A6 Rebooted

[Graham]

Hi folks - further to recent posts, I'm struggling to understand why those directly or indirectly responsible for Gregsten's murder would want to set up Hanratty. Could anyone provide some sort of explanation please?
Thanks,
OneRound

PS Graham - I'll PM you about getting my underpants back.

Hi OR,

that question has been asked 'n' times since this forum was initiated, years and years ago, and has never been answered. At least not to the satisfaction of most posters over the years. It's all part of the A6 'mythology', I feel.

I was intrigued when Sherlock Houses recently stated that Mick Hanratty was certain that Alphon wasn't the killer (something with which I have long concurred). I asked SH if Mick had had any suspicions concerning any other individual(s), but so far have had no response.

Re: your underpants, I can only suggest you lay your hands on an accommodation directory for Bessemer, Alabama, and start phoning! All I can tell you 40 years on is that it was an old-fashioned motel, rather like in 'Psycho'. Probably long since ploughed under.

Graham

[OneRound]

Hi OR,

that question has been asked 'n' times since this forum was initiated, years and years ago, and has never been answered. At least not to the satisfaction of most posters over the years. It's all part of the A6 'mythology', I feel.

I was intrigued when Sherlock Houses recently stated that Mick Hanratty was certain that Alphon wasn't the killer (something with which I have long concurred). I asked SH if Mick had had any suspicions concerning any other individual(s), but so far have had no response.

Re: your underpants, I can only suggest you lay your hands on an accommodation directory for Bessemer, Alabama, and start phoning! All I can tell you 40 years on is that it was an old-fashioned motel, rather like in 'Psycho'. Probably long since ploughed under.

Graham

Cheers, Graham. As there seem to be a few current posts suggesting Hanratty was set up by those responsible for Gregsten's murder, I just thought in terms of balance it was worth asking why. It'll be interesting to see if any possible answers are supplied.

Best regards,
OneRound

PS I think I'll forget about the underpants. Time I bought a new pair since staying in that Alabama hotel.

[Graham]

I think I'll forget about the underpants. Time I bought a new pair since staying in that Alabama hotel

They didn't fit me anyway...

Graham

[moste]

[QUOTE=OneRound;n733280]Hi folks - further to recent posts, I'm struggling to understand why those directly or indirectly responsible for Gregsten's murder would want to set up Hanratty. Could anyone provide some sort of explanation please?
Thanks,
As Graham used to advertise,’We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture, and hypothesis. ((S.H.)
Unless you believe as many do ,that Valerie Storie told the Gods honest truth, that the police carried out its duties with exceptional expertise and honesty, and that the jury carried out its responsibilities with the upmost concern for true justice, then we’re only left with pure supposition as to why anyone would want to set up Hanratty. If on the other hand you are convinced that one or more of the above beliefs are desperately wanting( as in my case ,having read the books , and looked into the case very thoroughly,) Then you join a forum to debate what the hell was going on.
I believe everything points to Hanratty being framed ,right down to the dodgy DNA.tests. Why? Well feel free to dig deep.

[NickB]

So a week and a half later they implemented the cartridge case drop.

Why would the police plant the cartridge cases to implicate Hanratty and then go after Alphon? Even getting Nudds to say that Alphon detoured via that room to deposit them. It doesn't make sense.

Anderson said that she first met Hanratty when he came into her shop. I do not know where the idea comes from that France introduced Anderson to him.

[moste]

Why would the police plant the cartridge cases to implicate Hanratty and then go after Alphon? Even getting Nudds to say that Alphon detoured via that room to deposit them. It doesn't make sense.

Anderson said that she first met Hanratty when he came into her shop. I do not know where the idea comes from that France introduced Anderson to him.

Re the Anderson thing. Well Nick, I’m guessing Limehouse got it from somewhere
As for police procedures..who knows.

[moste]

QUOTE: I was intrigued when Sherlock Houses recently stated that Mick Hanratty was certain that Alphon wasn't the killer (something with which I have long concurred). I asked SH if Mick had had any suspicions concerning any other individual(s), but so far have had no response.

I was intrigued when it was reported that Woffinden , when leaving a meeting somewhere ,lay a hand on Mick Hanratty’s shoulder and said,’ I’m going to prove James was innocent’

[cobalt]

To tackle OR’s question I think it’s best to revisit Swiss Cottage. Detectives arrived there almost a week after the murder and had presumably exhausted their list of suspected armed robbers, peeping Toms and assassins. Despite generous offers, nothing of note was coming via the chorus of snouts and grasses. It did not seem to be a crime carried out by recognised criminals. Maybe it was time to develop a new angle and delve more deeply into the victims’ personal and work relationships. Then a tip-off comes saying someone resembling the photofit has been sighted at shops in Swiss Cottage. The tip-off was obviously from Ewer and that someone was James Hanratty.

It was a rather desperate ploy by Ewer and one he later had to distance himself from. By concocting the ‘vision’ of Mrs. Gregsten he later attempted to explain how he had somehow managed to identify Hanratty a good few weeks before the entire police force of the UK. Had Hanratty been identified and questioned that day, the cartridge cases found in the Vienna Hotel, then Ewer could have rested a little more easily. Unfortunately for him the police did not take the bait, or they failed to join the dots, and Ewer was left hanging with his inexplicable prior knowledge.

The decision to create a red herring was Ewer’s. The choice of Hanratty to be that red herring was Dixie France’s. France, who had supplied the murder weapon, could provide the cartridge cases in relatively good faith for he assumed that Hanratty was in Liverpool at the time of the crime and would never get placed anywhere near a trapdoor. Hanratty was a reasonable choice. He was a rootless criminal who roved the country. This would tie up the police in weeks of fruitless detective work while the case grew cold. Jimmy Hanratty was a tough enough cookie who would not break under questioning so things would turn out well for everybody, even Jimmy who could be given a few favours after his eventual release.
Ewer, Alphon (possibly the murderer) and France all knew that Hanratty was innocent. Ewer kept his lips shut pretty much thereafter; Alphon gabbled and ranted about the case for years afterwards; and France of course committed suicide when he realised Hanratty would hang.

[Graham]

Very interesting and all that, chaps, but it still leaves us with the basic question: who would wish to set up Hanratty for the A6 crime, and why?

Graham

[Graham]

Have a read here, guys: https://api.parliament.uk/historic-h...james-hanratty

Graham

[cobalt]

Maybe I should have been more direct.

Who? William Ewer. He had arranged, or perhaps just encouraged, the ultimatum in the car and was now linked to an appalling crime.

Why? To send the police off on a wild goose chase and give things a chance to settle down.

Why Hanratty? He was known indirectly to Ewer and was a convicted criminal. He was well known to France who suggested him to Ewer as a temporary diversion. Which turned out to be permanent.

[Graham]

Ah yes, that hoary old 'Ewer as the brains' thing. On the basis that in this world nothing is impossible, I give it a 99.99% chance of its being totally untrue. Ewer was a bit of an odd-ball, but an apparently successful one, and he had known Janet Gregsten (who was his sister-in-law) for a long time; and after the smoke cleared he and she lived together for a time. Obviously, that is a potential match to light the flames of suspicion. But don't you think the police investigated him thoroughly? Plus, don't forget he successfully sued Paul Foot and Jonathan Cape, and also the Sunday Times for libel. And speaking of Foot, towards the end of his life had admitted that Janet Gregsten was far from being the vengeful harridan he had once thought, and also that Alphon in fact knew far less about the A6 Case than he had claimed. It took a sizeable bite of umble pie, I suspect, for Foot to make those admissions.

In a statement published by the Sunday Times, Ewer claimed to have followed a man who looked like Hanratty into a photographer's shop in Swiss Cottage, but he had gone, and then looked into a florist's in case he might be there. Ewer said he phoned the police to relate this incident to them, and heard no more from them. He then stated that he did not know if this man actually was Hanratty, and although he did indeed see Hanratty at the trial he was not totally sure if he was the man he saw in Swiss Cottage. Ewer did, though, establish (or so he claimed) that a man called Ryan had been in Burtol's cleaners in Swiss Cottage.

In the same statement he said he did not know and had never had any business dealings with Louise Anderson. He also said that the first and only time he met France was when the latter came into his shop to 'apologise' for Mike Gregsten's death. (Now, if true, why would France feel he had to do that?). Further, he stated that Janet Gregsten's 'she saw him at the cleaner's' claim was a complete myth.

Yes, I agree that Ewer is something of a mystery man, and he strikes me as being a pompous busybody who did, it's true, make statements some of which appear contradictory. If anything, he muddied the waters of the investigation, probably for no reason other than he couldn't keep his nose out. He did, though, support Janet Gregsten and her sons, and was kind to them. Can't knock him for that.

Ewer was not the brains behind any conspiracy, for the simple reason there was no conspiracy.

Graham

[cobalt]

No, I don’t think the police investigated Ewer thoroughly. I don’t think Paul Foot did either, concentrating his efforts on establishing the Liverpool/Rhyl alibi.

Ewer claimed to have phoned the police about a sighting at Swiss Cottage then heard nothing more about it: there were a number of shopkeepers (one an ex-policeman) who gave a very different account about detectives visiting their premises. I prefer their version to his. Two tabloid reporters both came up with the same ludicrous ‘vision’ story as allegedly told to them by Ewer, something Ewer denied. Again, I prefer their account to his. Ewer claimed not to have known Dixie France despite an exchange (presumably witnessed, meaning Ewer could not deny it took place) in his shop. I think this was a lie. Ewer claimed not to know Louise Anderson. This was almost certainly a lie as well.

Winning a libel case is no proof of anything except that a person has exceptionally deep pockets, especially to take on The Sunday Times. It’s the sort of thing Elton John does, not one would think the William Ewers of this world. Not only that, Ewer managed to have some astonishing embargo imposed on the details of the settlement which will only emerge long after those of us here are long dead. William Ewer was no humble citizen.

By his own account Ewer was on to ‘Ryan’ before the police were called to the Vienna Hotel concerning cartridge cases. That should have set alarm bells ringing: it was not a mere member of the public acting as a busybody or following a hunch but a man related through marriage to the victim. In fact the victim’s wife was working at his shop when he made the sighting nearby. That was 99.9% more than a coincidence in my book. Ewer was a man of mystery because he was not properly investigated.

[Sherlock Houses]

With regard to Mick Hanratty and your mentioning that he was convinced Alphon had nothing to do with the A6, may I ask if Mick did have any suspicions about anyone else?
Graham

You're confusing me here with Derrick, Graham. It was his post [#5888] which stated that Mick was convinced that Alphon was not guilty.
I spoke lots of times with Mick via telephone calls over the last 5 or 6 years and yes, it's true what Derrick stated, Mick no longer thought that Alphon was guilty. He had altered his opinion over recent years. He was still open to persuasion on the matter however. His father, James senior, Paul Foot, Bob Woffinden and Mick's very good friend Malachy Muinzer [an associate/colleague of Paul Foot] however were convinced, like many others, that Alphon was the A6 Murderer. Malachy, like myself, is still convinced that Alphon murdered Michael Gregsten, despite what Mike Mansfield might have said a few years ago.
With regards to Mick having suspicions about anyone else he did tell me that he thought Dixie France and one of his brothers-in-law [The Russells] had something to do with the A6 murder. One thing which Mick was 100% convinced about was his brother James's innocence of the A6 murder. Mick always referred to James as Jimmy incidentally.

[Graham]

Yes SH, it was you who announced Mick's passing - Derrick's post re: Mick's feelings about Alphon was very shortly afterwards. But I'd still be interested in learning why Mick thought Alphon wasn't the killer.

Paul Foot did indeed indicate what I said in my previous post regarding Janet Gregsten and Alphon. Regarding Alphon, it has always been my belief that it was Jean Justice who influenced Alphon into claiming that he was the killer, as part of their joint effort to 'get' Acott, as Alphon himself put it. Justice also had a huge animus against the legal 'Establishment', and made no secret of it.

Graham