A6 Rebooted

[Sherlock Houses]

So basically your defence of Hanratty boils down to: everybody whose evidence contradicts his version of events is lying?

Quite possibly so, the prime example being Baz Acott, whose economy with the truth, underhandedness and downright deception seemed to know no bounds. No wonder Sherrard placed so little faith in much of his testimony..

[Sherlock Houses]

You can always try to have your cake and eat it too, I suppose.

Some people, the non-perceptive among us, don't believe in [or simply ignore] signs, regardless of how many times they might come across them. Signs, pointers, whatever you might like to call them, are everywhere, they are there to assist us. I have come across loads while researching and studying the A6 murder over the years. I came across yet another one just a very short while ago while reading the above quoted sentence of mine. I was listening to one of just many hundreds of songs on my i-pod and at the exact moment I was reading the emboldened words the very same nine words played. That song ?? Bob Dylan's "Lay Lady lay".
What astronomical odds on that ?

[Spitfire]

Since my first encounter with the Hanratty case, I had always believed that Luckless Jim had sent his telegram by going to a public call box on St George's Hall forecourt, then dialling "100" and asking the operator to use the telegram service, and then dictating the telegram over the phone and paying for the same by the insertion of coins in the phone box, all of which took place at or around 8.40pm on Thursday 24th August 1961.

It now seems that Hanratty had to go to the main GPO in Victoria Street Liverpool before 6pm to pay for his telegram and then had to wait for over two and a half hours before he could send it by going to a telephone box on the forecourt of St George's Hall and phoning his telegram through.

My researches indicate that in 1961 an overnight telegram cost 1s6d for 12 words and 11/2d (three ha'pence for those that don't do decimal) for every word over 12, a standard telegram cost 3s and 3d respectively. The essence of a telegram was brevity, and the cost conscious Briton of the pre-Beatles era would tend to keep his text to 12 words or less. It should be noted that Jim's telegram contained 14 words including the closing phrase "Yours sincerely Jim". I would imagine that the 'helpful' GPO porter who had assisted in the composition of the telegram had a good chuckle over the inclusion of these words, possibly extremely rare in the history of telegraphic communication, which would cost Jim another 3d.

[OneRound]

Since my first encounter with the Hanratty case, I had always believed that Luckless Jim had sent his telegram by going to a public call box on St George's Hall forecourt, then dialling "100" and asking the operator to use the telegram service, and then dictating the telegram over the phone and paying for the same by the insertion of coins in the phone box, all of which took place at or around 8.40pm on Thursday 24th August 1961.

It now seems that Hanratty had to go to the main GPO in Victoria Street Liverpool before 6pm to pay for his telegram and then had to wait for over two and a half hours before he could send it by going to a telephone box on the forecourt of St George's Hall and phoning his telegram through.

My researches indicate that in 1961 an overnight telegram cost 1s6d for 12 words and 11/2d (three ha'pence for those that don't do decimal) for every word over 12, a standard telegram cost 3s and 3d respectively. The essence of a telegram was brevity, and the cost conscious Briton of the pre-Beatles era would tend to keep his text to 12 words or less. It should be noted that Jim's telegram contained 14 words including the closing phrase "Yours sincerely Jim". I would imagine that the 'helpful' GPO porter who had assisted in the composition of the telegram had a good chuckle over the inclusion of these words, possibly extremely rare in the history of telegraphic communication, which would cost Jim another 3d.

Hi all - the unnecessary formal closing phrase and the resultant additional cost makes me think Hanratty did not normally send telegrams. Is that right? Do we know?

If he didn't normally send telegrams, did an innocent explanation really warrant him acting unchacteristically and sending one to the France family? I rather doubt it.

This of course doesn't prove guilt although it's another pointer as to why I belive Hanratty did it even though imo his guilt was not fairly and reasonably proven.

Best regards,
OneRound

[cobalt]

If Hanratty did not send the telegram presumably one of his criminal cronies did this on his behalf. This person was never hunted down by Bert Balmer of Merseyside CID and threatened with the rope?

How did Hanratty communicate his desired message to his criminal confederate? And why choose the France family? Why not his family, for example.

And when the criminal confederate discovered Hanratty was seeking an alibi for the horrific A6 Case, why not just come clean and get a free pass from Bert Balmer?

[OneRound]

If Hanratty did not send the telegram presumably one of his criminal cronies did this on his behalf. This person was never hunted down by Bert Balmer of Merseyside CID and threatened with the rope?

How did Hanratty communicate his desired message to his criminal confederate? And why choose the France family? Why not his family, for example.

And when the criminal confederate discovered Hanratty was seeking an alibi for the horrific A6 Case, why not just come clean and get a free pass from Bert Balmer?

Hi Cobalt - I wasn't meaning to suggest that Hanratty didn't send the telegram. Rather that the reason for him doing so was a weak and futile attempt to establish a Liverpool alibi around the time of the murder.

Best regards,
OneRound

[Spitfire]

The above is paragraph 149 from the Hawser report.

It would be interesting to have the "considerable amount of circumstantial detail" but we only have the barest outline from which some of us have drawn wide ranging conclusions. Once again, a full transcript of Hanratty's evidence would be helpful.

[moste]

If Hanratty did not send the telegram presumably one of his criminal cronies did this on his behalf. This person was never hunted down by Bert Balmer of Merseyside CID and threatened with the rope?

How did Hanratty communicate his desired message to his criminal confederate? And why choose the France family? Why not his family, for example.

And when the criminal confederate discovered Hanratty was seeking an alibi for the horrific A6 Case, why not just come clean and get a free pass from Bert Balmer?

Your on the mark where Bert Balmer is concerned. The criminal element of Liverpool and therefore Hanratty's mates will have schooled Jim on how the land lay when the boys in blue were discussed, and will have left him in no doubt whatsoever that even so much as a whisper of his activities around Liverpool would go very ill for him and 'those close to him'
On his choice of France to receive the telegram and not his family, I would have to think this was almost certainly because France was involved in some way with his visit up north.
On the free pass from Balmer though, I think it more likely that Hanratty's friends would give that individual a very wide berth indeed, I reckon all who knew Balmer,that moved in those circles, feared him greatly, and for good reason.

[OneRound]

The above is paragraph 149 from the Hawser report.

It would be interesting to have the "considerable amount of circumstantial detail" but we only have the barest outline from which some of us have drawn wide ranging conclusions. Once again, a full transcript of Hanratty's evidence would be helpful.

Thanks, Spitfire.

I appreciate that Hawser is often tarred as producing a whitewash report but I do tend to side with his view of the telegram that ''it looks like a somewhat crude attempt to set up or support an alibi''.

Best regards,
OneRound

[cobalt]

OR,

Apologies for picking you up wrongly regarding the telegram. However if we agree that Hanratty did send it, he cannot really have been creating a false alibi in respect of the A6 murder. Hanratty was of limited education, but would surely have known that all telegrams were dated and timed. I think Acott claimed that Hanratty did attempt to pass off the telegram as having being sent on the Tuesday, rather than the Thursday, but Hanratty denied this. As for Hawser's logic, surely the point of the telegram would have been for France or more likely Hanratty to keep it as proof: it was not about the police managing to obtain a copy.

Is the prosecution case that the telegram, apart from being a rather tardy bolstering of Hanratty’s claim to have been in the Liverpool area, was more an alibi in respect of the gun being found on the bus? The gun was almost certainly hidden on the morning of the 24^th in London so Hanratty sends his telegram on the evening of the 24^th just after it isdiscovered?

Finally, a few random thoughts. Why did Hanratty give his address on the telegram as The Imperial Hotel, Russell Square, London? Why did he change his initial from J to P Ryan? Why not just use his default false address from the Kingsbury area, presumably picked up during his window cleaning days?

Was Hanratty one of these restless types such as I see nowadays incessantly sending or receiving messages by mobile phone? We know he sent flowers on his mother’s birthday for example, so could he have been one of these digital grazers back in the day?

[NickB]

[SIZE=16px][FONT=times new roman]As for Hawser's logic, surely the point of the telegram would have been for France or more likely Hanratty to keep it as proof: it was not about the police managing to obtain a copy.

Hanratty could have expected that the telegram itself would not be kept but the Frances would recall that it said he would be home on Friday morning and that a day or two later he arrived. This would have been consistent with his original claim that he sent it on the Tuesday, which was disproved by the copy obtained by the police.

[cobalt]

I can see some logic in that.

However the France family evidence was quite specific in regards to him arriving just after the telegram. Whether their evidence would have been quite so specific had the police not made them aware of the date and time on the telegram we do not know. Maybe without the copy produced by the police their evidence would have favoured Hanratty simply due to forgetfulness.

Against that, there is the problem that Carole France seemed to have a good memory for dates. And if Hanratty was guilty he could not have anticipated that it would take around two months for him to be nicked.

[cobalt]

It seems to be the prosecution case that Hanratty spent two nights- Thursday the 24^th and Friday 25^th of August- in Liverpool area trying to create a false alibi.

Do we know where it is alleged he stayed these two nights? Instead of relying on memories of his visit to properties in Liverpool and Rhyl around one month earlier, why did Hanratty not attempt to establish a newer alibi much closer to the date of the crime?

[Alfie]

It seems to be the prosecution case that Hanratty spent two nights- Thursday the 24^th and Friday 25^th of August- in Liverpool area trying to create a false alibi.

Do we know where it is alleged he stayed these two nights? Instead of relying on memories of his visit to properties in Liverpool and Rhyl around one month earlier, why did Hanratty not attempt to establish a newer alibi much closer to the date of the crime?

Good question. My guess is he stayed Thurs/Fri in a Liverpool guest house but felt constrained from citing it in his alibi because it could have come out that he only stayed there on those two nights, leaving his whereabouts on the nights of Tuesday and Wednesday still unexplained.

[cobalt]

It is a bit odd Hanratty never used this as part of his defence.

As we know the Rhyl alibi has been seriously questioned, but if you add together Mrs. Jones plus an uncontested landlady in the city of Liverpool then the alibi is strengthened a little in terms of plausibility.