A6 Rebooted

[cobalt]

Hi Moste,

I did indeed mean the police were the best equipped to explore new evidence. A police statement carries much more weight, legally, than what Mrs Lanz said to a member of the A6 Committee in 1966. The problem is, as you are no doubt aware, that they have no inclination to find any evidence, or indeed develop any leads which might come their way. Why shoot themselves in the foot? That is why until the conviction of James Hanratty is quashed legally there will likely be no advancements at all.

The Matthews Report has never been published, which speaks for itself.

It was superseded by forensic evidence relating to a handkerchief and some fragment of knickers which turned up to save the day for the prosecution. One fine day, after we have shuffled off our mortal coil, the forensic evidence which was unaccountably missed:- the interior of the car and the clothing of Gregsten and Ms. Storie- will magically be discovered in some police basement and the verdict rendered ‘unsafe.’ The police will apologise profusely of course, but by then few will even remember the case at all.

[moste]

Agreed!

[Sherlock Houses]

That’s very sad. His only son too, don’t know much about Michaels Mum do we?

Not a great deal that could be said to be pertinent to Michael's situation around 1961, Moste. At the time WW2 broke out in September 1939 his mum Jeanie May Gregsten and her sister [Michael's aunt] Hilda Oulet were both working as teachers, Jeanie May a Domestic Science teacher and Hilda an Elementary School teacher. In 1945 Michael was in the Forces but I don't know if he saw war service or not. He would definitely have been eligible given his age. Post war, up until his 1951 marriage to Janet, he had been residing with his mother and aunt in the Barnet area of London.

I know you often like to think outside the box, Moste, which I find quite refreshing especially when you consider that truth is often said to be stranger than fiction. Back in early January 2013 a comment was made with reference to one of my Youtube videos about the A6 murder. This comment was made by a Kevin Craigie who remarked about something a reliable source had told him back in 1992. His source told him that Gregsten and Storie were about to defect to Russia that very night and that Peter Alphon was recruited by British Security Services to eliminate them. Sounds crazy and far-fetched doesn't it and easy to dismiss as mischievous bunk, but what if there is an element of truth about it ? It would begin to explain certain suspicions about some of the utterings of the mysterious and enigmatic Mr Alphon

This Kevin Craigie made two additional comments about this Youtube video but all three comments had mysteriously disappeared within a very short time. Whether they were removed by Kevin himself or by Youtube I do not know. He claimed that his source, Paul Cleeland, whom he had known for 20 years, worked for MI5 during that period. Apparently many people suspect some sort of MI5 involvement in the A6 murder. Paul Cleeland, who would have been 19 in that politically explosive year of 1961, is the same person who was charged and convicted of the November 1972 murder of Terry Clarke, a suspected gangland boss. Cleeland spent 26 years in jail and protested his innocence from the very start. He has fought ever since to clear his name and his case is regarded as being possibly one of the last great miscarriages of justice from the 1970's.

Definitely gives one food for further thought.

[cobalt]

The Cleeland case from 1972 was unknown to me which is surprising given that it has been raised in parliament on three occasions by politicians from the two major parties. When three separate items of police documentation presented as evidence are later found to be inaccurate then it is hard to avoid the suspicion that some police corruption was involved.

In respect of the A6 Case I have always felt that there was some political element present but in truth not even Paul Foot, a very political animal himself, ever argued from that premise. The idea of Gregsten and Ms Storie defecting sounds quite ludicrous, especially at a time when the Berlin Wall was being laid brick by brick. I have never heard of either them having any interest in politics far less any political affiliation. They might have stumbled upon some political or corporate corruption within the UK motorway building programme in the course of their work but that was not much of a bargaining card to take past Checkpoint Charlie. Why stop them defecting in any case? They would have been discredited by the media as traitors or spies the minute they did.

The Scotland Yard forensic ‘expert’ McCafferty- he had no known scientific qualification- lies at the heart of the Cleeland case, and interestingly he also provided ballistic evidence in the A6 Case and even the Craig/Bentley case as well. It is barely credible that in all three cases, two of which are cause celebres, the actual gun and bullets involved in the murders have never been satisfactorily established. Rather like the more infamous Frank Skuse, McCafferty comes across as a man whose forensic duty did not seem to go much beyond finding evidence against the accused. I wonder if McCafferty was involved in the forensic examination of the car where the murder took place and that yielded nothing.

[Sherlock Houses]

The Scotland Yard forensic ‘expert’ McCafferty- he had no known scientific qualification- lies at the heart of the Cleeland case, and interestingly he also provided ballistic evidence in the A6 Case and even the Craig/Bentley case as well. It is barely credible that in all three cases, two of which are cause celebres, the actual gun and bullets involved in the murders have never been satisfactorily established. Rather like the more infamous Frank Skuse, McCafferty comes across as a man whose forensic duty did not seem to go much beyond finding evidence against the accused. I wonder if McCafferty was involved in the forensic examination of the car where the murder took place and that yielded nothing.

With reference to the alleged forensic expert John McCafferty I feel it's worth mentioning that Jean Justice was shocked at this police officer's dishonesty. I quote directly from Bob Woffinden's book [p.270].... Justice recalled being 'shocked by the dishonesty of a senior detective like Inspector McCafferty' (who said that it would have been possible for someone to get in and out of the car without getting blood on them and that the jacket was more likely than the trousers to have been bloodstained).

Getting back to the Cleeland case there was a Hansard debate that took place on July 18th 1988 which makes for very interesting reading. The debate was initiated by John Hughes, a Coventry MP, who makes clear his opinion of the 'forensic expert' John McCafferty in the following three paragraphs...

Many of those who have followed the case, and specialists referred to in Dr. Grant's report, have discredited the prosecution evidence. They have proven that Mr. McCafferty was not qualified to act as a prosecution forensic expert at Paul Cleeland's trial or any other trial as an expert for the department of public prosecution.

That important qualification was not attained through the generous committed co-operation of the prison authorities, the judiciary or the Home Office—quite the opposite. It would never have been brought to light but for the tenacity of Paul Cleeland and newspaper reporters who assisted him. Their endeavours eventually sparked an inquiry conducted by assistant chief constable Boothby whose report was finalised just prior to 1979. In normal circumstances, that report would have affirmed that Paul Cleeland was guilty or that his case should be reopened or, 924 most importantly, it would have questioned the competency of the forensic witness Mr. McCafferty and most alarmingly bring into question the justice of every sentence passed at every trial at which McCafferty had given evidence.

That report would bring to light the fact that innocent people had been convicted unjustly. For example, James Hanratty was hanged for a murder which many people believe involved MI5. The suppression of the report in addition to covering up the incompetence of Mr. McCafferty also covers up the inadequacies of the judiciary and the police. It has the most serious implications because over time the people involved have moved on to more esteemed positions to make bigger errors. As serious as the consequences may be for those individuals, the report must be made available to the public in the interests of Paul Cleeland.

Here is the link to that 1988 debate...https://api.parliament.uk/historic-h.../paul-cleeland

[moste]

Hi Sherlock. ‘From your post’....Back in early January 2013 a comment was made with reference to one of my Youtube videos about the A6 murder. This comment was made by a Kevin Craigie who remarked about something a reliable source had told him back in 1992.
Would these videos still be available on YouTube ? could you post the Irl?
Interesting comment by Craigie

[moste]

Hi Cobalt.
From your post....’Why stop them defecting in any case? They would have been discredited by the media as traitors or spies the minute they did.’
unless, it was like this,stop Gregsten from blabbing secret information at all costs ,set up a meeting on the premise of complying with some demand of his, then snuffing him out post haste, whether a spy or not. The woman was the problem, because I don’t think she was part of the agenda.

[moste]

I re-read recently that Janet Gregsten was a prominent member of the local amateur dramatics for ‘Abbots Langley Players, apparently along with the Gregstens good friend and neighbour Mr Roy Catton. Catton stated when interviewed by the Daily Sketch according to Paul Foot “Mr. and Mrs. Gregsten were a happy couple.(I suppose he thought he had good cause to say that, as we all know though , they were anything but a happy couple)I thought well fancy that, and here we have Michael, a keen amateur actor with Valerie at the Slough playhouse.

[moste]

Sorry not IRL.. URL. (Silly Sod)

[Sherlock Houses]

Hi Sherlock. ‘From your post’....Back in early January 2013 a comment was made with reference to one of my Youtube videos about the A6 murder. This comment was made by a Kevin Craigie who remarked about something a reliable source had told him back in 1992.
Would these videos still be available on YouTube ? could you post the Irl?
Interesting comment by Craigie

If you type something like 'Mystery of Deadman's Hill" on Youtube Moste a string of relevant results will appear.

It is an interesting comment by Kevin Craigie in light of something the Coventry MP John Hughes mentioned during that 1988 Hansard debate re. Paul Cleeland. Mr Hughes stated that 'James Hanratty was hanged for a murder which many people believe involved MI5'. Makes you wonder if he was privy to certain knowledge hidden from the general public by those anonymous corrupt little men who thrive in the corridors of power, immune from any external public scrutiny.

[moste]

If you type something like 'Mystery of Deadman's Hill" on Youtube Moste a string of relevant results will appear.

It is an interesting comment by Kevin Craigie in light of something the Coventry MP John Hughes mentioned during that 1988 Hansard debate re. Paul Cleeland. Mr Hughes stated that 'James Hanratty was hanged for a murder which many people believe involved MI5'. Makes you wonder if he was privy to certain knowledge hidden from the general public by those anonymous corrupt little men who thrive in the corridors of power, immune from any external public scrutiny.

I have over the years watched all of the YouTube stuff relating to the A6 case. “ Mystery of Deamans Hill “ etc. I seem to have got a hold of the wrong end of the stick , believing that you yourself had uploaded a video to the YouTube App. Apologies.
Reading the Hansard debate , I noted that the Minister for State, John Patten, took John Hugh’s to task over his statement ‘ being treated like a Russian political prisoner ‘. I considered this reprimand to be pure ‘blather’ designed to belittle Hugh’s and put him in his place as it were. John Patten May know the conditions experienced by political prisoners in Russia ,far better than Patten does, and Patten should bow to his conviction that he does! As for victim Paul Cleeland, John Hugh’s ‘for Coventry east ‘ certainly has a much more in depth handle on Cleelands treatment in prison than Patten is ever likely to!
But the most significant entry of course for our purpose is not only the ‘Many People believe Hanratty was hanged with an MI5 involvement,’ BUT, that the Minister for State, ignored the fact that this sentence was uttered without recrimination ,for me, speaks volumes.
It would appear that I am not alone in my original suspicions that sinister skulduggery was at work where the ‘expendable’ Hanratty was concerned.

[moste]

I have over the years watched all of the YouTube stuff relating to the A6 case. “ Mystery of Deamans Hill “ etc. I seem to have got a hold of the wrong end of the stick , believing that you yourself had uploaded a video to the YouTube App. Apologies.
Reading the Hansard debate , I noted that the Minister for State, John Patten, took John Hugh’s to task over his statement ‘ being treated like a Russian political prisoner ‘. I considered this reprimand to be pure ‘blather’ designed to belittle Hugh’s and put him in his place as it were. John Patten May know the conditions experienced by political prisoners in Russia ,far better than Patten does, and Patten should bow to his conviction that he does! As for victim Paul Cleeland, John Hugh’s ‘for Coventry east ‘ certainly has a much more in depth handle on Cleelands treatment in prison than Patten is ever likely to!
But the most significant entry of course for our purpose is not only the ‘Many People believe Hanratty was hanged with an MI5 involvement,’ BUT, that the Minister for State, ignored the fact that this sentence was uttered without recrimination ,for me, speaks volumes.
It would appear that I am not alone in my original suspicions that sinister skulduggery was at work where the ‘expendable’ Hanratty was concerned.

(That should have read’ John Hugh’s May know the conditions experienced.......)

[Sherlock Houses]

I have over the years watched all of the YouTube stuff relating to the A6 case. “ Mystery of Deadmans Hill “ etc. I seem to have got a hold of the wrong end of the stick , believing that you yourself had uploaded a video to the YouTube App. Apologies.

No, youre quite correct Moste, I have over the years uploaded quite a lot of A6 murder related stuff on Youtube. The 1992 Bob Woffinden documentary "Mystery of Deadman's Hill" which I uploaded in its entirety nearly 6 years ago has now been blocked, I received an email to that effect from Youtube quite recently. Apparently, although it was a Channel 4 production, a copyright claim was submitted by the pathetic bbc claiming that some part of the video contained copyright material of theirs. How strange that it has taken almost 6 years to claim copyright. Big Brother remains alive and well and dictatorial.....

[moste]

Unbelievable !

[Sherlock Houses]

The thought police are never that far away Moste, dictating what you can and cannot view.
I can still watch the video when I log into my youtube account but this is what Joe Public now sees [since early June this year]
when they try to view it.....