A6 Rebooted

[Graham]

There's a thread on these Forums about the Ruth Ellis, but if anyone fancies a top read about this case, then I can recommend A Fine Day For A Hanging by Carol Anne Lee.

Another case at the time, although not a capital case, that gave plenty of people good cause to think hard, and did I think go some way to changing the old attitudes, was The Profumo Scandal. Here, Dr Stephen Ward was hung out to dry by the Establishment, mostly because of his liberal views, but also because he was a perceived member of the hoi polloi who dared mix with his betters and then accuse them of corruption. His trial (for living on immoral earnings but really, I think, the Establishment's way of fixing him for Profumo's fall from grace) is I understand under review by the CCRC.

Graham

[ansonman]

Jumping on the bandwaggon: The Wallace case 1932

"The Wallace case is unbeatable; it will always be unbeatable" Raymond Chandler

"This murder, I should imagine, must be almost unexampled in the annals of crime". Lord Wright of Durley

"Either the murderer was Wallace or it wasn't. If it wasn't, then here at last is the perfect murder". James Agate

What's more, they're absolutely right.

Ansonman

[Graham]

Hi Cobalt and Graham - certainly some stand out cases there.

Another well worth a read in my opinion is the Cameo Murders of 1949. I don't have time to go into detail now but it too has many intriguing and unsettling features.

Best regards,

OneRound

Hi OR,

Blimey, I'd just about forgotten about The Cameo Murders, a case loaded with apparent police corruption and a possible innocent man executed. I'll leave it to you to expand upon it.

Graham

[Graham]

"Either the murderer was Wallace or it wasn't. If it wasn't, then here at last is the perfect murder". James Agate

If it was Wallace, what do you think his motive was?

Graham

[NickB]

Julia Wallace thread here.

Just before the A6 murder there was the murder of Jacqueline Thomas, last seen on 18th August 1961 at a funfair in Birmingham.

[Sherlock Houses]

Another well worth a read in my opinion is the Cameo Murders of 1949. I don't have time to go into detail now but it too has many intriguing and unsettling features.

The Cameo Cinema double murder of March 1949 has a fair bit in common with the A6 Murder.
A prison inmate, Robert Graham, falsely accused George Kelly and Charles Connolly of [each independently] confessing to him their parts in the murders [while they were exercising together in Walton Prison]. Kelly and Connolly didn't even know one another. Both Kelly and Connolly had protested their innocence from the very moment of their arrest, just over 6 months after the murders.
The amount of police corruption and manipulation of witnesses, most notably in the person of Inspector Herbert Balmer, was to prove staggering. It ultimately resulted in the execution of the innocent Kelly and the imprisonment of Connolly. Connolly too could easily have been hanged but for a fortunate twist of fate.

The prosecuting counsel in this notorious case was William Gorman. 12 years later, as Justice Gorman, he would preside in the A6 murder trial.
I wonder what Justice Gorman's personal thoughts and feelings were when before him in the Bedford Court appeared the prosecution witness, Roy Langdale, an almost carbon copy of the prison grass Robert Graham ? He must have cast his mind back 12 years to the testimony of a certain Robert Graham and alarm bells must have started ringing in his ears.
Justice Gorman's summing up in the A6 murder case was very fair and favourable towards Hanratty. One cannot escape the strong feeling that he was in fact directing the jury towards a verdict of 'not guilty'. He must have been astounded 10 hours later when they returned with their unexpected decision.

The abundance of perjury in both murder cases is both shocking and criminal.

[Sherlock Houses]

Check out J.H. opposite page 241 in Paul Foots, "Who killed Hanratty". Is this ( to quote V.S.)" a pale face "would you say? or more akin to someone ruddy faced, with freckles. What do you think gang?
In consequence what is convincing I think, is that the fist time V.S. saw J.H. is in the line up, when she picked out the man she thought she was supposed to pick out. prompting Acott to utter that damning phrase "Well done! I knew I had settled my score"

Attached below is that particular photo of Hanratty, Moste. The one I've enclosed has been cropped but not by myself. Even in this black and white photo you can tell that Hanratty's complexion is ruddy, a freckled tan that is shared by many ginger haired and fair skinned people.

As for Storie picking out Hanratty in the I.D. parade, even if she wasn't coached [which I very much doubt] by Acott it must have been obvious who the police suspect was, solely by the unnatural colour of his hair which stood out alarmingly from the other 12 people in the line-up.

[cobalt]

Hello Graham,

I concur with most of what you said regarding historic cases, save Timothy Evans. However despite my interest in all the cases mentioned by others, I do not want to derail a thread devoted to the A6 Murder (I am not sure why this site uses the plural form ‘murders.) I mentioned the Evans case specifically because it showed what contortions the judicial system will engage in, when trying to retain its sense of infallibility.

When a wife and her child are found together, both strangled, and both wrapped in the same bed sheet, then that would seem to be the work of one person. Evans was, eventually, pardoned of his daughter’s murder (the only one for which he stood charge) and before his own execution Christie confessed to the murder of Evans’ wife on a few occasions. Therefore, unsurprisingly, the commonly held belief is that British justice executed an innocent man.

It is remotely feasible that Christie made a false confession, or even that the two men collaborated to some degree. But outside of legal circles this is widely regarded as desperate nonsense.

[cobalt]

Sherlock Houses,

I myself have often been struck with similarities between the A6 case and the Cameo murders. There is another similar one, from memory, involving two characters called Devlin and Burns, in which Balmer may have been involved too.


Returning to John’s point about the DNA evidence, I know much of this has been covered in the past, but I will attach a useful metaphor regarding Low Copy Number DNA which comes courtesy of the Crown Prosecution Service website.

Interpretation of results
• The standard test produces reproducible and repeatable results when the quantity of DNA is not a limiting factor. This is like casting a net into a well-stocked lake with a variety of fish; the catch will represent the different types of fish.

• The LCN test is more like casting a net into a lake with few fish; the catch may not represent all the types of fish and a second attempt may contain different types. The individual catches may not fully represent all the types but repeat analysis may assist.


In a previous post I suggested that rather than accidental contamination, there may have been willful malpractice. A serious charge of course, especially without proof, but I did refer to other murder cases where this was acknowledged to have happened. I also pointed out that to my knowledge no person involved in supplying misleading scientific evidence to a court of law has ever been prosecuted.


So why would the Hanratty case be considered so politically sensitive, years after the event, to warrant tampering with evidence? There are three factors that I believe may be involved.

First of all the credibility of the legal system itself. No system wants to hold its hands up and admit to the possibility that it took an innocent life. That would seriously undermine its credibility with the public; at least life sentences can be rescinded. British justice would never hang an innocent man is a refrain I remember from my childhood.

Secondly, the integrity of the police force has to be protected too. If (and I appreciate it can only be ‘if’) the police pursued the wrong man and built a case against him when he was around 200 miles away from the scene, then that would be what Lord Denning once called ‘an appalling vista’ and one which, in the eyes of our political masters, the public were better not forced to confront. This is far removed from arresting Tim Evans, who did make a confession intially in any case. So did Stefan Kisko. So did most of the Birmingham Six. Hanratty admitted nothing.

Finally, we cannot overlook the position of Valerie Storie. Here was a young woman attacked in the spring time of her life and confined to a wheelchair. She seems to have made as good a life as is possible since then, and avoided bitterness or self-pity. What if she were to be told, in the autumn of her years, that she had (unwittingly I am sure) sworn an innocent man’s life away in the courtroom?

I appreciate all I have said is speculation, albeit founded, I hope, on some reasonable observations of how our judicial and political systems operate.

[Sherlock Houses]

So why would the Hanratty case be considered so politically sensitive, years after the event, to warrant tampering with evidence? There are three factors that I believe may be involved.

First of all the credibility of the legal system itself. No system wants to hold its hands up and admit to the possibility that it took an innocent life. That would seriously undermine its credibility with the public; at least life sentences can be rescinded. British justice would never hang an innocent man is a refrain I remember from my childhood.

Secondly, the integrity of the police force has to be protected too. If (and I appreciate it can only be ‘if’) the police pursued the wrong man and built a case against him when he was around 200 miles away from the scene, then that would be what Lord Denning once called ‘an appalling vista’ and one which, in the eyes of our political masters, the public were better not forced to confront. This is far removed from arresting Tim Evans, who did make a confession intially in any case. So did Stefan Kisko. So did most of the Birmingham Six. Hanratty admitted nothing.

Finally, we cannot overlook the position of Valerie Storie. Here was a young woman attacked in the spring time of her life and confined to a wheelchair. She seems to have made as good a life as is possible since then, and avoided bitterness or self-pity. What if she were to be told, in the autumn of her years, that she had (unwittingly I am sure) sworn an innocent man’s life away in the courtroom?

I appreciate all I have said is speculation, albeit founded, I hope, on some reasonable observations of how our judicial and political systems operate.

This comes very close to my own thinking, Cobalt, as to why the A6 case is so different to other murder cases and why it still arouses such great interest and controversy more than 5 decades later. It won't lie down and die despite the alleged Low Copy Number DNA findings/interpretations which fly in the face of all the other compelling evidence pointing to Hanratty's innocence.

The third factor you mention [ie Valerie Storie] and in particular the last sentence is in my view very pertinent and crucial.

[ansonman]

This comes very close to my own thinking, Cobalt, as to why the A6 case is so different to other murder cases and why it still arouses such great interest and controversy more than 5 decades later. It won't lie down and die despite the alleged Low Copy Number DNA findings/interpretations which fly in the face of all the other compelling evidence pointing to Hanratty's innocence.

The third factor you mention [ie Valerie Storie] and in particular the last sentence is in my view very pertinent and crucial.

Re the third factor, would she need to be told? I would have thought she was more aware than anybody that she could well have chosen the wrong man, and not for the first time. I suppose that psychologically, she could have made herself believe that she chose the right man and the DNA results following the exhumation would have reinforced that. But I cannot help thinking that there must have been, and still is some doubt in her mind that she sent an innocent man to the gallows.

Ansonman

PS

Graham the anti Wallaceites would have us believe that the motive was his hatred of his wife (dull and boring marriage), that she was far older than he and that he was having an affair with the house cleaner. All rubbish in my view as I regard him as being as innocent as Hanratty.

[Limehouse]

Sherlock Houses,

I myself have often been struck with similarities between the A6 case and the Cameo murders. There is another similar one, from memory, involving two characters called Devlin and Burns, in which Balmer may have been involved too.


Returning to John’s point about the DNA evidence, I know much of this has been covered in the past, but I will attach a useful metaphor regarding Low Copy Number DNA which comes courtesy of the Crown Prosecution Service website.

Interpretation of results
• The standard test produces reproducible and repeatable results when the quantity of DNA is not a limiting factor. This is like casting a net into a well-stocked lake with a variety of fish; the catch will represent the different types of fish.

• The LCN test is more like casting a net into a lake with few fish; the catch may not represent all the types of fish and a second attempt may contain different types. The individual catches may not fully represent all the types but repeat analysis may assist.


In a previous post I suggested that rather than accidental contamination, there may have been willful malpractice. A serious charge of course, especially without proof, but I did refer to other murder cases where this was acknowledged to have happened. I also pointed out that to my knowledge no person involved in supplying misleading scientific evidence to a court of law has ever been prosecuted.


So why would the Hanratty case be considered so politically sensitive, years after the event, to warrant tampering with evidence? There are three factors that I believe may be involved.

First of all the credibility of the legal system itself. No system wants to hold its hands up and admit to the possibility that it took an innocent life. That would seriously undermine its credibility with the public; at least life sentences can be rescinded. British justice would never hang an innocent man is a refrain I remember from my childhood.

Secondly, the integrity of the police force has to be protected too. If (and I appreciate it can only be ‘if’) the police pursued the wrong man and built a case against him when he was around 200 miles away from the scene, then that would be what Lord Denning once called ‘an appalling vista’ and one which, in the eyes of our political masters, the public were better not forced to confront. This is far removed from arresting Tim Evans, who did make a confession intially in any case. So did Stefan Kisko. So did most of the Birmingham Six. Hanratty admitted nothing.

Finally, we cannot overlook the position of Valerie Storie. Here was a young woman attacked in the spring time of her life and confined to a wheelchair. She seems to have made as good a life as is possible since then, and avoided bitterness or self-pity. What if she were to be told, in the autumn of her years, that she had (unwittingly I am sure) sworn an innocent man’s life away in the courtroom?

I appreciate all I have said is speculation, albeit founded, I hope, on some reasonable observations of how our judicial and political systems operate.

Excellent post.

[Limehouse]

Hi Cobalt,

what you say is perfectly correct. However, to this day there is a suspicion that Timothy Evans did in fact kill his daughter, whether he was pardoned or not. It was an extremely complicated case, as is the A6. I haven't read anything about this case for a long time, but may just do so now you've raised it.

Derek Bentley was the victim of the technically correct but unbelievably vicious application of the law at the time. He killed no-one, but because it was considered he and Craig went out armed and therefore intended to use the gun, together with the infamous "Let him have it, Chris!" uttered by Bentley, and the fact that the victim was a police officer, the law condemned him and not Craig, who was too young to hang.

Ruth Ellis pleaded 'not guilty' at the insistence of her barrister, but when she was asked by the prosecution what she intended to do when she fired the gun at Blakeley, she replied that she intended to kill him and that was that as far as a verdict was concerned. It appears that she genuinely wanted to die for what she had done.

Yes, Hanratty did have an alibi - the Rhyl Alibi - but it was never proved and never can be. As I've said many times over the years, if the A6 Case had happened under Scottish law, the probable verdict would have been 'not proven'.

Graham

A very good summary Graham.

Without wishing to go 'off thread', I believe Timothy Evans to have been innocent of the murders of his wife and daughter. If he did not kill his wife, there is no logical reason to assume that he killed his daughter.

The hanging of Bentley was, as you describe, vicious and if he ever uttered the words 'let him have it Chris' it is much more likely that he meant 'hand over the gun' rather than 'murder that policeman'.

As for Ruth Ellis, much as I see this as a very tragic case, as the law stood at the time, there was no choice but to pass the death penalty on her. I sometimes wonder how much sympathy David Blakely would have been given had he been hanged for shooting her under similar circumstances? Personally, I feel the most tragic victims in the Ellis case were her children.

Hanratty's alibi, although considered shaky by many, is no more so than Alphon's.

Have a good weekend all.

[Graham]

Hi Julie,

I'm also sorry to go off-thread, but these cases do reflect the mood and state of the country around the time of the A6 Crime, which I think is important if we're trying (without much success) to unravel it.

It's not easy to feel sorry for Ruth Ellis, but she had a very difficult life in many respects, maybe much of it down to her own conscious choices and decisions. Maybe to an extent she was the victim of circumstances. Her son Andy was also a tragic figure, and committed suicide at the age of 38. Amazingly, Mr Christmas Humphreys, the prosecuting counsel at Ruth's trial, paid for Andy's funeral, and if I recall correctly he had for some time sent monetary gifts to both of Ruth's children. He was prosecution counsel at Derek Bentley's trial, but I don't think he extended the same charity towards the Bentley family. Surprisingly, Humphreys was a Buddhist.

Back on thread, compared with Alphon at least Hanratty had a reasonably long time to come up with a plausible alibi.

Graham

[Limehouse]

Hi Graham,

No problem going off thread. As you say, these cases do reflect the culture and attitudes of the time.

Absolutely agree with your comments regarding the Ellis case. Her daughter also died tragically young, from cancer I believe.

Derek Bentley and James Hanratty were easy targets for the justice system. Both were petty criminals, although I believe that Hanratty to have been much more streetwise and certainly more articulate (which just serves to show how disabled poor Bentley actually was).

Both were easily led, vulnerable and, to my way of thinking, disposable as far as the establishment were concerned.

Interestingly, both came from very decent, hard-working families yet both of them took the wrong path in life. Both had learning difficulties (thus their vulnerability and tendency to be led astray by others) and both had suffered, to some extent, from the dysfunction that WW2 visited on youngsters of this generation. That is particularly true of Bentley. As you have also pointed out in the past Graham, both suffered serious head injuries in the years before their crimes.

Julie