A6 Rebooted

[Graham]

Hi Julie,

One of the slightly odd things about the Great Train Robbery is that more than one of the gang said that he was in on the robbery to make enough money 'to go straight'. They were all lifelong criminals, and so I wonder, if they had actually got away with it, how many of them really would have cast off their lives of crime and gone straight?

JH had tried working, and plainly didn't like it. There's no doubt that he did make money from time to time in his house-breaking escapades, but he also said that house-breaking was finished and to make real money he had to get a gun and move up-market, crime-wise. Had the A6 never happened, chances are that he would have been nicked anyway -again.

Had he been acquitted, first thing would have been to respond to the many approaches from the press he would inevitably have had. Little doubt that he would have been well-paid for his story. Would such a payment or payments have induced him to try his hand at going straight? Impossible to say. On the other hand, it may be that narrowly escaping death at the hands of the Law might have inspired a life-changing revelation, given his Catholic upbringing. Who knows?

Graham

[Sherlock Houses]

Woffenden only assumes it was the 36 bus conductor due to one press report. The vast majority of the journalists did not say it was the 36 bus. Only 1 on the Sheffield Telegraph wrote that. The other national journalists do not clarify at all what bus she referred to. Again slightly mysterious.

The Express newspaper article from March 14th 1962 also mentions the 36 bus. It also actually names the conductor, a Mr Bryan [obviously referring to Ernest Brine].The Mirror doesn't mention the bus, only the woman, and the Times and Guardian newspapers make no mention of the incident at all.

Here's what the Express printed.........

[OneRound]

Hi Sherlock - sorry but, not for the first time, I'm confused. Where does Mr Bryan (or Brine) fit in? As appears to be in keeping with Graham's earlier post, I thought Pamela Patt was the conductor we were concerned with on the Number 36.

Thanks,

OneRound

[Derrick]

...But having said that, none of the guests at Ingledene on the crucial days ever came forward either...

Hi Graham.

You're wrong here. Messrs Sutch, Sayle and Williams were not only brought into court for Mrs Jones to identify on Monday 12th February 1962 but they also gave evidence on the last day of witness evidence on 13th February 1962 as to whether they recognised Hanratty as having been there at the same time.

HTH
Del

[Graham]

Hi Graham.

You're wrong here. Messrs Sutch, Sayle and Williams were not only brought into court for Mrs Jones to identify on Monday 12th February 1962 but they also gave evidence on the last day of witness evidence on 13th February 1962 as to whether they recognised Hanratty as having been there at the same time.

HTH
Del

OK Derrick, point conceded, I'd forgotten, but strictly speaking the witnesses you mention didn't 'come forward' as such (no pun intended) but were traced by the police on behalf of the prosecution and very likely sub-poenaed. None of them had ever set eyes on Hanratty prior to the trial. There were I think 2 families who were at Ingledene that week but who never came forward or were ever traced.

I think by now everyone interested in the A6 will know that Mr Sayle was the father of radical comic Alexei Sayle, who remembers staying at Ingledene that week.

Graham

[Sherlock Houses]

Hi Sherlock - sorry but, not for the first time, I'm confused. Where does Mr Bryan (or Brine) fit in? As appears to be in keeping with Graham's earlier post, I thought Pamela Patt was the conductor we were concerned with on the Number 36.

Simple really. Pamela Patt was the conductress on the early morning run of the 36A bus on Thursday, August 24th, and Ernest Brine was the conductor on the afternoon/early evening run of the same bus.

[OneRound]

Simple really. Pamela Patt was the conductress on the early morning run of the 36A bus on Thursday, August 24th, and Ernest Brine was the conductor on the afternoon/early evening run of the same bus.

Thanks, Sherlock. It is perhaps interesting that the Prosecution concentrated upon Pamela Patt's shift (as - I think this is right - they considered Hanratty had to deposit the gun and bullets during her time on the bus as he was sending a telegram to Dixie France and family from Liverpool that evening) whilst the mystery woman in court was drawing attention to Ernest Brine's later shift.

Best regards,

OneRound

[Ed James]

PS Ed - I'm unsure what point you're making or question you're asking about the watch. Can you expand please.

Hi Oneround

I'll try to clarify the watch point. The gunman presumably had a watch that worked , as according to Valerie's first evidence he kept looking at his watch. But the gold watch that Hanratty was seeking to sell didn't work according to Woffinden - and I am making the assumption that he wore this watch if only for the ease of trying to sell it. The lack of a working watch may also have contributed to Hanratty's vagueness as to times in his Liverpool alibi ,assuming credence for that alibi.

If the gunman didn't have a working watch, why give back both the watches to VS .

All this raises the question as to whether this matter should have been pursued at the time (no pun intended).

By the way I think you were spot on regarding the police and defence position on the Rhyl bus conductor. However, I recall reading somewhere that there was a recorded interview of the Rhyl conductor but it is held by Liverpool police and never been viewed.
ATB
Ed

[Sherlock Houses]

Mrs Jones description of James Hanratty

It is true that the Rhyl witnesses did not mention freckles or ruddiness, but at the same time, did they state his complexion was pale or that his eyes were icy blue and saucer-like? I am not sure on that point.

In 1984 Paul Foot wrote an article for "Unsolved" magazine [published by Orbis] about the A6 murder. He had recently interviewed Mrs Grace Jones who said "I'll never forget those lovely blue eyes he had. He seemed a lovely, friendly boy."

[Sherlock Houses]

According to Woffinden the woman shouted out that someone ought to ask the conductor on the number 36 bus, which I always took as a reference to the bus that ran local to the Vienna Hotel. I never did figure out precisely what she meant, assuming her words were correctly reproduced. I've often wondered if she meant that the conductor saw the gun being stashed under the back seat, and not by Hanratty, but kept it to himself. I don't think Foot mentions the incident.

Paul Foot does cover the incident on pages 142-143 of his book.
Interestingly enough the now defunct Daily Herald also mentioned [as did the Express] the conductor's name [Brine]. This would suggest that the mystery woman did in fact shout out the conductor's name as we have two independent references corroborating this.

[OneRound]

Hi Oneround

I'll try to clarify the watch point. The gunman presumably had a watch that worked , as according to Valerie's first evidence he kept looking at his watch. But the gold watch that Hanratty was seeking to sell didn't work according to Woffinden - and I am making the assumption that he wore this watch if only for the ease of trying to sell it. The lack of a working watch may also have contributed to Hanratty's vagueness as to times in his Liverpool alibi ,assuming credence for that alibi.

If the gunman didn't have a working watch, why give back both the watches to VS .

All this raises the question as to whether this matter should have been pursued at the time (no pun intended).

By the way I think you were spot on regarding the police and defence position on the Rhyl bus conductor. However, I recall reading somewhere that there was a recorded interview of the Rhyl conductor but it is held by Liverpool police and never been viewed.
ATB
Ed

Thanks on all counts, Ed.

I now follow your clarification of the point about the watch. Who can say if there would have been any meaningful mileage in pursuing this aspect but I can't see that it would have done any harm if raised by the Defence. It might just have created another element of doubt for the jury ....

Best regards,

OneRound

[Graham]

Paul Foot does cover the incident on pages 142-143 of his book.
Interestingly enough the now defunct Daily Herald also mentioned [as did the Express] the conductor's name [Brine]. This would suggest that the mystery woman did in fact shout out the conductor's name as we have two independent references corroborating this.

I think old age is catching up with me, SH. Although it's a long time since I read Foot's book, to be fair to me. However, nothing came of the appeal-court incident (I'd better say as far as I'm aware), but nevertheless still interesting and strange.

Graham

[OneRound]

In 1984 Paul Foot wrote an article for "Unsolved" magazine [published by Orbis] about the A6 murder. He had recently interviewed Mrs Grace Jones who said "I'll never forget those lovely blue eyes he had. He seemed a lovely, friendly boy."

Hi Sherlock - this will probably only support the school of thought as recently and not unreasonably advanced by Dupplin Muir that Hanratty was damned whatever was said in his favour. However, without raising questions as to Mrs Jones' integrity or memory, isn't the key question here - When did Mrs Jones see and meet Hanratty?

If there's no evidence that it was on the evening of Gregsten's murder, I don't see that it helps matters much.

Best regards,

OneRound

[moste]

Hi Oneround

I'll try to clarify the watch point. The gunman presumably had a watch that worked , as according to Valerie's first evidence he kept looking at his watch. But the gold watch that Hanratty was seeking to sell didn't work according to Woffinden - and I am making the assumption that he wore this watch if only for the ease of trying to sell it. The lack of a working watch may also have contributed to Hanratty's vagueness as to times in his Liverpool alibi ,assuming credence for that alibi.

If the gunman didn't have a working watch, why give back both the watches to VS .

All this raises the question as to whether this matter should have been pursued at the time (no pun intended).

By the way I think you were spot on regarding the police and defence position on the Rhyl bus conductor. However, I recall reading somewhere that there was a recorded interview of the Rhyl conductor but it is held by Liverpool police and never been viewed.
ATB
Ed

From Valerie's statements:
I think it is clear that he had a working watch, because on at least two occasions he said without being prompted "there is plenty of time yet"!
presumable after consulting his watch. VS didn't mention anywhere of him asking her or Michael what time it was. Maybe its just me, but if this quote is remembered correctly("there's plenty of time yet") by VS, I cant think of another reason for anyone using this actual line unless they were keeping to a predetermined schedule. Also they apparently turned into two previous side roads off the A6 in the Clophill area, before having been advised by Valerie, that these locations were not suitable (very strange) for JH to have a kip, (also very odd)until finally arriving at the layby by the RAC box, still in plenty of time....?

[moste]

Another issue, while in the car on their journey, a couple of other things that have bothered me.
1,If as Valerie has stated, her and Michael managed to make murmured conversation, out of earshot, "he didn't seam to mind that". Why? (and I accept everyone would act differently under such circumstances) would an attempt not be made to form a very simple escape plan, I.E. "The next time we stop at a read light, jump out and run", I mean for instance in the middle of St. Albans, or Luton. I appreciate people will say, "they were terribly frightened, and he had a gun pointing at them" but this brings me to my 2nd point. Would someone under such intense duress open a cigarette packet, light two, and give one to the abductor?