A6 Rebooted

[Graham]

Hi Spitfire,

A good synopsis Graham but one other fact that should be mentioned is that Mrs D could hardly understand the man who inquired for directions due to his heavy Scottish or Welsh accent (as perceived by Mrs D).

I did mention this in Post No 2717.

One thing about the Liverpool Alibi which has always puzzled me is when Joe Gillbanks tracked down Terence McNally, who was named by JH as one of the people he stayed with in Liverpool. McNally was totally unhelpful, and said to Gillbanks: "If Hanratty does not open up, why should I?"

Doesn't 'open up' about what? Any suggestions?

McNally was subsequently issued with a subpoena, and not to put too fine a point on it, he did his nut. He swore black and blue that he hadn't seen JH for 4 years, not since they were in Lewes prison together. To admit to seeing JH was to run the risk of being prosecuted for receiving. He also said he knew no-one in the Scotland Road area of Liverpool and did not have, or live in, a flat there. If McNally was indeed questioned about his strange statement, I don't recall reading anything about it.

Even though at the start of the trial JH was sticking to his 'three men in a flat' alibi, McNally had effectively blown it apart, to the point where JH admitted to his defence that it was a fabrication.

Graham

[Spitfire]

Hi Spitfire,



I did mention this in Post No 2717.

One thing about the Liverpool Alibi which has always puzzled me is when Joe Gillbanks tracked down Terence McNally, who was named by JH as one of the people he stayed with in Liverpool. McNally was totally unhelpful, and said to Gillbanks: "If Hanratty does not open up, why should I?"

Doesn't 'open up' about what? Any suggestions?

Hi Graham,

My apologies for suggesting you had forgotten the accent discrepancy.

I agree, a strange thing for McNally to have said but no idea what he might have been on about.

I've been busy on the web searching for picture houses on the Scottie Rd. More or less opposite Cowley's shop is Stanley Rd, at its junction with Scotland Rd stood the Rotunda Theatre http://www.arthurlloyd.co.uk/Liverpo...aLiverpool.htm unfortunately for Hanratty this was destroyed by the Germans in 1941. I assume it was a bomb site in 1961.

[Spitfire]

Here's an old map.

Cowley's shop at No 408 Scotland Rd was on the junction of Scotland Rd and Taylor Street.

[OneRound]

Showing Hanratty just the one photo was indeed very careless of the Liverpool police who were acting on behalf of Acott [unbeknown to the defence team]. You seem to have forgotten however that shortly after this initial photo identification of Hanratty, Mrs Dinwoodie was shown a series of photographs [which included a different photo of Hanratty] and confirmed her previous identification.

To quote from Paul Foot's book [from page 196]......


"Soon after confirming the one photograph, Mrs Dinwoodie was again shown several photographs, including one of Hanratty different to the one she had confirmed in the first place. Once again, promptly and without any doubt, Mrs Dinwoodie selected the photograph of Hanratty as the man who had come into her shop."

Hi Sherlock - that's fair enough and I'm very sympathetic to Hanratty supporters here. However, a substantial spanner had already been thrown in the identification works by DC Pugh being too quick off the mark and reckless in showing Mrs Dinwoodie only one photograph to begin with.

I don't deny it was useful to Hanratty's cause that Mrs D later identified him from several photographs. However, it would have been so much more help if she had had the opportunity and been able to do that first of all. Through no fault of her own or Hanratty's defence team, she was not so much then being asked to identify someone who had been in the sweet shop months earlier but effectively to identify the same man she had very recently identified in another photograph.

Best regards,

OneRound

[OneRound]

...
One thing about the Liverpool Alibi which has always puzzled me is when Joe Gillbanks tracked down Terence McNally, who was named by JH as one of the people he stayed with in Liverpool. McNally was totally unhelpful, and said to Gillbanks: "If Hanratty does not open up, why should I?"

Doesn't 'open up' about what? Any suggestions?
...

Graham

Hi Graham - I've noticed you ask this question about McNally before. I haven't replied previously as I have no answer of any substance to provide. However, I too find it an intriguing comment and feel your persistence merits some reward, however dubious.

My highly speculative interpretation is that Hanratty did visit McNally in Liverpool shortly before the A6 murder but was no longer with him at the time of the crime itself. Thus, McNally could not provide an alibi for Hanratty but could only potentially drop himself in it for a charge such as receiving by ''opening up'' about recently seeing burglar Jim. Hence, McNally's extreme reluctance to say anything and even greater annoyance at being pestered to do so.

If McNally had not seen Hanratty at all around this time, I would have expected him to state that in no uncertain terms rather than skirt round the issue given the nature of the crime and the penalty involved.

It will be noted that this interpretation leaves open whether Hanratty had left McNally and Liverpool for a certain cornfield or a particular seaside location.

Best regards,

OneRound

[Graham]

Hi Spitfire,

My apologies for suggesting you had forgotten the accent discrepancy

.

No worries!

Thanks for the info re: the former cinema. Looking at the photo in Paul Foot's book (there is no indication as to the date of this photo, but assume it must have been shortly prior to the publication of his book in 1971) it all seems a bit derelict on the other side of the road opposite the shop. Certainly no cinema.

I think it was Steve who posted photos of the area as it was a few years ago, and the railing of the underground w.c. was still there, but the entrance was blocked off. The shop, by then, had been demolished. I did save all of Steve's posted photos (every one a good 'un) but lost the lot when my old computer went bang.

Graham

[Graham]

Hi One Round,

your suggestion re: McNally is certainly feasible, and of course we only have his word for it that he hadn't seen JH for 4 years.

Any thoughts about the possibility that JH bought an alibi? Not at all beyond the realms of possibility in my view.

Graham

[Derrick]

My feeling about what McNally said to Gillbanks is this;

Gillbanks put it to McNally that there were three men in Liverpool who could alibi Hanratty but Hanratty wouldn't name them. Gillbanks asked McNally for the names and got the aforementioned reply.

Just my interpretation.

Del

[NickB]

Hanratty was of no fixed abode so, unless sleeping rough, was always either staying with friends or in some kind of guest house. This meant that in providing an alibi he didn’t have the option of saying he was ‘home alone’ but had to name a place where there would be witnesses. This is the problem he was presented with when asked to provide an alibi for that week.

Even if you accept the Rhyl alibi there is still the question of where he stayed on 24th August. He claims to have travelled back to London that night but the France family testified that he returned a day later.

[Derrick]

Hanratty was of no fixed abode so, unless sleeping rough, was always either staying with friends or in some kind of guest house. This meant that in providing an alibi he didn’t have the option of saying he was ‘home alone’ but had to name a place where there would be witnesses. This is the problem he was presented with when asked to provide an alibi for that week.

Go on...expand on this further please.

Even if you accept the Rhyl alibi there is still the question of where he stayed on 24th August. He claims to have travelled back to London that night but the France family testified that he returned a day later.

Is that the same France family who testified against him? Dixie France saying, in particular, that the gun was found in a place that Hanratty had mentioned to him in the previous August.

Del

[Spitfire]

Go on...expand on this further please.



Is that the same France family who testified against him? Dixie France saying, in particular, that the gun was found in a place that Hanratty had mentioned to him in the previous August.

Del

Something which was not denied by Hanratty and therefore we can assume to be true.

I am not sure that having committed such a revolting crime as the A6 Murder that Hanratty could rely on thieves' honour to protect him.

[NickB]

Go on...expand on this further please.

Hanratty could not have said “I went home and spent the night alone”, which could not be disproved, he had to come up with places to stay in that involved witnesses.

The problem with saying he stayed with friends was that he could not name them unless he had actually stayed with them or they were prepared to perjure themselves for him.

And I don't see what the France family had to gain by conspiring to say he returned to London on the Saturday.

[Sherlock Houses]

Mrs Dinwoodie said the man [who she identified as James Hanratty] entered the shop shortly after 4 o'clock, soon after the Liverpool Echos had arrived.

Just for clarification purposes this is what Mrs Dinwoodie told Hanratty's defence team during the second week of December 1961 a few days after they got wind of her existence. Acott had very cunningly avoided [for about 7 weeks] telling the defence team about her. Nice chap old Basil.

[OneRound]

Hi One Round,

your suggestion re: McNally is certainly feasible, and of course we only have his word for it that he hadn't seen JH for 4 years.

Any thoughts about the possibility that JH bought an alibi? Not at all beyond the realms of possibility in my view.

Graham

Thanks, Graham.

Interesting question about the possibility of buying an alibi. Obviously here there is a presumption or acceptance that Hanratty killed Gregsten and I'll give you some speculative thoughts on that basis. I appreciate that some posters strongly dispute that presumption and don't accept it for a moment whilst others have at least certain doubts.

Following up a point made by Spitfire yesterday, the nature of the crime would have repulsed the majority of even the most hardened criminals. Of those not sufficiently sickened by the crime, many would have been scared of any association with it due to the potential severe penalties.

Thus, buying an alibi was always going to be difficult for Hanratty. There simply would not have been many sellers on the market. Of the few that were, none were going to provide ''fit for purpose or money back'' guarantees!

It seems likely to me that an attempt at a bought or begged alibi was made in respect of Liverpool. However, no one there was prepared to play ball and so the alibi switched to Rhyl. I don't think any poster (whether believing Hanratty guilty, innocent or unsure) considers that Hanratty was in Liverpool on the night of the A6 crime; he was either in Rhyl or a Morris Minor. However, if McNally and/or others like him had backed up Hanratty's first account and swore blind that Hanratty was with him (McNally) in a Liverpool flat, would we to this day have ever heard any mention of Rhyl in respect of this case?

Now onto the sweet shop. It appears clear (as far as anything to do with this case is) that the incident happened on the Monday or the Tuesday. It's agreed that Hanratty was in London on the Monday and so claimed by his supporters that the incident must have happened on the Tuesday. However, that is not the only possibility. It could have occurred on the Monday involving a criminal pal of Hanratty who gave or sold him this aibi when Hanratty was seeking an alibi for the Tuesday. Possibly the pal gave Hanratty an alibi for the wrong day without Hanratty's knowledge or Hanratty, knowing it was the wrong day, chanced no one would adequately remember.

To my thinking, the sweet shop incident must have occurred to some extent. It's inconceivable that Hanratty could have totally made up a story which was supported in part by Mrs Dinwoodie and her granddaughter. However, there are noticeable discrepancies in the accounts (in addition to the day itself). Perhaps this is just due to the passage of time affecting the memories of those giving the accounts as Hanratty's supporters claim. However, it could also be explained by the man in the sweet shop not being Hanratty and he (Hanratty) having to remember and rely upon an account he had bought.

And finally we end up in Rhyl. I acknowledge this is the high watermark of my speculation but I do wonder if somehow Terry Evans suggested this alibi to Hanratty and he went for it. It's fair enough that Evans couldn't just walk into Hanratty's cell and directly say this but it doesn't seem inconceivable that such a message could have been passed on.

Evans always seems to have been remarkably supportive of Hanratty. Getting him a job on the dodgems, putting him up for the night, not holding a grudge when his shoes were nicked, pressuring Charlie Jones, the newspaper vendor, to lie about seeing him, speaking up for him on tv documentaries, etc. Add to that, Evans talking to Grace Jones during a break in the trial contrary to the judge's instructions - do we really know why and what that was about?

One other thing about the switch to the Rhyl alibi. The note that Sherrard got Hanratty to sign is usually viewed as Sherrard covering his own back. That's entirely understandable and clearly a large part of it. However, the note also contained a plea for the landlady to come forward. I suspect that was included at Hanratty's urging. Did he know that someone would appear? If he did, that might go a long way to explaining why he changed / expanded his alibi to Rhyl. Many here feel that it was the switch to Rhyl that did for Hanratty; that may well be so but probably and largely because Mrs Jones was such a poor defence witness which Hanratty had not contemplated.

Masses of speculation in the above and far, far too much for me to have given a guilty verdict at the time of Hanratty's trial. However, they are honestly held and do little to persuade me of Hanatty's innocence.

Best regards,

OneRound

[Limehouse]

Hi All,

Some interesting posts of late. I am pleased the thread is bumping along amicably and so many posters are joining in the debate.

Concerning the most recent posts about Hanratty trying to buy an alibi - precisely what could he offer in return? Attempting to pervert the course of justice is a very serious crime now and it almost always results in a prison term. How much more severe would the penalty have been back then - given that the original crime was cold-blooded murder, rape and attempted murder? I can't imagine anyone being willing to provide an alibi in return for anything Hanratty could afford to offer.

Today marks the 53rd anniversary of JH's judicial hanging.