.
How many more innocent people have been fitted up by the police and languishing behind prison walls with little hope of obtaining justice ??

Hi SH,

I could not agree more. The documentary shocked me. I was so angry that this level of corruption and injustice could still happen, well into the 21st century.

The rather crucial difference I saw with Hanratty's case was that Andrew Malkinson was provably innocent, and provably fitted up by the Greater Manchester Police, allowing a highly dangerous sexual predator to remain uncaught for all those years. The DNA didn't lie; policemen did, under pressure to get someone for this serious crime and claiming there was no DNA evidence, relying instead on mistaken identification evidence from the victim, which would not have been enough had they not falsely obtained supporting evidence from two dodgy characters who were 'persuaded' to act as witnesses. There was a DNA profile on the victim's vest top, which wasn't Malkinson's. Unfortunately for the police, samples had previously been taken and retained, and the DNA was later matched via the national database to a Mr. B who lived in the vicinity of the attack and was unknown to the victim, so this man should have been picked up and investigated a very long time ago. There appeared to be no timeline for when Malkinson might expect to be fully compensated for having had his life and good name ruined, nor any reassurance that Mr. B was not still alive or a potential threat to the public.

I thought the Post Office scandal was about as bad as it gets, but this tops it: one innocent man coming up against a brick wall of organised evil, which not only destroyed him but left an evil man at large.

The equivalent with Hanratty would have been identifying Alphon's DNA on the victim's underwear, or the DNA of anyone other than Hanratty who was unknown to Valerie Storie, and destroying it after claiming there was no DNA evidence.

Love,

Caz
X

[Sherlock Houses]

Some sad news to report with the passing on Saturday evening of Michael Hanratty's dear wife Maureen. She was 79 and had been suffering badly from breathing problems for the last couple of years or so. Just like Michael [Mick] and the rest of the Hanratty family she was a passionate believer in James's innocence.

[cobalt]

I saw an interview where Malkinson raised an issue I have commented on here in regard to the A6 Case. Malkinson thought that a body independent of the police should hold evidence obtained in criminal cases. There is a history of evidence disappearing whilst in police hands, or occasionally popping up in a police basement to bolster a disputed case.

[Sherlock Houses]

Anyone who hasn’t watched the BBC 2 documentary on the 17 year conviction of Andrew Malkinson aired tonight needs to view.

lt’s got Hanratty all over it.

I've just finished watching this documentary...

A shocking miscarriage of justice which has caused untold damage and suffering to an innocent man incarcerated for so long.
Lasting shame on the Greater Manchester Police. Unforgivable.
Lasting shame on the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Unforgivable.
How many more innocent people have been fitted up by the police and languishing behind prison walls with little hope of obtaining justice ??

[ansonman]

Anyone who hasn’t watched the BBC 2 documentary on the 17 year conviction of Andrew Malkinson aired tonight needs to view.

lt’s got Hanratty all over it.

[moste]

I was able to view this Sky History documentary ['The guilty innocent'] last night and for me it left loads to be desired. I could hardly believe the amount of screen time that was allotted to the smug ex-policeman Paul Stickler, he seemed to take over proceedings. It's clear to me that his knowledge and understanding of this complex murder mystery is superficial and he is definitely not a stickler for accuracy. Rhyl is definitely not a 40 minute drive from Liverpool Mr Stickler and Michael Gregsten was not shot through the back of the head but through his left temple and lower left ear. That's besides all the errors and assumptions he made in a youtube video of his which I watched about a year or so ago.

I am always aghast at the lack of care that goes into a case such as this. I watched a short intro into Sticklers obvious attempt at assassination of Hanratty’s case. The actual bullet penetration was only 1/2 an inch apart, below the left ear lobe . and exiting slightly lower on other side of face. His brain actually was not impacted. So death occurred as a result of broken jugular, and he bled to death. Just to clear that up. Stickler was arrogant and clearly biased with his views. The shooting of Gregsten , I have always advocated had all the hallmarks of an assassination, Stories statement did not jive with this speculation.

[mpriestnall]

I was able to view this Sky History documentary ['The guilty innocent'] last night and for me it left loads to be desired. I could hardly believe the amount of screen time that was allotted to the smug ex-policeman Paul Stickler, he seemed to take over proceedings. It's clear to me that his knowledge and understanding of this complex murder mystery is superficial and he is definitely not a stickler for accuracy. Rhyl is definitely not a 40 minute drive from Liverpool Mr Stickler and Michael Gregsten was not shot through the back of the head but through his left temple and lower left ear. That's besides all the errors and assumptions he made in a youtube video of his which I watched about a year or so ago.

Not a stickler for facts then? Sorry couldn't resist.