A6 Rebooted

[moste]

Additionally, a professional killer would not have entered the couple's car and risk leaving fibres, fingerprints or other forensic evidence behind. Neither would a professional killer shot someone inside the car and drive off in the car, thus risking being caught in a car with blood and brains all over the passenger seat.

Quite right, But could it not be that the killer shot Gregsten through the window of the car , and left the scene with a third person left to take care of the following mayhem. This would be in keeping with Superintendend Mathews belief that more than 2 people possibly 3 people were involved in all of this.

[moste]

Limehouse. I agree with your last two paragraphs whole heartedly.interested to hear more in future posts . I know incidentally my views negate ms. Stories statements , sorry, I just don’t believe a lot of what she had to say.

[Limehouse]

Additionally, a professional killer would not have entered the couple's car and risk leaving fibres, fingerprints or other forensic evidence behind. Neither would a professional killer shot someone inside the car and drive off in the car, thus risking being caught in a car with blood and brains all over the passenger seat.

Quite right, But could it not be that the killer shot Gregsten through the window of the car , and left the scene with a third person left to take care of the following mayhem. This would be in keeping with Superintendend Mathews belief that more than 2 people possibly 3 people were involved in all of this.

I think this is very unlikely. A professional killer would have ordered the couple out of the car, carried out the killing and left the scene swiftly. They certainly would not have taken the couple on a pointless meander through the night streets or raped one of the victims.

Having said that, I don't think a former house-burglar, out to score his first practice 'stick-up' would have taken the couple on that very risky jaunt either. Surely they would also have sought a swift exit? Is it possible that the attacker needed the car as a get-away vehicle with a view to holding up a remote garage, where a nice cash return on a few minutes work would most likely be the result? Again, in that case, I would have expected the 'robber' to have ordered the couple out of the car and drive off with it - except it seems that our man was not a very good driver?

[cobalt]

Hi Moste,

I see that Spitfire is having some sport with your rubber suit theory again, whilst Limehouse has made a highly logical criticism of your ‘amateur’ hitman scenario. I have to agree with them on both points but hope you keep thinking outwith the conventional parameters on the case, for neither the prosecution nor the defence has provided a satisfactory resolution to the A6 Case despite having had 50 years to do so.

You have always been willing to question the evidence of Valerie Storie which very few have been, unless it is in regard to her ID evidence. I have sometimes wondered if her account contained some elements of double bluff. The initial version was that she and Gregsten were in the corn field as part of preparing for a car rally. This was unquestioningly accepted by my parents at the time as I recall and probably most of the British public too, even if the police, and the couple’s family and work colleagues knew better. Only after the trial and execution did the romantic relationship between the couple become public knowledge. Then, with many a nod and wink, the British public worked out why Miss Storie and Gregsten were really sitting in a car in a corn field.

And there the matter is normally laid to rest. Some of the more lurid commentators have even suggested that the couple were caught in the act by their attacker, which triggered his erratic behaviour that followed.

But what if the story of a sexual assignment was actually a ‘blind?’ I understand that the couple had actually lived together briefly in the past so I am not sure if they needed to rely on the interior of a motor car for their intimate encounters. Was there not a flat in existence which they were due to move into together in the near future? Is it possible that they drove to the corn field as part of an arranged meeting, having driven to a different spot shortly before and discovered their ‘contact’ was not there?

Valerie Storie was reported as saying to census taker John Kerr: ‘We picked up a man around Slough,’ although we do not know if that was written down by him since his piece of paper was mislaid apparently. In her desperate state it would be foolish for us to lay too much importance upon Valerie Storie’s choice of words, but they were among the very first words she ever uttered about what happened and at a time, perhaps, when she was not sure if she would survive. So they mattered a great deal to her. I cannot imagine a couple would have picked up a lone, male hitch-hiker in the late evening so if the words are to be taken at face value this suggests they made contact with ‘a man’ who was unknown to Valerie Storie.

The rest of the events may have unfolded much as she described.

[cobalt]

In relation to Matthews suggestion that two or three people were involved, it is hard to see how the gunman could have arrived at the cornfield under his own steam. Clearly, he did not arrive alone by car, since in the aftermath of the crime no abandoned vehicle was identified in the surrounding area. A taxi might just be possible but the police must surely have explored that avenue and drawn a blank. Which -unless he was local- leaves us with him walking from the train station.

I googled the map of Taplow Railway Station to Marsh Lane/Dorney Reach and the route seems to be around 2 miles from what I can gather. I doubt that the roads and the footpaths on the country lane have altered much over the years. A few things struck me about this route. First of all, Hanratty was a city boy and a two mile country walk might have seemed a bit much, psychologically, for a car thief. Secondly, even in the late evening some cars would have passed a man walking for two miles and surely, subsequently, have reported seeing him. Yet no one did. No one in Taplow wanted to ‘get in on the act’ like a cast of extras were accused of doing in Merseyside. Finally, Valerie Storie’s description of the gunman is quite specific abut his wearing a suit and having polished shoes; this does not fit with someone who has walked a couple of miles along a country road, carrying a revolver and perhaps as many as five boxes of ammunition.

It may be the gunman arrived some hours before the attack but then the problems become even greater. A stranger wearing a suit and carrying a bag in a quiet country area would have drawn undue attention in broad daylight and presumably have needed some food and watering in the course of his stay.

For me, the only logical conclusion is that the gunman was driven to, or close to, the cornfield by another party. That driver must have known that his passenger was carrying a weapon and was engaged in illegal activity of some sort, so understandably was tight-lipped about his involvement after the terrible events.

[cobalt]

I am aware that a stranger to the Taplow area, resembling Alphon, was allegedly seen on the afternoon of 22nd August by two local witnesses. However, we must remember that none of these identifications was tested in court.

This qualification also applies to an identification by Mrs. Lanz, the proprietor of the Old Station Inn, from which Gregsten and Valerie Storie left prior to their ordeal. She claimed that Alphon had visited the premises previously and on the night in question was there in the company of at least one other man. This is a much stronger sighting on two grounds: first of all, the woman had seen him on more than one occasion; secondly, proprietors are generally very good at remembering the faces of those who visit their hostelries. No doubt the QC Swanwick would have accused Mrs. Lanz in court of trying to drum up business for her Inn, just as Mrs. Jones was for her guest house and presumably Mrs. Dinwoodie for her sweet shop in Scotland Road but it never came to that.

We are regularly told that Alphon was just an oddball who, by pure chance, got caught up in the A6 Case and milked it for all it was worth. But if Mrs. Lanz is correct then I doubt if chance has much to do with it at all. For it would mean that Alphon was unwittingly dogging the footsteps of killer James Hanratty at every turn.
Not only did Londoner Alphon happen, just by chance, to be in a rural backwater the very day that Londoner James Hanratty decided to launch the violent phase of criminal career there, but he also stopped off for a drink at the very same hostelry and I believe at the very same time as the victims. The following day, purely by chance, he goes to the same hotel that Hanratty did the day previously and is sent, again like Hanratty, to the overspill Vienna Hotel.
So it can hardly be a surprise when Alphon is arrested on suspicion a few days later, although his arrest has actually nothing to do with the coincidences mentioned so far.

If Alphon was innocent as many here believe, then he was fully entitled to milk these outrageous coincides for all they were worth, for it seems fate was trying very hard indeed to ‘frame’ him as the A6 murderer. Except for others, there are about two coincidences too many here.

[OneRound]

....

For me, the only logical conclusion is that the gunman was driven to, or close to, the cornfield by another party. That driver must have known that his passenger was carrying a weapon and was engaged in illegal activity of some sort, so understandably was tight-lipped about his involvement after the terrible events.

Some well constructed and interesting posts there, cobalt.

I've commented before that whilst I don't believe Alphon was the A6 murderer and rapist, I don't rule him out of having had some involvement with the events of that night. The coincidences aren't as plentiful or as damning for him as Hanratty but there are still a few that go into the mix.

Your paragraph above particularly caught my attention. There's a lot of merit in it as far as I'm concerned although, with particular reference to your most recent post, things don't completely gel with what we apparently know. Now if only Alphon had been able to drive ....

Best regards,

OneRound

[moste]

Some well constructed and interesting posts there, cobalt.

I've commented before that whilst I don't believe Alphon was the A6 murderer and rapist, I don't rule him out of having had some involvement with the events of that night. The coincidences aren't as plentiful or as damning for him as Hanratty but there are still a few that go into the mix.

Your paragraph above particularly caught my attention. There's a lot of merit in it as far as I'm concerned although, with particular reference to your most recent post, things don't completely gel with what we apparently know. Now if only Alphon had been able to drive ....

Best regards,

OneRound

‘Now if only Alphon had been able to drive’ I can’t believe you just said that Dude!
It’s statements like this, and people in the legal fraternity coming up with what can only be described as outlandish utterances such as ‘well It couldn’t have been Alphon , because he didn’t have a driving licence, and wasn’t capable of driving a motor car that make me smile . Come on let’s get real.
I myself ,at 17 yrs. of age set off happily , (if illegally)down the street in my mates car having only watched people drive on a few occasions. Crashed the gears a few times and kangaroo’d when the car seemed to insist on it, but never the less I could have got from A to B if it was imperative to do so.
So let’s have no more ’Alphon couldn’t drive’ (I know it’s a different machine but he knew the clutch control and operation of a motor cycle no problem) feel free to sit him back behind the wheel of a moggy minor if you’ve a mind to.

[moste]

In relation to Matthews suggestion that two or three people were involved, it is hard to see how the gunman could have arrived at the cornfield under his own steam. Clearly, he did not arrive alone by car, since in the aftermath of the crime no abandoned vehicle was identified in the surrounding area. A taxi might just be possible but the police must surely have explored that avenue and drawn a blank. Which -unless he was local- leaves us with him walking from the train station.

I googled the map of Taplow Railway Station to Marsh Lane/Dorney Reach and the route seems to be around 2 miles from what I can gather. I doubt that the roads and the footpaths on the country lane have altered much over the years. A few things struck me about this route. First of all, Hanratty was a city boy and a two mile country walk might have seemed a bit much, psychologically, for a car thief. Secondly, even in the late evening some cars would have passed a man walking for two miles and surely, subsequently, have reported seeing him. Yet no one did. No one in Taplow wanted to ‘get in on the act’ like a cast of extras were accused of doing in Merseyside. Finally, Valerie Storie’s description of the gunman is quite specific abut his wearing a suit and having polished shoes; this does not fit with someone who has walked a couple of miles along a country road, carrying a revolver and perhaps as many as five boxes of ammunition.

It may be the gunman arrived some hours before the attack but then the problems become even greater. A stranger wearing a suit and carrying a bag in a quiet country area would have drawn undue attention in broad daylight and presumably have needed some food and watering in the course of his stay.

For me, the only logical conclusion is that the gunman was driven to, or close to, the cornfield by another party. That driver must have known that his passenger was carrying a weapon and was engaged in illegal activity of some sort, so understandably was tight-lipped about his involvement after the terrible events.

I googled the map of Taplow Railway Station to Marsh Lane/Dorney Reach and the route seems to be around 2 miles from what I can gather. I doubt that the roads and the footpaths on the country lane have altered much over the years

Hi Cobalt.

In 1961 the link road between the A4 and the M4 I don’t believe existed . Though there is now an overpass pedestrian bridge , back then the housing estate Ms Storie lived in on Anthony way was only minutes walk from the ‘S’ bend where the young motorcyclist stated ‘he saw a young couple parked on the side of the road, windows steamed up ‘ of what he thought to be a Morris minor car. And didn’t we learn from Ms. Storie that they had in fact stopped somewhere first before being disturbed and moving on to the corn field location. All very intriguing .
I hear what you say about the supposed gunman arriving at that field having traversed the country lanes .... Ok , that definitely is not James Hanratty.
To take the chance on not being noticed dressed like she said he was, it just doesn’t work.

[moste]

’Was there not a flat in existence which they were due to move into together in the near future? Is it possible that they drove to the corn field as part of an arranged meeting, having driven to a different spot shortly before and discovered their ‘contact’ was not there? . ‘
Yes quite right ,the virtually penniless Gregsten had recently paid a deposit on a flat in Windsor, to move in on the following weekend 26 th of Aug.
presumably with Ms. Storie . We don’t know whether it was this flat or the flat at Sabine house, where he claimed to be retuning from the family holiday on the south coast, to paint and decorate. I would guess his soon to be home would be his target for a spruce up.

Almost every turn seems to be some kind of puzzlement . Even his neighbour and friend Mr. Catton admitted ‘ Mike was always hard up, he invited us along to the company beano I think because he knew he would supply the bottle.
How the hell was he going to manage to run two homes? Even his wife sold his beloved piano to make ends meet! Was Gregsten about to come into serious money?

[OneRound]

‘Now if only Alphon had been able to drive’ I can’t believe you just said that Dude!
It’s statements like this, and people in the legal fraternity coming up with what can only be described as outlandish utterances such as ‘well It couldn’t have been Alphon , because he didn’t have a driving licence, and wasn’t capable of driving a motor car that make me smile . Come on let’s get real.
I myself ,at 17 yrs. of age set off happily , (if illegally)down the street in my mates car having only watched people drive on a few occasions. Crashed the gears a few times and kangaroo’d when the car seemed to insist on it, but never the less I could have got from A to B if it was imperative to do so.
So let’s have no more ’Alphon couldn’t drive’ (I know it’s a different machine but he knew the clutch control and operation of a motor cycle no problem) feel free to sit him back behind the wheel of a moggy minor if you’ve a mind to.

Moste - if you had noticed the dots that followed the words in bold above and the 'what we apparently know' which came immediately before those words, you might have picked up that any conclusion on my part was purposely left open and not automatically the one that you attribute to me.

Do not assume that every wooden item is a stick to beat those doubting the views of the legal fraternity. Sometimes it may be an olive branch.

OneRound

[Graham]

Moste - if you had noticed the dots that followed the words in bold above and the 'what we apparently know' which came immediately before those words, you might have picked up that any conclusion on my part was purposely left open and not automatically the one that you attribute to me.

Do not assume that every wooden item is a stick to beat those doubting the views of the legal fraternity. Sometimes it may be an olive branch.

OneRound

Well said, OR! Especially your last sentence. It seems increasingly that the Hanratty supporters doubt, with varying logic, every possible suggestion that their boy gone done it, yet in all the years I've been posting here I have never once seen any suggestion as to who their alternative killer might be - if indeed they have an alternative whose initials are not PLA.

Cobalt,

about 25 years ago I walked from Taplow Station to the cornfield on a blazing hot summer's day. It took me less than half an hour, and I'm not what you might call super-fit. It was dark when Hanratty arrived at the car, so if he had arrived at Taplow by train, as has been suggested before, it would certainly have been deep dusk when he got off and started walking.
City boy he may have been, but from what I've read about him he was anything but unfit - ref: his ability to out-run the police in Shrewsbury.

There are houses in the vicinity, and further down Marsh Lane is Dorney Court, which then was a very grand private dwelling. I believe that there had been reports of burglaries in the area prior to 22 August 1961. It has to be a matter of conjecture what Hanratty had in mind that evening, but I don't believe that hi-jack, murder, rape and attempted murder were in his schedule. Rather, maybe, to 'do' a house, or as it seemed he tried with Gregsten and Storie, 'stick up' a car. After all, he'd mentioned to France that he wished to become a 'stick up artist' or whatever the phrase is. I very strongly suspect that the whole grisly episode that evening was unplanned - that it 'went wrong'.

Trouble is, all this speculation regarding Hanratty's presence at Dorney Reach that night began way back in 1963 when an early commentator on the A6 Case - Blom-Cooper, I believe - asked the rhetorical question: was Hanratty sent to the cornfield? No proof has ever been adduced that he had been sent, but, in view of the puzzling lack of an overall motive for an exceedingly vicious crime, it was a I feel a justified question waiting to be asked.

Graham

[cobalt]

Hi Graham,

Despite the sterling efforts on this site regarding photographs, there is no substitute for walking the scene of the crime as you and others have been able to do. So I defer to your knowledge of Taplow railway station and Marsh Lane.

The lack of a motive proportionate to the crime has always lain at the root of the A6 Case, along of course with the coincidences regarding Alphon’s possible involvement. I think those who support the prosecution case want to have their cake and eat it regarding Hanratty’s motivation, as I shall outline.

I can readily believe that a compulsive burglar like Hanratty might well turn up in the Taplow area with a view to stealing from a large house. He might have been a city boy but from what I can gather he was no respecter of geography when it came to a spot of thieving. So yes, Hanratty might have been there, based on tip-offs and chit-chat from the criminal underworld.

I can also just about believe that Hanratty wanted to go ‘up market’ and turn to robbery rather than housebreaking. I assume the rewards are greater and the currency is usually cash, so no need for commission to the fences. It hardly fits with what we know of his character but Hanratty never denied voicing this ambition to France, so he must at least have considered it as a career option.

The problem for me is, the prosecution want to conflate these two types of crime. If he is doing some burgling, then he does not need to be wearing a suit and packing a gun or boxes of ammunition when slipping through doors or windows. He needs to be quick on his toes and get back to the railway station before the burglary is discovered. Even if he is just ‘casing a joint’ why run the risk of carrying guns and ammunition?

If he is going down the route of armed robbery then the suit is still a strange choice, as is a handkerchief to cover his face. No one had been using handkerchiefs since The Blue Lamp, nylon stockings being the disguise of choice; a young man like Hanratty certainly had access to those. (The neatness of the handkerchief over the killer’s face and the handkerchief wrapped round the gun under the bus seat has always seemed suspicious to me.) Anyhow, if Hanratty is bent on armed robbery he is obviously not going to end up in a cornfield. A burglar might have done, but not an armed robber.

It’s as simple as that. The armed robber is simply in the wrong place. He is not where he should be, robbing a small, family-owned petrol station before he graduates to bank robbery and wages heists. With a getaway car running in the forecourt as well. Everyone has to start somewhere, but no armed robber is going to hold up a Morris Minor in a cornfield as part of his apprenticeship.

The prosecution cannot have it both ways. Hanratty was either going out equipped for burglary in a rural backwater or he had decided to embark on armed robbery, which means he would have been nowhere near a cornfield. He cannot have been doing both.

[Graham]

Hi Cobalt,

Good points!

Re: JH's dress, the code in those days amongst young men was to dress 'sharp', that is largely Italian fashion, and this JH did and to good effect, it would seem. With regard to his burgling, he apparently preferred well-to-do areas such as Stanmore and Finchley, and I would suggest that to avoid standing out like a sore thumb, even at night, in such areas, he went out attired in suit, collar and tie. The days of burglars wearing a striped jersey, a beret and mask, and carrying a bag marked 'swag' were long gone....

I think regarding your comment about a cornfield being the wrong place to begin his career as a stick-up artist, it's worth reflecting that as, presumably, he'd never done it before, making a start with courting couples, whose attention is obviously elsewhere, makes sense. Was it just money and valuables he was after? He'd nicked cars before, and pinching one from a couple who may well not be in quite the right, er, position to defend their property would I feel have occurred to him. But we don't know, when all is said and done.

Not far from where I live is a long-established, remote and semi-rural spot for what were once known euphemistically as 'courting couples', and years ago there was a spate of violent robberies there. Basically, the same as happened to Gregsten and Storie - money, jewellery, any other valuables, and I believe on more than one occasion the car itself. Literally, they were caught with their pants down. It's all quiet there now; maybe the sophisticated security systems of modern cars has made it harder to commit an automotive 'smash and grab'.

Even in those days petrol stations in built-up areas were equipped with all manner of audible and visible alarm-systems, plus in many cases a direct line to the police. I know - I worked in one for a very short time in the later 1960's. I think the way that petrol-stations (preferable all-night ones) were successfully robbed was for a team to go in mob-handed and empty the place and scarper before the staff knew what had hit them! JH's criminal record was mainly vehicle-related, along with IIRC two sentences for housebreaking. His brother Michael said that James was always on the look-out for something, searching for adventure and some elusive dream, so maybe getting into armed robbery was his way of moving a rung up the criminal ladder and achieving his dream.

Just musing, but I'm beginning to sound like a practised villain, so I'll end now.

Graham

[cobalt]

I had overlooked the once fashionable crime of ‘car-jacking’ courting couples, which flourished in the USA in the 1950s I think. And of course the infamous ‘Zodiac’ killer in the late 1960s often picked on courting couples although, like the A6 attacker, robbery was not his motive. For all that, I’m not aware of a case where the car-jacker went for a four hour, meaningless jaunt before shooting the occupants of the car.

If Hanratty was cutting his teeth as an armed robber then I still have a problem as to why he would be in the Taplow area; there must have been courting couple sites in the London environs which he knew from personal experience, places he could have made an easier getaway from if things went wrong.

As it turns out the cornfield was actually a rather good spot for a car-jacking since the culprit could have been 10 minutes on the way back to London (presumably) before the police were alerted. So why then all the self-pitying ‘I am a desperate man on the run.’ and ‘I was locked up as a child’ psycho-babble reported by Valerie Storie? The attacker has a gun, takes valuables and scoots off with the car. Even a novice would have acted along these lines, not hung around inside the cornfield for some time making small talk before visiting petrol stations for milk and cigarettes. He is supposed to be an armed robber but does not really steal anything.
This is not inexperience in my opinion, more an indication of confusion and maybe even guilt.