A6 Rebooted

[babybird67]

where?

Jen,
There is lots and lots of evidence.That is why the case won"t die.

Norma

I havent seen a bit of evidence that there was a miscarriage of justice. Not one.

[Natalie Severn]

Originally Posted by Natalie Severn
You can"t count the witnesses for the prosecution on one hand,and those you can count have been discredited either because they were criminals and grasses and loathed by their fellow prisoners like Nudds or Langdale apparently were [ and who were possibly leant on by police or needed to do the police a favour for their own reasons] or they were people like Skillett and Trower , apparently perfectly decent, honest, people but totally discredited by equally honest, decent witnesses like Blackhall or Hogan who totally contradicted their evidence.
Babybird wrote
If you are arguing that contradictions in witness testimony 'discredit' eachother, then following that logic all the Rhyl witnesses are discredited because they conflict with another witness, Valerie. It doesn't work like that. Witnesses give their testimony in court, a jury listens to it, and makes up their mind. In this case that was done and the verdict was guilty.

Several of statements of Rhyl witnesses were not revealed to the defence .For example that of Mr Christopher Larman, that of Mrs Margaret Walker and that of Mr Trevor Dutton.That is a very serious matter and in the case of the Guildford Four ,such non- disclosure enabled Gareth Pearce to investigate the beginnings of a miscarriage of justice and eventually establish that a miscarriage of justice had occurred.
Moreover,when later the defence were able to get sight of Mrs Walker"s and Mr Larman"s statements we now know they believed the timings were out.
In fact Mrs Walker said,like Mr Larman that she had seen the young man [six months previously] at about 7.30 pm,whereas Hanratty had said not left LIverpool [on the double decker Crosville bus ] until 7.30.
During Hanratty"s exchange with Swanwick ,Swanwich asked the following question:
Swanwick:"Can you give any idea of the time you got to Rhyl?"
Hanratty:"Off hand I cannnot,If I was to say a time it would not be fair,because you would cross-examine me,and I am not sure of the exact time,
Swanwick:"I only want an aproximate time of you can give it"
Hanratty;"I could not because I did not time it"

Now bear with me while I check Mrs Walker"s statement to , Hanratty"s solicitor Mr Kleinman and his deduction of the time;

Both Mrs Walker and Mr Larman made rough guesses at the time and both said 7.30.-about
but Mrs Walker when pressed by Mr Kleinman said: "because it was getting dark and the street lights were on"
Now,Sunset was at 8.30 on 22nd August 1961 in Rhyl.The street lights did not come on until a half hour later.Therefore Mrs Walker could not possibly have seen the young man earlier that 9pm on 22nd August 1961.
In fact I have watched the sunset at exactly these times in August 2010 and know that sunlight can still pervade Rhyl from the bay at 9pm which would have enabled both Mr Larman and Mrs Walker to see Hanratty"s artificiial hair colouring despite experiencing the time as "getting dark".
Nobody appears to have thoroughly investigated their timings .Maybe Kleinman genuinely believed there was a mismatch between what Hanratty said about his arrival in Rhyl and whatMr Larman , Mrs Walker,Mrs Vincent and Mrs Betty Davies and her mother-in -law,Mrs Margaret Davies said about the time they saw the young man.But to me it seems quite clear;they saw him when he said---as it was getting dark.

[Natalie Severn]

A special light bulb needed to see colour in dark

Jen,
Valerie,with all due respect,could not have seen the colour blue in the artificial light of a car"s headlights.You have to buy a special bulb,called a daylight bulb to see colour when darkness is lit up by artificial ight to reveal colour.All eye colour except brown appears as grey.Blue eyes would appear as grey and Hazel or green eyes would also appear as grey.
Its an impossibility without a special daylight bulb.
Norma
ps obviously Valerie thought the man had ice blue eyes but thats a different thing from actually seeing blue in artificial light.

[Limehouse]

A friend passed me this today:

The LCN result does not in itself provide information about the type of body fluid the DNA came from, although there may be circumstances that enable this to be inferred. For example, a profile obtained from the rim of a cup may be inferred to have come from saliva.

From the CPS website: http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/p...n_testing.html

This seems to throw doubt on the certainty that the Hanratty DNA on VS knicker fragment was definitely from semen.


ALSO -

The LCN test is more like casting a net into a lake with few fish; the catch may not represent all the types of fish and a second attempt may contain different types. The individual catches may not fully represent all the types but repeat analysis may assist.

Now to me that suggests there could be DNA present that the test does not identify - so another person's DNA could be present but not detected.

[RonIpstone]

Y

All the verdict amounted to was that a rather mentally challenged ,hang "em and flog "em, all male, middle class, jury in Bedford who
didn"t know their arses from their elbows after eleven hours without a decent meal or a decent drink ----and after a great deal of confusion about the meaning of the words "reasonable doubt" decided to call it quits and unite to cause a death by hanging.

A certain native Bedfordshire contributor is not going to like that.

The jury might not have been able to distinguish their collective arses from their elbows but probably would have been able to distinguish between apostrophes and inverted commas.

[babybird67]

Jen,
Valerie,with all due respect,could not have seen the colour blue in the artificial light of a car"s headlights.You have to buy a special bulb,called a daylight bulb to see colour when darkness is lit up by artificial ight to reveal colour.All eye colour except brown appears as grey.Blue eyes would appear as grey and Hazel or green eyes would also appear as grey.
Its an impossibility without a special daylight bulb.
Norma
ps obviously Valerie thought the man had ice blue eyes but thats a different thing from actually seeing blue in artificial light.

Right, so the red handkerchief that Hutchinson allegedly saw by artificial light must also have been a lie? Or he just thought it was red?

I'm sorry but that's not true. I can see eye colour when the sun goes down and a light illuminates the person's face next to me. Try it in your own home Nats. And I don't have any special light bulbs either.

[jimarilyn]

Thanks Derrick for a helpful and instructive post.I can"t post easily from our place in Wales at the moment but when I can get on line properly will ask a few questions on the reasons LCN tests are only admissable in the UK, Netherlands and New Zealand as trhe courts have ruled out their use in all other countries.
Best
Norma

Hi Norma

I think the following article from the BBC website in December 2007 might prove helpful. The last paragraph is illuminating.............

DNA test halted after Omagh case

Police have suspended the use of a controversial DNA technique following the Omagh bomb verdict.

Earlier, the Crown Prosecution Service said it would review live prosecutions in England and Wales using Low Copy Number (LCN) DNA testing.

Northern Ireland's Chief Constable, Sir Hugh Orde, also said he had instigated an immediate review of cases there.

Omagh suspect Sean Hoey was cleared on Thursday of a total of 58 charges, including 29 murders.

Tony Lake, spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), announced the interim suspension of the use of LCN DNA testing by the Forensic Science Service (FSS).

He said: "In England and Wales DNA evidence has to be corroborated by other evidence.

"However, as a precautionary measure the Crown Prosecution Service are currently reviewing the pending cases in which Low Copy DNA profiling is to form part of the prosecution case to see whether any may be affected.

"The review will take into account the terms of the judgement and the weight that is to be attached to the DNA evidence."

The BBC's Michael Buchanan said that Acpo produced a confidential report in August which called for the technique to be urgently reviewed.

The independent forensic science regulator will be carrying out the review.

The post was created by the Home Office in July this year to monitor the standards of evidence provided by the FSS and other private sector companies.

LCN allows genetic profiles of offenders to be created from very small tissue samples that have only been detectable with new techniques available since 1999.

These can be as tiny as a millionth the size of a grain of salt which can amount to as little as a few cells of skin or sweat left in a fingerprint.

The FSS say they have used LCN DNA about 21,000 times and generated profiles from items such as matchsticks, weapon handles and grabbed clothing.

To do this, the minute samples must be magnified and this is where critics say error can creep in.

The prosecution in the Omagh case claimed that LCN analysis had shown links between the bomb timers used in the attack and Mr Hoey, a south Armagh electrician.

But the judge rejected the use of the technique because it was not yet seen to be at a sufficiently scientific level to be considered evidence.

Following widespread criticism of Northern Ireland police by relatives of Omagh victims, Sir Hugh said: "I have asked for an urgent review of all cases that rely in any way, shape or form on Low Copy Number DNA."

He said it was at the very cutting edge of science and had been used in the trial because of his determination to build a case.

But Sir Hugh said: "It is a vital ingredient of cases in the future which will bring very guilty people to justice."

A spokesman for the Attorney General said that while a small number of active cases would be reviewed as a precaution, there were "no current plans to review past cases".

LCN testing has been used in a number of other high-profile cases.

It has been reported that it was this technique which was used by the FSS in Birmingham to examine DNA samples from the car hired by the McCanns.

Serial rapist Antoni Imiela was caught after his profile was obtained from minute traces of DNA from items of clothing.

And in 2000 Ian Lowther was convicted of the murder of Mary Gregson, who was walking along the Leeds-Liverpool canal towpath in August 1977.

The DNA LCN technique allowed scientists to go back and generate a DNA profile from an old semen stain originally found on the clothing.

Traditional or so-called "gold standard" DNA profiles created using larger samples of genetic material will not be examined under the review.

Michael Buchanan said LCN DNA was only accepted as evidence in two other countries, New Zealand and the Netherlands, because of concerns over its accuracy.

[Black Rabbit]

Any further collective insulting of the opposing side either through snide terms, "Hanratty appreciation society", "forum of losers", or any other disparaging remarks aimed at the people who post here will result in permanent revocation of your posting privileges.

It would seem that certain posters chose not to heed Admins warning and persist in their arrogant behaviour.

For their benefit I attach the follwing link:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_gb0786080#m_en_gb0786080

Time for people to grow up.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Norma

I think the following article from the BBC website in December 2007 might prove helpful. The last paragraph is illuminating.............

Michael Buchanan said LCN DNA was only accepted as evidence in two other countries, New Zealand and the Netherlands, because of concerns over its accuracy.

Thanks James-

[Natalie Severn]

babybird67;[/B]172657]Right, so the red handkerchief that Hutchinson allegedly saw by artificial light must also have been a lie? Or he just thought it was red?

Babybird,
Yes,Hutchinson thought it was red and in the gaslight red would have appeared a different colour than in daylight but more easily guessed at correctly than blue or other paler colours.Blue and other pastel shades are impossible to accurately determine when the pitch darkness is illuminated by artificial light as in the artificial headlights of a passing vehicle.


Babybird :
I'm sorry but that's not true. I can see eye colour when the sun goes down and a light illuminates the person's face next to me. Try it in your own home Nats. And I don't have any special light bulbs either.

Yes,Jen,absolutely.But we are not talking about when the sun goes down as Valerie didn"t see the gunman"s face then -she saw him just from his shoulders down-when she did see his face it was pitch dark and the darkness was illuminated by the artificial light of a car"s headlights.

[Natalie Severn]

It would seem that certain posters chose not to heed Admins warning and persist in their arrogant behaviour.

For their benefit I attach the follwing link:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_gb0786080#m_en_gb0786080

Time for people to grow up.

Point taken.Thanks for the reminder.However,Black Rabbit I still fail to see how the Bedfordshire jury could have come back after 10 hours of deliberation and having expressed and acknowledged uncertainty among their ranks, particularly when ,after asking the judge for further guidance, they totally ignored that guidance-I mean was he too subtle for them? Did they fail to understand nuance and innuendo?I mean Judge Gorman almost spelled it out for them in a sense. Clearly they were either unable to fully appreciate or understand the guidance of the judge or appreciate or understand the inconsistencies and anomalies of the trial --- or were they just steeped in prejudice?Was that why Michael Sherrard had fought so hard -and failed---to have the trial heard at the Old Bailey?
But that really does not mean it was because they came from Bedfordshire for crying out loud-ofcourse not,it just meant Hanratty was unlikely to have been heard by a more urbane and less partial jury-less partial because Bedfordshire was where the crime was committed.
Berst Wishes,
Norma

[RonIpstone]

The jury, in accordance with the convention of the time, was empanelled from a cross-section of the inhabitants of the township of Bedford and its environs. This is what you thought of the jury.

All the verdict amounted to was that a rather mentally challenged ,hang "em and flog "em, all male, middle class, jury in Bedford who
didn"t know their arses from their elbows after eleven hours without a decent meal or a decent drink ----and after a great deal of confusion about the meaning of the words "reasonable doubt" decided to call it quits and unite to cause a death by hanging.

I think that we can all agree, pro-Hanratty or anti-Hanratty, that the jury was not up to the job.

[Derrick]

Point taken.Thanks for the reminder.However,Black Rabbit I still fail to see how the Bedfordshire jury could have come back after 10 hours of deliberation and having expressed and acknowledged uncertainty among their ranks, particularly when ,after asking the judge for further guidance, they totally ignored that guidance-I mean was he too subtle for them? Did they fail to understand nuance and innuendo?I mean Judge Gorman almost spelled it out for them in a sense. Clearly they were either unable to fully appreciate or understand the guidance of the judge or appreciate or understand the inconsistencies and anomalies of the trial --- or were they just steeped in prejudice?Was that why Michael Sherrard had fought so hard -and failed---to have the trial heard at the Old Bailey?
But that really does not mean it was because they came from Bedfordshire for crying out loud-ofcourse not,it just meant Hanratty was unlikely to have been heard by a more urbane and less partial jury-less partial because Bedfordshire was where the crime was committed.
Berst Wishes,
Norma

Hi Norma
I agree. Gorman tried to be as fair as could be with his directing of the jury. But Hanratty was stitched up, as the trial was originally set for the Old Bailey.
Derrick

[Derrick]

Yes,Jen,absolutely.But we are not talking about when the sun goes down as Valerie didn"t see the gunman"s face then -she saw him just from his shoulders down-when she did see his face it was pitch dark and the darkness was illuminated by the artificial light of a car"s headlights.

Hi Norma

Valerie Storie had her real good glimpse whilst in the back of the car when she didn't have her glasses on. This testimony changed to the front seat come the trial. All very convenient for the Crown's case.

Derrick

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Derrick,
These inconsistencies are very important because they suggest to me that Valerie may have had difficulty trying to remember some of the terrible events of that night .Her memory appears to have unevenly recalled some of her ordeal and as with very many victims of trauma and post traumatic stress ,certain events unfolded only gradually and inconsistently.Much research has been done into the effects of such trauma with survivors of the holocaust and such memory discrepancies are really common.
But like you I do worry about whether the crown may have seized their advantage somewhat and were opportunistic over some memory inconsistencies ,
Best
Norma