A6 Rebooted

[OneRound]

The 1957 Homicide Act introduced the defence of ‘diminished responsibility’ reducing a murder charge to voluntary manslaughter. Following the Act, of the 64 people sentenced to death half (32) were reprieved. This is why I believe that a plea of diminished responsibility would have been successful.

Hi Nick - the frequency of reprieves granted under the '57 Act is somewhat skewed upwards though as the final 13 individuals sentenced to be hanged between December 1964 and November 1965 were automatically reprieved as Parliament debated and brought in legislation to stop the use of the death penalty.

I am firmly in cobalt's camp that a plea of 'diminished responsibility' upon behalf of Hanratty would have failed for the reasons he gives.

Best regards,

OneRound

[caz]

OR,
Congratulations on a masterful summation of the question marks concerning DNA evidence in relation to James Hanratty.

NickB,
Pleading mental deficiency would not have been an option considered by Hanratty if he were innocent of course.

Had he been guilty, then I am less convinced such an appeal would have saved him from execution. He would have then changed his story three times: from Liverpool alibi, to Rhyl alibi; to mental deficiency. I doubt if legal opinion, far less the British public, would have seen this as anything more than a desperate, late ploy to avoid responsibility for a terrible crime involving gratuitous murder, rape and the paralysis of the surviving victim.

It may be that we already know what Hanratty did at the time of the murder, in so far as he gave his account at trial. Hanratty went to the gallows not just protesting his innocence but asking his family to fight to clear his name. Now, Hanratty did not have much of a reputation to uphold so he presumably believed he was being wronged. Of course, he could have been trying to save face in front of his family in order that they did not feel disgraced, but there were ways to do this short of asking them to continue the fight after his death. Convicted murderers normally accepted their lot with a degree of fatalism before execution, finding a cryptic form of words which indicated they were being punished for mistakes and poor decisions in life. This was open to Hanratty, short of making a confession to his guilt, but instead he went in the opposite direction and placed a responsibility upon his family which is still being carried out 55 years later.

Good post, cobalt, and a happy new year to all.

I was only thinking last night about the disgrace that would have attached to a crime like this, and wondered if this, in part, contributed to Dixie France's suicide.

Petty crime was one thing, but the honour system within the criminal fraternity would have considered the senseless and horrific A6 shootings and rape quite another matter. While stealing from someone better off, or even trading in firearms, would have been seen as relatively minor law-breaking, nobody would have wanted to be associated with whoever had left one man dead for no apparent reason, then raped and shot his helpless girlfriend before fleeing the scene using the couple's car. So whatever France may or may not have known about all this, and regardless of the truth, he would have found himself in a deeply uncomfortable position, given his association with the man convicted of such an appalling crime.

If Hanratty was indeed the guilty man, it might help to explain why he went to his grave protesting his innocence and asking his family to clear his name. He must have appreciated by then just how shaming it was for them to have to face a world that believed their son/brother could have done such a thing. Had he confessed, or even gone for a diminished responsibility plea, his family would have continued to bear the stigma - and possibly the responsibility - for the rest of their own lives. I'm pretty sure I would, if I thought a child of mine had committed a crime of this magnitude.

Revisiting 10 Rillington Place for a moment, I strongly suspect Christie's reasons for refusing to admit to the murder of baby Geraldine were along similar lines. It was bad enough to confess to killing several adult women [while claiming, IIRC, not to have caused them any pain ], but doing away with a helpless little tot was on a whole other level. A coward like Christie, who had sent an innocent man to the gallows, would have been right to fear the reaction of his fellow prison inmates had he confessed to that one.

Love,

Caz
X

[ansonman]

Good post, cobalt, and a happy new year to all.

I was only thinking last night about the disgrace that would have attached to a crime like this, and wondered if this, in part, contributed to Dixie France's suicide.

Petty crime was one thing, but the honour system within the criminal fraternity would have considered the senseless and horrific A6 shootings and rape quite another matter. While stealing from someone better off, or even trading in firearms, would have been seen as relatively minor law-breaking, nobody would have wanted to be associated with whoever had left one man dead for no apparent reason, then raped and shot his helpless girlfriend before fleeing the scene using the couple's car. So whatever France may or may not have known about all this, and regardless of the truth, he would have found himself in a deeply uncomfortable position, given his association with the man convicted of such an appalling crime.

If Hanratty was indeed the guilty man, it might help to explain why he went to his grave protesting his innocence and asking his family to clear his name. He must have appreciated by then just how shaming it was for them to have to face a world that believed their son/brother could have done such a thing. Had he confessed, or even gone for a diminished responsibility plea, his family would have continued to bear the stigma - and possibly the responsibility - for the rest of their own lives. I'm pretty sure I would, if I thought a child of mine had committed a crime of this magnitude.

Revisiting 10 Rillington Place for a moment, I strongly suspect Christie's reasons for refusing to admit to the murder of baby Geraldine were along similar lines. It was bad enough to confess to killing several adult women [while claiming, IIRC, not to have caused them any pain ], but doing away with a helpless little tot was on a whole other level. A coward like Christie, who had sent an innocent man to the gallows, would have been right to fear the reaction of his fellow prison inmates had he confessed to that one.

Love,

Caz
X

I cannot believe that France committed suicide, in part, because of any disgrace associated with having let Hanratty into his home.

The appeal was dismissed on the Tuesday, reported on the Wednesday and on the Thursday France checked into a boarding house bedsit. Before gassing himself he wrote about 100 pages of writing paper, all of which were taken by the police and most of which have never been disclosed.

I find it impossible to believe that France killed himself because of the "shame" his association with Hanratty had brought to his family, or that it would take 100 or so pages of writing to express that shame and justify an act that would devastate his (France's) family. What makes far more sense to me is Woffinden's assertion that France was indeed an associate in a very filthy act: the framing of Hanratty.

For my money, France held the key to what really happened and was the central player in this case. He killed himself because he knew an innocent man was about to be hanged and that his evidence had been crucial to the guilty verdict.

Ansonman

[Spitfire]

For my money, France held the key to what really happened and was the central player in this case. He killed himself because he knew an innocent man was about to be hanged and that his evidence had been crucial to the guilty verdict.

Ansonman

The most important part of France's evidence was the conversation with Hanratty about getting rid of stuff under the back seat of a double-decker bus and, as Hanratty never denied this conversation, we can assume that France told the truth which is hardly a reason for killing oneself.

[OneRound]

I cannot believe that France committed suicide, in part, because of any disgrace associated with having let Hanratty into his home.

The appeal was dismissed on the Tuesday, reported on the Wednesday and on the Thursday France checked into a boarding house bedsit. Before gassing himself he wrote about 100 pages of writing paper, all of which were taken by the police and most of which have never been disclosed.

I find it impossible to believe that France killed himself because of the "shame" his association with Hanratty had brought to his family, or that it would take 100 or so pages of writing to express that shame and justify an act that would devastate his (France's) family. What makes far more sense to me is Woffinden's assertion that France was indeed an associate in a very filthy act: the framing of Hanratty.

For my money, France held the key to what really happened and was the central player in this case. He killed himself because he knew an innocent man was about to be hanged and that his evidence had been crucial to the guilty verdict.

Ansonman

Hi Anson,

If ''France was indeed an associate in a very filthy act:the framing of Hanratty'', he presumably was a willing participant. It strikes me as odd that such a hideous individual would then have a belated attack of conscience and do himself in as a result.

Foot saw France's written notes (not sure if it was all of them?) and commented along the lines that France slated Hanratty rather than sympathised with him.


PS Cobalt - meant to say this before, many thanks for your generous feedback on my ''concerns about the DNA'' post.

Best regards,

OneRound

[ansonman]

Hi Anson,

If ''France was indeed an associate in a very filthy act:the framing of Hanratty'', he presumably was a willing participant. It strikes me as odd that such a hideous individual would then have a belated attack of conscience and do himself in as a result.

Foot saw France's written notes (not sure if it was all of them?) and commented along the lines that France slated Hanratty rather than sympathised with him.


PS Cobalt - meant to say this before, many thanks for your generous feedback on my ''concerns about the DNA'' post.

Best regards,

OneRound

OR

France's first attack of belated conscience occurred earlier than his successful suicide attempt. Three days before the start of the trial, at which he had been listed to give evidence, he was found in a gas filled room in Holland Park. A few hours after arriving at the hospital to which he was then taken, he had to be restrained from jumping out of a high level window.

He attempted suicide twice, and tried to jump from a window to his death because he felt shame at having allowed Hanratty into the family home?

Ansonman

[OneRound]

OR

France's first attack of belated conscience occurred earlier than his successful suicide attempt. Three days before the start of the trial, at which he had been listed to give evidence, he was found in a gas filled room in Holland Park. A few hours after arriving at the hospital to which he was then taken, he had to be restrained from jumping out of a high level window.

He attempted suicide twice, and tried to jump from a window to his death because he felt shame at having allowed Hanratty into the family home?

Ansonman

Hi again anson - Pure speculation on my part but, as you ask, I suspect it would be most to do with fear of the law catching up with how Hanratty obtained the gun plus an element of shame.

I do not believe that an innocent Hanratty was framed by France and so that's not a reason for the suicide attempts in my opinion. Foot's reading of France's notes do appear to support that view.

It also needs to be kept in mind that sadly there isn't always a logical cause underlying suicide.

Best regards,

OneRound

[cobalt]

I hadn’t realised that France’s suicide attempts were closely associated, in terms of time at least, with the developments in the case. To use that rather grand term from the JFK assassination, it may be that Dixie France is the Rosetta Stone of the A6 Case. His actions clearly suggest some kind of personal knowledge or involvement, from whichever perspective we interpret them.

I cannot imagine France was ever a willing participant in helping the police make a case against Hanratty, be he innocent or guilty. As a man who operated in the criminal milieu, France would no doubt have had to drop the odd name and tidbit of information to the police over the years in order to protect his interests. There seem to have been a number of ‘steers’ in this case: the police becoming aware of Alphon at the Alexandra Hotel; the bullets turning up weeks later at the Vienna Hotel; the police apparently conducting enquiries in the Swiss Cottage shopping arcade where Hanratty had left a suit to be cleaned.

However, to actually testify for the prosecution, even in a case that both the police and criminal fraternities would have wanted resolved as quickly as possible, was surely a breach of the criminal code. It’s one thing to let the police know about Hanratty’s favourite hiding place; quite another I would think to testify to that in public.

As far as the Rosetta Stone analogy goes, the general feeling on this site seems to be that France was in some way connected to the weapon used in the murder. I did ask earlier what was known about the actual history of the weapon since normally the police are very thorough in tracking ownership and activity concerning a firearm used in a capital crime. So far as I am aware we seem to have little information in this area.

[caz]

I cannot believe that France committed suicide, in part, because of any disgrace associated with having let Hanratty into his home.

The appeal was dismissed on the Tuesday, reported on the Wednesday and on the Thursday France checked into a boarding house bedsit. Before gassing himself he wrote about 100 pages of writing paper, all of which were taken by the police and most of which have never been disclosed.

I find it impossible to believe that France killed himself because of the "shame" his association with Hanratty had brought to his family, or that it would take 100 or so pages of writing to express that shame and justify an act that would devastate his (France's) family. What makes far more sense to me is Woffinden's assertion that France was indeed an associate in a very filthy act: the framing of Hanratty.

For my money, France held the key to what really happened and was the central player in this case. He killed himself because he knew an innocent man was about to be hanged and that his evidence had been crucial to the guilty verdict.

Ansonman

I'm sorry, Ansonman, but it makes no sense to me at all that anyone who could deliberately set up an innocent man for a capital crime would suddenly suffer such a crisis of conscience - after the unsuccessful appeal - that he would top himself. If France had really framed an innocent Hanratty and been that sorry about it he could have come clean before facing his maker.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

OR

France's first attack of belated conscience occurred earlier than his successful suicide attempt. Three days before the start of the trial, at which he had been listed to give evidence, he was found in a gas filled room in Holland Park. A few hours after arriving at the hospital to which he was then taken, he had to be restrained from jumping out of a high level window.

He attempted suicide twice, and tried to jump from a window to his death because he felt shame at having allowed Hanratty into the family home?

Ansonman

In part, yes, I think France would have felt shame to find himself associated in any way with such a horrendous crime. And he was associated, regardless of whether you think Hanratty was guilty or not, if only due to his known connections with the convicted man. There were probably other, more deeply personal factors, as there are with most suicides, so I don't buy that he took an active part in the crime, or knew who did, then framed Hanratty for it and became suicidal as a result. If he supplied the gun to Hanratty, never imagining what it would actually be used for, I can well understand how that might have played on his mind afterwards. He may have thought that by doing the right thing, and telling the police about Hanratty's hiding place, he'd feel better about himself, but the enormity of the whole thing and the final outcome evidently proved too much to bear.

Love,

Caz
X

[NickB]

A more likely source for the gun was Slack.

Hanratty admitted asking Slack to get a gun (I “asked him to get a shooter to do some stick-ups”) but later claimed “it was only a matter of conversation”. From prison he wrote a letter to Slack setting out this as the explanation.

Had Slack been allowed to receive the letter he would have been able to concur that ‘it was only a matter of conversation’ and support Hanratty’s line of defence. Instead he denied the discussion had happened at all.

[ansonman]

In part, yes, I think France would have felt shame to find himself associated in any way with such a horrendous crime. And he was associated, regardless of whether you think Hanratty was guilty or not, if only due to his known connections with the convicted man. There were probably other, more deeply personal factors, as there are with most suicides, so I don't buy that he took an active part in the crime, or knew who did, then framed Hanratty for it and became suicidal as a result. If he supplied the gun to Hanratty, never imagining what it would actually be used for, I can well understand how that might have played on his mind afterwards. He may have thought that by doing the right thing, and telling the police about Hanratty's hiding place, he'd feel better about himself, but the enormity of the whole thing and the final outcome evidently proved too much to bear.

Love,

Caz
X

The facts, as we know them, don't square with France having thought that by "doing the right thing" he would feel better about himself. On the contrary.

On the afternoon he was called to give evidence, he was said to be too ill to go into the witness box and his wife appeared instead. He returned to court the following week, attended by two nurses. According to the reports at the time, France gave evidence only with intense reluctance and did not give any indication that he felt shame at having allowed Hanratty into his house. Indeed, France told the court "I give his character the highest praise".

If France felt so ashamed about his relationship with Hanratty, why on earth was he so reluctant to give evidence against him? If he felt better about himself for giving evidence against him, why did he subsequently commit suicide the day after the unsuccessful appeal was announced? And why on earth would he check into a bedsit and write 100 pages immediately prior to gassing himself? The facts to not rest comfortably with the notion that France was ashamed of Hanratty and was therefore keen to give evidence against him.

In one of the letters that Charlotte France made available to the Sunday Times, her husband, writing on the night of his suicide, says:

"One day you will understand that what I have done this night I have done for you and the children. They are going to crucify us all".

Make of that what you will. It it hardly squares with remorse for having let Hanratty into the house, or of feeling better for testifying against Hanratty, whose character France praised highly.

Ansonman

[NickB]

France's “highest praise” comment about Hanratty's character was at the committal and related to Jim’s behaviour towards his daughter. Apparently he was unaware that Jim had done any more than drive her to work once.

Parts of his letter to the Coroner were read out by the Coroner who said: "This is a letter written in great bitterness and with great feeling against the man Hanratty".

Two Sunday Times reporters were allowed to read the other letters. They recorded the letters said France committed suicide because of the shame he brought his family by introducing a ‘monster’ like Hanratty into the household. One reporter accepted the letters at face value, the other thought they implied feelings of guilt.

According to his wife his first suicide attempt was in January and he had been intensely depressed for some time. His brother was killed in a nasty car accident a fortnight before his own death.

[cobalt]

Ansonman’s description presents a picture of Dixie France being a very reluctant witness indeed. As he indicated, any feelings of guilt France might have had would surely have been assuaged somewhat by his doing the decent thing and testifying against Hanratty, the monster who he allowed into his family home.

Even in his suicide notes France could have unburdened himself more fully and not just savagely attacked Hanratty, but actually declared he was guilty of the A6 crimes. Yet he did not do this, even after a jury and appeal court had made their judgment.

France was coerced into testifying for a reason and for me the likeliest reason is that the police had made a potential link between France and the murder weapon. The deal would have been for France to take the witness stand in return for police not pursuing their enquiries about the gun. Incidentally this is a gun we seem to know less about than the handkerchief in which it was wrapped, an unusual situation in a capital crime. In fact, it appears we seem to have as little evidence regarding the history of the gun as we have of forensic evidence inside the car where the crime was committed.

Once Hanratty’s appeal was dismissed, France may well have been fearful that Hanratty would have a bit more to say about guns and Dixie France. Having got their verdict, the police might then have proceeded further into the provenance of the gun and, as France saw it, crucified him and his family.

None of the above assumes either guilt or innocence on Hanratty’s part.

[Derrick]

...I did ask earlier what was known about the actual history of the weapon since normally the police are very thorough in tracking ownership and activity concerning a firearm used in a capital crime. So far as I am aware we seem to have little information in this area.

On 3rd September 1961, the police released details of the black Enfield revolver to the press.

It was made in 1943 for armed services use and had the serial number 8839. The police had contacted the War Office and they were checking their records to ascertain who the weapon had originally been issued to.

I can find no other information as to the findings of the War Office in this exercise.

HTH
Del