Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A6 Rebooted

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Spitfire View Post
    Derrick, who gives the impression of being au fait with all the ins and outs of William Lee's Matlock sighting, has it as above.

    I've asked Derrick as to where one can see Lee's statement but he has told me to do some digging like Norma has .
    So Lee said that he first heard about the murder at around 5.00pm so went to the police with his 'report of a sighting' some time after that time? Which meant that he carried the car number around in his head for - depending upon who you believe - for either 11 hours or 9 hours? A number that he 'just happened' to memorize? I don't believe a word of it!

    Did Norma ever come back with a response to this nonsense?

    Graham
    We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze

    Comment


    • I'm afraid to say that the Matlock sighting is probably unreliable for the reasons given.

      If it was offered to the police before the number plate was given to the media then it is highly significant evidence.

      However, the weight of evidence suggests it was given afterwards; this does not render it irrelevant, but weakens it force.

      However, we still do not have a clear line of evidence of when this, the most sought after car in Britain, was actually alerted to the public.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Graham View Post
        So Lee said that he first heard about the murder at around 5.00pm so went to the police with his 'report of a sighting' some time after that time? Which meant that he carried the car number around in his head for - depending upon who you believe - for either 11 hours or 9 hours? A number that he 'just happened' to memorize? I don't believe a word of it!

        Did Norma ever come back with a response to this nonsense?

        Graham
        How do you know he didn’t write the number down,if he was so incensed about the traffic incident, with the idea of reporting it at first opportunity, then as the day wore on, calmed down, and decided to forget about it?(happened to me in the past)
        Then as he hears the news much later in the day realizes the description tallies with the car he was involved with ,so contacts the police.
        Something else about this witness. When Lee found out and I presume he did , that the car was found abandoned in Redbridge, Essex . He would immediately think to himself ‘well there’s my sighting in Matlock lost all credibility! But from all accounts he stuck with his story . This gives his sighting more credibility for my money, because he wasn’t aware of any mileage discrepancy, or top policemen falsifying their relevant notes etc.

        Comment


        • Quote :“ I know that's what Foot said, and no reason whatsoever to doubt him, but how long would it take the police to decide to give the Morris's reg no to the media?”
          Hi Graham, just thinking , We have the Bedfordshire detective giving the full ‘so called’ description of the killer, from right there at the scene of the crime, but it occurs to me, since you mention it, a much more important description would be that of the murder car complete with reg no. Probably something to do with protocol . But let’s face it, there would possibly have been a couple of million males that would fit that description . But the car was unique. Unless of course Valerie did not know the car registration.

          Comment


          • Acott's headquarters at the Broadway House

            According to Foot (p. 56), when the cartridge cases were found at the Vienna (Mon Sept 11) Acott "descended with all his staff" on the Broadway House Hotel in Dorset Square.

            That seems odd to me. Why would Acott move his headquarters from Bedford to a hotel more than a mile-and-a-half away from the Vienna? Come to that, why would he base himself in a hotel at all? Why not at Scotland Yard?

            Also, none of the sources seem to know exactly when this move was made. A report in Thursday's Telegraph suggests it may not have been until the Wednesday. The fact that it was only on that day that Galves was questioned, and Nudds even later, on the Friday, suggests the police reacted rather slowly to this crucial discovery. Am I reading this right?

            Comment


            • Woffinden’s account on page 60 might be more accurate.

              On the morning of the 11th, Acott, who’d based himself from the outset in Bedford, conferred with colleagues at Scotland Yard. A special information centre had been set up there to coordinate London enquiries into the murder. From this juncture, the Bedford base was discontinued. The investigation was run entirely from London — either from Scotland yard or at the Broadway House and the Vienna, where Acott now established a police presence.”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Spitfire View Post
                Woffinden’s account on page 60 might be more accurate.

                On the morning of the 11th, Acott, who’d based himself from the outset in Bedford, conferred with colleagues at Scotland Yard. A special information centre had been set up there to coordinate London enquiries into the murder. From this juncture, the Bedford base was discontinued. The investigation was run entirely from London — either from Scotland yard or at the Broadway House and the Vienna, where Acott now established a police presence.”
                Thanks, Spitfire. That sounds more logical.

                Still, it seems odd that the Telegraph would report Acott arriving in London on the Wednesday.

                Comment


                • When did Jim return from Ireland?

                  I don't think it's very significant, but as in Hanratty's account of his return from Liverpool, there's a discrepancy between his version and the recollections of others - in this case those of Charles France and Louise Anderson.

                  Woffinden, working I assume from Hanratty's statements to his defence team, has him flying back to London early on the Monday morning, Sept 11 and visiting the Frances at midday. France told the Magistrates' Court he turned up at his house on Saturday, Sept 9, while Anderson at the same hearing said she believed he left two suitcases with her on the Friday, Sept 8.

                  Somebody's memory is faulty, but whose?

                  Comment


                  • The police and Alphon's alibi

                    All the question marks over the reliability of the Nudds/Snell evidence and the validity of Alphon's alibi could have been avoided if the Highbury cop, DS Kilner, had contacted Mrs Alphon to confirm his alibi. It seems almost inconceivably sloppy that he didn't do this four days after the murder, when events were still fresh in her mind. Instead, it was 20 days later that she was interviewed by Acott, by which time she was unable to say whether she'd met her son on the Tues, Wed or Thurs of that week.

                    The police committed numerous errors - and worse - during the A6 investigation but it strikes me that this one might have been their most crucial. All the subsequent mischief-making by Justice et al might have been forestalled if Kilner had contacted Mrs A that Sunday. Instead, he seems to have deemed it sufficient that some unnamed person at the Vienna Hotel vouched for Alphon.

                    "Sad," as a certain well-known politician might say.

                    Comment


                    • Good point.

                      Kilner was also lax in allowing 10 days to pass after the phone call to the Vienna before someone from the hotel made a written statement confirming the information given, during which time Nudds left the Vienna.

                      Interesting that he referred to Alphon’s 1953 conviction as if it was his latest one. But there were also the 'fraud and hire purchase frauds' in 1961.
                      http://discovery.nationalarchives.go...ls/r/C10888300

                      Comment


                      • "Peter and Gordon"

                        Originally posted by cobalt View Post
                        The question is whether Alphon could have driven the car from Dead Man’s Hill to Redbridge Tube Station. (Let us for the moment omit any other circuitous routes in between or changes of driver.) The answer is surely yes, he could. With much more difficulty than Hanratty it is true, but he could have driven in the early hours of the morning when traffic was light and managed to park the car badly, before absconding. Alphon was man who regularly overestimated his abilities, so the concept of driving a murder car south was within his mental compass. Necessity might also have provided a spur to his actions.
                        There can be no doubt, Cobalt, that Peter Louis Alphon could drive a car. That tireless campaigner for justice, aptly named Jean Justice, in his 1964 book "Murder vs Murder" writes about this on page 49.......

                        "I can personally vouch for the fact that Peter Alphon, although he has handled a car, is a most incompetent driver. Indeed, Superintendent Acott himself, in the list of reasons already mentioned, goes so far as to say that Alphon could not drive at all. There I cannot agree with the Superintendent, for Alphon once drove my friend's car about half a mile along a private road. Not only did he have trouble with the gears, he proved such a menace that my friend was obliged at one juncture to take hold of the wheel. Another friend of mine, WHO WAS ONCE DRIVEN ABOUT TWENTY MILES BY ALPHON, is prepared to make a statement in confirmation of my views. He has described to me how he, too, had to take over because Alphon drove dangerously at excessive speed and ignored red traffic lights."

                        This second friend that Jean refers to was his personal chauffeur at that time, Gordon Perkins. Gordon was interviewed a few years later by Paul Foot, prior to publication of Paul's very impressive and compelling 1971 book "Who killed Hanratty". This is what he revealed [page 333] ...

                        "One night Peter [Alphon] and I went to hire a car to drive down to Fox's cottage in the country - Laudate.
                        We hired a Vauxhall Victor with the gear stick on the steering column. Alphon tried to hire it in his own name but the company refused him because he didn't have a driving licence. From the moment we set out, Alphon kept asking if he could drive the car himself. I said No. It was a hired car and it wouldn't be insured if he drove. We got out at a pub and Alphon kept trying to get me sloshed. He succeeded in the end - at a steak house in Kingston-on-Thames. I was very drunk indeed and I flung him the keys and told him to drive. He started the car alright, selected first gear and drove off. But he drove recklessly, fast and without complete control of the steering wheel, and he never dipped his lights. I kept telling him to turn left to try to slow him down, but it didn't work very well. Finally he did turn left, stopped, and I plucked the keys out of the ignition. I was frightened. WE HAD DRIVEN ABOUT TWENTY MILES I SUPPOSE, FOR ABOUT THREE QUARTERS OF AN HOUR. The car wasn't damaged, but I kept thinking it might be."


                        It wouldn't surprise me in the least if some folk on this forum were to claim that Justice and Perkins were telling porkies about Pete's ability to drive.
                        *************************************
                        "A body of men, HOLDING THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO NOBODY, ought not to be trusted by anybody." --Thomas Paine ["Rights of Man"]

                        "Justice is an ideal which transcends the expedience of the State, or the sensitivities of Government officials, or private individuals. IT HAS TO BE PURSUED WHATEVER THE COST IN PEACE OF MIND TO THOSE CONCERNED." --'Justice of the Peace' [July 12th 1975]

                        Comment


                        • I had a drive of a ‘62 Vauxhall Victor 101 back in 1971, with a view to buying it from a work mate. It was common knowledge though that this particular model suffered serious body rusting prematurely, and since the car in question was flawed in this regard I declined the purchase.
                          The gear shift was indeed on the steering column , and though a pretty experienced driver by this time, I did discover the shift changing through the gears to be awkward due to wear , and care had to be given to selecting the correct gear due to the design,( ie. each gear engagement ,too close together).
                          If Alphon did drive a Victor with column gear change, and I don’t recall Alphon denying it , He would have little or no problem, with the controls of a Morris Minor

                          Comment


                          • Did Galves actually see a pair of gloves in Alphon's suitcase?

                            Woffinden baldly asserts that she did, and various posters have alluded to Galves' averring as much in her second statement (Sept 13), but I've not seen it in an actual quote from that statement.

                            Can anyone supply the quote?

                            Comment


                            • Mrs Galves - an English speaker or not?

                              Foot assures us (p. 58) that neither Mr nor Mrs Galves spoke English, which caused Acott to rely principally on Nudds for his understanding of what occurred at the Vienna. But surely this must be wrong. Mrs Galves made two statements to police and had two interviews with them and there is no mention of her needing an interpreter at any time. And in helping to run a hotel, would a non-English speaker be of use for anything bar cleaning? Yet some sources describe her as the de facto manager of the Vienna.

                              Also, precisely what status did she have as a immigrant? I've read both that she was in the country illegally and that she had a work permit or visa but it was due for renewal imminently - the suggestion being that this gave Acott some leverage over her when it came to the fitting-up of Alphon. Anyone know which it was?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Alfie View Post
                                Woffinden baldly asserts that she did, and various posters have alluded to Galves' averring as much in her second statement (Sept 13), but I've not seen it in an actual quote from that statement.

                                Can anyone supply the quote?
                                This is not in Galves original statement which just refers to ‘very dirty clothing’.

                                It is interesting that Woffinden quotes extensively from Galves statements and in each case provides a reference number so you can look up the statement date. Then in the final section ‘The Resolution’ he mentions that she saw a pair of gloves and provides no reference.

                                Perhaps it was from Woffinden’s conversation with Galves when he visited her in Spain more than 30 years later.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X