A6 Rebooted

[ansonman]

I cannot disagree with that.

I did a search of the Daily Herald for 1961 from the British Newspaper Archive. The're all there but I could not find anything relating to the press interview with Mrs. Dinwoodie. I am not a subscriber and I don't have the time to go though all the papers even if I was.

On 14th October the headline was "A6 Murder Drama - Man will be charged today".

Interestingly, Foot says on P99:

"The party arrived soon after midday. At 4.45p.m. that day (October 13th), Hanratty stood in an identification parade before four witnesses. Mr John Skillet, who was driving down Eastern Avenue at the same time as the murder car, picked out Hanratty as the man in the car. Mr Edward Blackhall, who accompanied Skillet in the car, picked out someone else. Mr. Hirons, the eighty-year-old garage attendant who had filled the murder car with petrol, picked out someone else. Mr. Trower, the man who had been standing in Redbridge Lane on the morning after the murder, picked out Hanratty as the driver of the Morris which had flashed past him. The murder charge at Blackpool was not announced to the press, despite these identifications. Yet there was no denying Mr. Acott's confidence that he had his man in his grasp".

P100:

"A6 MURDER CHARGE IN 24 HOURS" screamed the Daily Mirror, the next day (October 14th)."

"This was all very surprising. The suspect had still to be identified by the only witness to the crime - Valerie Storie".

"Why, then, were the press so confident that Hanratty would be charged?. If Miss Storie failed to identify Hanratty, the case against him would be derisory. How were the Murder Squad so certain on that Friday 13th that their chief witness would not let them down again?"

As you say Moste, "This guy was going to hang at all costs".

[NickB]

I can only think that Mrs. Dinwoodie was being badgered in order to confuse and confound her into being unsure about the timing of Hanrattys visit.

This is what Foot is implying, but it does not make sense because the police already had her statement saying that it happened on Monday so there was no need to keep badgering her.

I was hoping Spitfire could find Don Smith's article so we could see what he actually reported at the time, rather than what Foot reports him as recalling 9 years later. Why did Foot rely upon these recollections and not quote from the article itself?

When Kleinman interviewed Mrs Dinwoodie she showed that she would not be intimidated on the question of which day it occured.

[moste]

And then further down page 197, Foot goes on to explain ‘The Liverpool CID inquiries into the sweet - shop incident lasted for a week when hardly a day went buy without police visits at Mrs.Dinwoodies house , the shop owners , and the young girls homes. I think foot is inferring that the police were messing with the minds of these people especially the old lady. How difficult is it to take a statement from a person which involves a brief meeting with a stranger which lasted only a few minutes? I can only think that Mrs. Dinwoodie was being badgered in order to confuse and confound her into being unsure about the timing of Hanratty’s visit. The wicked scoundrels!
The following page reveals Sherrards disgust at Acotts reluctance to share his knowledge of the events with the defence.
’Sherrard’ : when we’re you proposing to be good enough to tell us , who are defending this man for his life, the result of these police enquiries.’ Clearly as far as the police were concerned , this guy was going to have to hang at all costs.

[ansonman]

Foot, P197:

"There is some independent evidence to suggest that in those early days Mrs Dinwoodie was in grave doubt as to the date of the incident. Mr Don Smith, one of Liverpool's most experienced crime reporters, who was working at that time for the Daily Herald, heard from a police contact that the Liverpool CID had found a lady who appeared to substantiate Hanratty's alibi. At once, Smith went to interview Mrs Dinwoodie at her home. He believes he was the first journalist ever to speak to her. "She told me", he says, "that she was, at first, fairly sure that the man had come into the shop on the Tuesday, the day of the murder; but that now so many people had been asking so many questions, she wasn't so sure". (Interview with me, April 7th, 1970)."

[moste]

Wasn't it the crime correspondent of the Daily Herald who, according to Foot, was the first to interview Dinwoodie? He claimed she said the visit was on Tuesday in that interview, which would be interesting to see.

With questions like this, we would really need to have access to the particular Daily Herald issue from back then. I think we have guys on this thread who pay for the access privilege , I suppose even then it would be hard to find. because its hard to know when the article was published.
If that could be found and given credence, obviously it would be pivotal to Hanrattys innocence.

[cobalt]

Maybe related to the umbrella Ewer?

Well, W.N. Ewer was born in 1895 so he would be around the right age to be a father or uncle. His name was William Ewer which is the same name as man we know from the A6 Case. And he was originally from North London area. That’s all I know. I’m not sure how common the name Ewer is in London area: in Scotland we tend to spell it ‘Ure’ and it’s not a particularly common name up here.

W.N. Ewer certainly led an interesting life and in terms of his relationship with MI5 he seems to have been a poacher turned gamekeeper. He was still contributing articles to the Daily Herald at the time of the A6 Case so would have been privy to journalistic gossip.

[NickB]

Wasn't it the crime correspondent of the Daily Herald who, according to Foot, was the first to interview Dinwoodie? He claimed she said the visit was on Tuesday in that interview, which would be interesting to see.

[moste]

The Daily Herald is, alas, no more having been eventually subsumed into The Sun newspaper. One of its founding members just before WW1 was a W.N. Ewer from North London who later became part of the Communist Party of Great Britain and was harassed by MI5. He was lucky not be charged in respect of treason on one occasion. In later years he was supported financially by presumably MI5 to write anti-soviet articles for the paper.

Maybe related to the umbrella Ewer?

[cobalt]

The Daily Herald is, alas, no more having been eventually subsumed into The Sun newspaper. One of its founding members just before WW1 was a W.N. Ewer from North London who later became part of the Communist Party of Great Britain and was harassed by MI5. He was lucky not be charged in respect of treason on one occasion. In later years he was supported financially by presumably MI5 to write anti-soviet articles for the paper.

[cobalt]

Once you get past the opening paragraphs this is a reasonably fair, factual summary of Hanratty's short life.

[Spitfire]

How the Daily Herald viewed Hanratty on 19th February 1962. A psychopathic, sex-obsessed, vain dandy with expensive tastes.

[moste]

Interesting cobalt, that you spent time checking for a political link with the A6. I thought I was out on a limb, being highly suspicious of the excruciatingly close proximity of the corn field. ,and the Old Station Inn, with the regular and presumably very familiar route, through Taplow, traversed by the likes of Stephen Ward, John Profumo, and their girls. Not to mention Stories lovely memories of her and Michaels enjoyable strolls along the banks of the Thames, watching the barges as they negotiated the locks . I can’t help but wonder, did they meander along the tow path as far as the Spring Cottage (the lent gift from the Astors to Ward) a summer retreat for high Jinx and frivolities , and witnessed what may have been. I put this theory forward as possible, and less fantastic than the farce put out by the prosecution.
Political or otherwise, No one jumped into Gregsten car at dusk, have him drive all round Gods creation, before stopping in Bedfordshire and shooting him dead twice by accident, with all the rest of the nonsense patched together to make the story work as best as possible.
Gregsten was premeditatedly targeted. Of this I am certain.
.

[cobalt]

I was struck with some of the similarities between the two cases. Back in 1961 it seemed odd that no worthwhile forensic evidence could be retrieved from the car which was where the murder and sexual assault took place. That is even truer in 1999 with this Clydach case since you would expect DNA evidence against the accused to be retrievable from a house where there was a triple murder.

And Moste, as someone who has queried whether there was a political element to the A6 Case, you might be intrigued that some of the evidence withheld from the defence in the Clydach Case is under a regulation normally reserved for state security.

I did spend some time a few years ago trying to find a political link to the A6 Case. I thought of the Berlin Wall (being built at the time of the crime) and possibly Alphon’s father rubber stamping visas for known former Nazis who had been helpful to the UK subsequently. William Ewer’s war time activity remains a closed book. The Cliveden Set of Keeler and Profumo did cavort nearby the murder scene. And road systems and tyres and braking systems were all big money back in 1961, the type of situation where a research scientist might be bribed to alter test results. Or bumped off if he didn’t, as is alleged in the ‘Marconi Murders.’ Sorry to say I never turned up anything worthwhile.

[moste]

I just read an article of the Clydach killings , with a summary of the case in the magazine Murder most foul . Absolutely incredible story,
talk about. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[cobalt]

It’s not my intention to go off topic, but there has been a development in what are known as the Clydach killings, an horrific family murder case in 1999 near Swansea that I assume most of us will know of.

The case has a number of similarities with the A6 Case, the main one being that there has remained a lingering doubt over the guilt of the man condemned, who died recently in prison. The police initially focused on another suspect, a serving policeman whose wife was in a relationship with one of the victims. After a year they turned their attention to the man convicted who had no obvious motive for the crime but had a weak alibi which was later altered a bit. He also told a few lies to police in the course of being investigated, even ‘ambushing’ his own defence lawyer close to trial. No one was able to place him at the scene of the crime. There was next to no forensic evidence.

The recent result has been similar to the A6 Case. A DNA sample has been retrieved from a glove which, if not totally conclusive, makes it likely the real killer was jailed. There the matter might end, but I doubt that it will. There are other exhibits that have not been tested, disputed expert opinion and a couple of eyewitnesses who seem to have been ignored. One eyewitness came up with a fotofit that looked the spitting image of the policeman initially suspected, although this was never released to the public for some reason. Police evidence has been withheld from the defence.