A6 Rebooted

[Alfie]

Thanks gents. Don't have the 1999 edition of Woffinden so hadn't seen that quote. A little surprised Woffinden included it in the later edition, but good to know that Swanwick wasn't as remiss as I'd thought. Agree that Alphon staying more than one night is a possible explanation for the 'deposit' entry, in which case Acott and Co wouldn't have needed to doctor the diary, just concoct a story around it that put Alphon in Room 24, even if only temporarily. I still believe that's a more likely explanation than Nudds dreaming up Statement 2 all on his own.

[NickB]

Nudds said at the Committal that he got the idea from a female guest who had changed rooms.

Going back to what we were discussing about the rental car being abandoned in Ireland, does this not give credibility to Acott's assertion that he traced Hanratty through Leonard? ...

The rental company report the missing car to the Irish police, they then contact the Met who establish that the hirer's name and address are the same as the mystery guest in the Vienna register. The Met report back the link to a murder enquiry, so the Irish police put out an enquiry to hotels. One in Cork reports that the same name and address were used by a guest who shared a room with Leonard.

[Graham]

In the Vienna's records, Acott found that Ryan of Room 24 had left his address as 72 Wood Lane, Kingsbury. According to Woffo, when the case against Alphon collapsed, Acott's next step was to trace the mysterious Ryan, so visited the above address on 26 September where he met a Mr George Pratt. Mr Pratt had lived at the address for years, but did, however, show Acott a letter from Ireland, addressed to a Mr Ryan. This letter came from a car-hire firm in Dublin. The same afternoon, Acott and Oxford called at Hanratty's home, 12 Sycamore Grove, and advised Mr and Mrs Hanratty that their son was wanted for car theft. Woffo says that how Acott made the link between Ryan and Hanratty has (or had) never been fully explained. He also says that Acott's solicitor stated that the link came from Gerard Leonard, who had passed the name Hanratty onto Dublin police, after he remembered he had written cards for JH to his mother. However, the solicitor says that Acott was advised of all this on 25 September, which Woffo says cannot be true as Acott's search for someone called Ryan had not started until the following day.

So precisely how was the link made? Any further information in Woffo's 1999 version of his book?

Graham

[Alfie]

I've no doubt that Acott made the connection between Ryan and Hanratty with the aid of the Irish police, but the sequence of events can only be guessed at.

Hanratty most probably abandoned his damaged rental car the day he flew back to England. (I have two dates for this, btw: Woffinden says Mon, Sept 11 while other sources says Fri, Sept 8; anybody know which is correct? I'm inclined to believe Sept 8 because at the Committal Dixie said Hanratty visited his house on Sat, Sept 9.)

Once the car was reported missing I'm guessing it would have taken a little time for the police to locate it - it wouldn't have been a high priority - and only when it was found to be damaged would wheels have been set in motion to trace the hirer. As Nick says, the Met would probably have been an early port of call for the Garda, but the fact that no official seems to have visited Mr Pratt at 72 Wood Lane prior to Sept 26 when Acott and Oxford saw him suggests to me that the connection with the A6 case wasn't made prior to Acott's visit.

However, the fact that Acott and Oxford were knocking on the door of the Hanratty residence at 12 Sycamore Grove only a few hours after talking to Pratt suggests that the Irish police hadn't been idle in the meantime. I'm guessing that they'd already traced Ryan to O'Flynn's Hotel in Cork - perhaps by ringing around hotels asking if a James Ryan had booked in during the relevant week; or through speaking to John Dowling, the officer who attended the accident in Castlemartyr - and had spoken to Gerrard Leonard as a result of these inquiries. In any case, it seems they were able to tell Acott about the Ryan-Hanratty connection straight away.

What I've never really understood or seen explained is why, three days later, Acott and Oxford went to Ireland. Does this mean they didn't know that Ryan/Hanratty had already returned to England? Wouldn't there have been records to show that he'd flown out of Dublin/arrived at London Airport? And if they weren't in Ireland looking for Hanratty, what were they doing there?

[moste]

What reason would she have to tell such a lie?

Enlighten us, what are the other "many" statements that you deem to be lies?

What reason did she have to lie? Clearly, you didn’t read the whole post!

Storie made good coin on a Story she had published only weeks after Hanratty hanged. A story which was obviously in the works as the

noose was going round Jim’s neck. I can’t think of anything more ‘uncouth’

The serialized ‘Today’ article was a spiced up piece of melodramatic nonsense , but hey ! that’s just my opinion

I do like to present alternative views ,more for new comers than the ‘status quo.’

On the Hanratty /Ryan link, I thought the general consensus was that the trip to Eire was a waste of taxpayers money , and that the

connection was made free gratis by William Ewer traversing the Swiss Cottage ,tracking a man he was convinced killed his b in law.

[NickB]

I would be surprised if no-one had visited 72 Wood Lane before Acott and Oxford's went there on the 26th.

[cobalt]

According to a news reporter, Acott's response to Ewer's fanciful tale regarding Swiss Cottage was to claim that he, Acott, had already been on the trail of Hanratty before that. That is, before the 1st September, Hanratty was already somewhere on the radar of the A6 investigation.

That may just have been Acott defending his investigation. Or maybe a way of explaining away Ewer's apparent prior knowledge about the suspect. Or maybe it was the truth.

[moste]

According to a news reporter, Acott's response to Ewer's fanciful tale regarding Swiss Cottage was to claim that he, Acott, had already been on the trail of Hanratty before that. That is, before the 1st September, Hanratty was already somewhere on the radar of the A6 investigation.

That may just have been Acott defending his investigation. Or maybe a way of explaining away Ewer's apparent prior knowledge about the suspect. Or maybe it was the truth.

And if your arm was twisted and you were forced to say which you believed to be the case , what would you say?

[cobalt]

Hi Moste,

I try to keep an open mind, so will pass on your question. Sorry I can't give a source for that comment by Acott, but I came across it a few days ago.

Some of the rationalising about what a 'deposit' actually meant and room changes have had me pushing matchsticks across the kitchen table. The philosopher Gilbert Ryle made a career out of both rationalising and pushing matchsticks about as I recall, which is why I preferred the French existentialists like Sartre and Camus who could let rip in their local boozer.

[moste]

According to a news reporter, Acott's response to Ewer's fanciful tale regarding Swiss Cottage was to claim that he, Acott, had already been on the trail of Hanratty before that. That is, before the 1st September, Hanratty was already somewhere on the radar of the A6 investigation.

That may just have been Acott defending his investigation. Or maybe a way of explaining away Ewer's apparent prior knowledge about the suspect. Or maybe it was the truth.

In order for Acott to be able to explain away Ewers apparent prior knowledge of the suspect , Acott would have to have actually shown Ewer a picture of Hanratty and discussed his investigations to date with him , would you think? ( Unless Ewer did actually know Hanratty)
Peter Duffy’s report on the incident was referencing the 1st of Sept. sighting of Hanratty by Janet/ Ewer. only nine days after the murder He and Oxford didn't visited the Hanrattys home until the 26th.If they had their Hanratty/Ryan connection as soon as Ewer called them, why did they not go around to Mr. Hanrattys home until after Alphon was released on the 24 th. They decide to fly out to Dublin chasing Ryan, on the 29 th only when Storie failed to pick out Alphon, All very fishy for me.

[Alfie]

What reason did she have to lie? Clearly, you didn’t read the whole post!

I did read it, unfortunately. And I think you need to keep in mind that your imagining what might have happened doesn't make it real. Intimating that Valerie may have invented the rape to "defend her virtue" is a notion so fact-free that it enters the realm of hallucination.

So, I repeat: why would Valerie say that her parents were aware of the nature of her relationship with Gregsten if they weren't? Why, if they'd have been "absolutely mortified" to have known about it, as you claim, would Valerie tell the world that they did know and were unfazed by the fact? Wouldn't broadcasting such a lie have been even more mortifying for them?

I'm also still waiting to hear about the "many" other lies in that Today article.

[Graham]

Woffo is usually pretty good on what happened and when it happened. He appears to accept that when Acott and Oxford visited Mr Pratt they hadn't at that point made the Ryan - Hanratty connection. After all, they had only been seeking Ryan for the two days since Alphon was cleared. So, as Woffo believes, in the few hours between leaving Mr Pratt's home and arriving at the Hanrattys, Acott had made the Ryan - Hanratty connection. Either this is genuine, or perhaps Acott already knew that Ryan was Hanratty, and was calling on Mr Pratt purely to see for himself the contents of the letter from Dublin. I think I'm prepared here to give Woffo the benefit of the doubt, and accept, perhaps with a reservation or two, that Hanratty's name was only revealed to him between Mr Pratt and the Hanrattys. I guess that after leaving Mr Pratt's, with the letter in hand, contact was made with Dublin police, who gave him the name 'Hanratty' vis-a-vis Mr Leonard's statement. Only supposition, of course. All rather confusing, for Woffo too it seems. It'll probably never be cleared up to the satisfaction of everyone interested.

Graham

[NickB]

Oxford said they had substantially made the connection the day before visiting Pratt. (Said at trial, reported in the Appeal.)

It seems foolish for Hanratty to have left such an obvious trail in Ireland, but of course he had no reason to think that the Vienna would feature in the police's enquiries.

[Spitfire]

Was there any particular reason why Hanratty picked on 72 Wood Lane and why he kept using that address rather than any other. Wood Lane had numbers 1-114 why not randomly select any one of those numbers?

George A Pratt (1902-1976) and his wife Hetty Pratt (1909-1996) had been living at 72 Wood Lane since before the War, and had two children, a daughter born in 1932 and a son in 1940, but none of them has any apparent connection with Hanratty. Was Wood Lane on the Hanrattys' window cleaning round, and was 72 just randomly selected and kept to without Hanratty realising the dangers in keeping the same false address?

[Graham]

Wood Lane and Sycamore Grove are very close to each other in Kingsbury, so very likely that Mr Pratt's house on Wood Lane was on Hanratty's window-cleaning round. Not that his heart was really into cleaning windows, of course. Maybe he and Mr Pratt had exchanged a few words, who knows? One could also ask why he chose the alias 'Ryan'?

Graham