A6 Rebooted

[Alfie]

Well they did Nick, by way of inference .
They ,the prosecution, knew that the defence had reduced the possibility of Hanratty being in that sweet shop,from Monday or Tuesday to just Tuesday, by reason of the prosecutions own addmision , that there was unchallengeable proof that Hanratty was in London all day Monday.
There then followed possibly the biggest gaff in courtroom history.
The now famous, and self destructing statement made by Swanwick.
'There was possibly a flight available , or helicopter service,that could possibly have deposited Hanratty down in the field where the crime took place.
At this moment in time, Hanratty was home free, and I would suggest the Jury had heard enough,and we're ready to vote on it.
Unfortunately ,and unbelievably, in the event he hanged.
This passage of events ,re the barrel scraping air flight reference,is right up there with my main reasons for believing in Hanrattys innocence

I've never understood why the Hanratty-ites get their knickers in such a twist over this particular courtroom exchange between Acott and Swanwick.

Swanwick was merely making sure that the jury was aware that it was possible for Hanratty to have been in Liverpool and Dorney Reach on the same day.

Acott's reply was, "I think it is possible, but I do not think it happened and I never have thought it happened."

So the idea that an exasperated jury would have been ready to discharge Jim after hearing the prosecution discussing the regularity flights from Liverpool is ludicrous.

Oh, and by the way, in his "now famous, and self destructing statement" Swanwick said nothing at all about helicopters, as you've quoted above. That was Sherrard. So could I ask that in future you try not to mislead readers by attributing words to people that they never actually uttered?

[Alfie]

It was proven that he was in London all day on Monday 21st so he had to have been in Liverpool the following day.

No he didn't. There was another possibility, which the prosecution put before the jury and which I'd wager they found more plausible than Jim's ever-morphing tale: he obtained the sweetshop alibi from some Liverpool associate with a Welsh or Scottish accent.

[louisa]

No he didn't. There was another possibility, which the prosecution put before the jury and which I'd wager they found more plausible than Jim's ever-morphing tale: he obtained the sweetshop alibi from some Liverpool associate with a Welsh or Scottish accent.

But Olive Dinwoodie (don't you just love her name?) remembered Hanratty, if not to describe him exactly, but she remembered a man with a London accent coming into her shop and asking directions. The little girl was in the shop on that day as well. And that was Tuesday 22nd at 5pm.

If he had to be in Slough by 9pm then he woud not have cut things so fine, having to get back to Lime Street station, then back to Euston to catch another train to Sloiugh.

Then he would have been on foot, coming from the train station, trying to locate an obscure field in the dark (in a place he had never before been to).


Hanratty only changed his alibi once. He originally lied in the mistaken belief that he was protecting his friends, then when he realised the true seriousness of his plight he decided to come clean and tell the truth, which unfortunately proved to be too late. The jury had already made up their minds and hearing that Hanratty had lied was probably the final straw.

[Graham]

But Olive Dinwoodie (don't you just love her name?) remembered Hanratty, if not to describe him exactly, but she remembered a man with a London accent coming into her shop and asking directions. The little girl was in the shop on that day as well. And that was Tuesday 22nd at 5pm.

This is part of Mrs D's statement:

I could hardly understand the man when he asked for directions to Tarleton Road. I told him I did not know that road, only Tarleton Street. Several other customers came into the shop and I said perhaps they could help him and I went on serving and did not even notice him go out.He was hard to understand, I thought he was Scots or Welsh.

Where did you get the idea that Mrs D thought he had a London accent?

Also, Mrs D stated initially that she thought the man came into the shop on the Monday, not the Tuesday, some time between 3.30pm and 4.00pm. Mrs D's grand-daughter Barbara helped in the shop only on the Monday, but had visited with her friend Linda on the Tuesday at about 4.45pm. If Mrs D's timings were correct, the girls could not have seen the man on the Tuesday.

There is also the difficulty that Mrs D was shown only one photo by DC Pugh, that of Hanratty - not good police practice.

All this has been discussed on these boards for years now.....we're going round in circles again.

Graham

[uncle_adolph]

No he didn't. There was another possibility, which the prosecution put before the jury and which I'd wager they found more plausible than Jim's ever-morphing tale: he obtained the sweetshop alibi from some Liverpool associate with a Welsh or Scottish accent.

Why would someone "obtain" an alibi which they had no idea could be proved for a hold up/murder that started out several hours later anyway?

[NickB]

After putting the gun on the bus he realised that he had nothing he could show anyone to explain his whereabouts over the past 3 days except the Vienna hotel bill. Any receipts or tickets etc. he had acquired since would have to be discarded as they showed that he had not been in Liverpool where he’d said he was going. So he set out on the telegram mission to provide at least some evidence that he had been to Liverpool that week.

Then when he went to Liverpool "to interview and see if these people would stand by my alibi" he could only accept whatever they had to offer more than 6 weeks after the event.

[louisa]

Why would someone "obtain" an alibi which they had no idea could be proved for a hold up/murder that started out several hours later anyway?

Good point.

And Mrs. Dinwoodie may not have the known the difference between a London accent and another regional one. I can't always recognize different British accents either.

If Hanratty was trying to establish an alibi then surely he would have made himself more memorable and conspicuous, maybe by dropping a pile of change onto the floor while he was in the sweetshop?

And the murder probably wasn't supposed to be a murder, just a hold-up, so the perpetrator wouldn't have known he would be needing an alibi.

[moste]

I've never understood why the Hanratty-ites get their knickers in such a twist over this particular courtroom exchange between Acott and Swanwick.

Swanwick was merely making sure that the jury was aware that it was possible for Hanratty to have been in Liverpool and Dorney Reach on the same day.

Acott's reply was, "I think it is possible, but I do not think it happened and I never have thought it happened."

So the idea that an exasperated jury would have been ready to discharge Jim after hearing the prosecution discussing the regularity flights from Liverpool is ludicrous.

Oh, and by the way, in his "now famous, and self destructing statement" Swanwick said nothing at all about helicopters, as you've quoted above. That was Sherrard. So could I ask that in future you try not to mislead readers by attributing words to people that they never actually uttered?

Watch the A 6 committee short film from 1972 financed by John Lennon on YouTube.

The mention of helicopters,was to demonstrate I think that to bring a suggestion to the courts 'that maybe there was an aeroplane service from Speke airport to London , then the continuing journey to Dorney , to be at the field in time to car jack the couple is preposterous !

[moste]

A fragment of the excised portion was retained by the laboratory having first been placed in a small envelope made of cellophane and sellotape which was in turn put into a small brown envelope and the small envelope into a larger envelope before being treasury tagged to a laboratory file. It was so placed when rediscovered in 1991.

Woffinden, on his website, claims he “tracked down surviving exhibits in the case and asked for these to be tested by DNA methods”.
http://www.bobwoffinden.com/articles...deadmans-hill/

I can't believe other than 'the knickers were stored intact for the 30 odd years.
For blood group testing' ,all they would need is a scraping surely?

[JPR1975]

Newbie

Hi All
A new member here.
I’ve always been fascinated by the James Hanratty case ever since reading the Paul Foot/Bob Woffinden books when a teenager.

Initially I always believed in Hanratty’s innocence, this obviously influenced by the style of Foot and Woffinden’s writing and thought Hanratty was framed by a wider conspiracy, with Alphon probably the killer.

Sadly, with the DNA evidence available it is hard to argue against Hanratty being innocent (although I find the strange occurrences / co incidences that happened in the case un-paralleled in British criminal history) and surprised that Hanratty was found guilty on the evidence presented at the trial at the time.

Of course if he really was guilty that I’m obviously glad that he got everything he deserved.

My apologies if any of these theories have been put forward in the past, I did read the original posts years ago but haven’t visited them since, and I concede I don’t know as much as some of the contributors here, for what it’s worth, my points are;

Hanratty Guilty – Acting completely alone.

I find it hard to accept that Hanratty would randomly be walking through a cornfield in Dorney at night time.

Hanratty – Not guilty – DNA / Framed.

I know nothing about DNA but as said above, if his semen was found in Valerie Storie’s knickers that was proved to be Hanratty’s that sort of ends the debate there, and moves it on to the reasons why he did it and were other people involved in the “wider conspiracy”.

I know this far fetched, but the case is so bizarre, has there been a cover up since Day 1 and the semen never was Hanratty’s and it was a plot from the very start (I accept that DNA wasn’t around in 1961 but anyone with the power/influence to frame someone for murder must have had the foresight to think that there would be advances in the future).

What I mean by this, was the plan always to kill both Gregsten/Storie (for reasons unknown, more than just because of an affair – I even read once that due to Gregsten’s job he was about to defect to Russia and the KGB were involved) and Hanratty was the unfortunate patsy set up to the take the wrap by someone involved in the case who held a grudge against him etc)

If anyone wants to hear about state intervention on murder cases, please read “A thorn in their side” by Robert Green (her nephew) – about the Hilda Murrell case, if to be believed it is shocking to what extent cover ups can happen.

But what I believe the most likely scenario to be (although still things don’t make sense, the killer couldn’t drive the car correctly, the amazing leniency shown towards Alphon plus many many more examples)

Hanratty – Guilty – Part of a wider conspiracy.

I think William Ewer was the prime mover in the case and paid someone to to do the frightening of Gregsten/Storie (not necessarily to murder). That someone most likely to be Alphon. Alphon albeit a nutcase didn’t want to do it himself and through his criminal/underworld contacts “SUB-CONTRACTED” the job out, most likely to France (with the strong possibility of Anderson being involved at any point in the chain). France knew Hanratty was stupid/naïve to take the job on and supplied him with the gun, Alphon supplied him with the information on Gregsten/Storie (which he received from Ewer)

The hold up went wrong (At this point there was no intention to murder, so Hanratty was recruited purely for the job not be framed / hung), Hanratty in panic ended up murdering Gregsten/raping Storie and thinking she was also dead.

As a result Alphon/Ewer/France/Anderson had to then manipulate the situation to get Hanratty caught (knowing he couldn’t grass on them as that would be admitting to the murder himself).

This would explain;

Hanratty / Alphon both staying at The Vienna – they knew each other.

Gun being planted on the 36A bus / Cartridges found in The Vienna – Planted there, most probably by France

France’s eventual suicide – guilt of his involvement?

Alphon being recognised by the Landlady of the The Old Station Inn

Monies paid to Alphon account (as per Paul Foot book) – possibly now blackmailing Ewer.

(I also find Michael Fogarty-Waul’s account fascinating).

This is just my opinion and I accept there are holes in it, but there are in all the theories about this amazing case.

Thanks

JPR

[NickB]

I agree it is hard to understand why Hanratty, or anyone really, was in that cornfield with a gun. I’ve always assumed he had come from Maidenhead which is about an hour away by foot – simply because it was mentioned. If it was Hanratty’s first attempt at a hold up then perhaps he would not want to do it in an area in which he was known to have burgled before.

In any case I think the primary objective was something else and this went wrong, or his nerve failed, and he stumbled upon the car by accident.

I do not think it was planned because:

1. Valerie and Mike could not easily have been followed because they did not go straight from the Old Station Inn to the cornfield; they went somewhere else first and only moved on later. Someone must have pointed this out to Woffinden after his book came out, because he corrected it in later editions. (Graham spotted this.)

2. Although Valerie said “we had been in the car to that particular spot quite a few times” she also said “we had been there before only a couple of times during the last three months”.

So if a gunman was targeting them, it would have been a remarkable stroke of luck for him to have gone to the cornfield entrance at the same time they chose to be there.

[louisa]

Watch the A 6 committee short film from 1972 financed by John Lennon on YouTube.

The mention of helicopters,was to demonstrate I think that to bring a suggestion to the courts 'that maybe there was an aeroplane service from Speke airport to London , then the continuing journey to Dorney , to be at the field in time to car jack the couple is preposterous !

It is.

As I keep saying, the timeline does not fit with Hanratty being the culprit.

Nothing fits with Hanratty being the culprit. What we know of the man - small time crook, car thief, never owned a gun. He had never had the need to rape anyone. It sounds as though he had girlfriends and always treated them well.

The fact that the gunman obviously could not drive a car should have been one of the main points of the trial.

What does fit, however, is when you put Alphon in the role of gunman.

Valerie Storie's initial photofit is a good likeness of Alphon, who is the complete opposite, looks wise, of Hanratty.

She initially told police that the gunman had small deep set eyes. Then, after a visit from Gregston's wife she changed it to "His eyes were blue and saucer like"

And the jury voted to hang Hanratty on the evidence of this woman!

And I agree with Moste that back in the old days a sample of clothing evidence would not have been treated as it would today, especially if it was only being retained for blood sampling.

[louisa]

Hi All
A new member here.
I’ve always been fascinated by the James Hanratty case ever since reading the Paul Foot/Bob Woffinden books when a teenager.


Sadly, with the DNA evidence available it is hard to argue against Hanratty being innocent (although I find the strange occurrences / co incidences that happened in the case un-paralleled in British criminal history) and surprised that Hanratty was found guilty on the evidence presented at the trial at the time.

Thanks

JPR

Hi JPR!

I joined this forum in 2012 especially to take part in this discussion. I have recently joined it again.

I entirely agree with your theories.

Regarding DNA, I agree with Paul Foot that there must be something 'wrong' with it because Hanratty could not have been the gunman.

Somehow that DNA became contaminated, possibly because way back in 1961 evidence (from both sides) was stored in the same box.

[louisa]

I agree it is hard to understand why Hanratty, or anyone really, was in that cornfield with a gun. I’ve always assumed he had come from Maidenhead which is about an hour away by foot – simply because it was mentioned. If it was Hanratty’s first attempt at a hold up then perhaps he would not want to do it in an area in which he was known to have burgled before.

In any case I think the primary objective was something else and this went wrong, or his nerve failed, and he stumbled upon the car by accident.

I do not think it was planned because:

1. Valerie and Mike could not easily have been followed because they did not go straight from the Old Station Inn to the cornfield; they went somewhere else first and only moved on later. Someone must have pointed this out to Woffinden after his book came out, because he corrected it in later editions. (Graham spotted this.)

2. Although Valerie said “we had been in the car to that particular spot quite a few times” she also said “we had been there before only a couple of times during the last three months”.

So if a gunman was targeting them, it would have been a remarkable stroke of luck for him to have gone to the cornfield entrance at the same time they chose to be there.

I just don't think Hanratty was there that night.

He didn't know the area (he liked city life) and I can't honestly see why he would agree to do a 'job' in a rural place he had never been to before.

He would have had to walk, which was something Hanratty did not like doing. He would probably have stolen a car if he was going to have to be somewhere a distance from the station.

Whereas...eye witnesses spotted Alphon in the area of the cornfield just days preceding the incident.

Alphon already knew Slough - I think he had been to school in the area.

[Graham]

I have to say that the last 3 posts are merely bending the facts and fabricating new 'facts' to suit an individual's personal theory - if that isn't too grand a word here - about this case. Yes, there are unexplained mysteries surrounding the A6, as well as more coincidences than you can shake a stick at. I wouldn't argue that Hanratty was unlucky that the jury's verdict went against him, but had it not done so then I believe that a guilty man would have walked free. Indeed, had he not gone and changed his 'alibi' for what was known in those days as an 'ambush alibi', the jury may well have given him the benefit of the doubt.

For reasons that have been stated many times on these boards over the years, Alphon was not the A6 murderer, and neither was he part of a conspiracy as no conspiracy existed. I could go on at length, but what's the point? At this stage of the game neither 'side' to this debate is likely to convince the other; it hasn't happened yet so far as I know, and is not likely to happen at any time in the future. However, this won't stop me from posting.........

The A6 Crime left one man murdered, another man executed, and a woman maimed for life. These are the hard, sad facts. I believe that the culprit was Hanratty; others do not. However, there is one rather unpleasant aspect that has been creeping into this debate for some time, and that is the totally unjustified denigration of the late Valerie Storie. She told the truth as she saw it. It is as simple as that.

Thank you.

Graham