A6 Rebooted

[moste]

Such patronising condescension . Why don't you get off your butt and do some research yourself ?

LOL. Loved it

[moste]

[QUOTE=gallicrow;n778594]
I believe that Michael was (Nanna) Gladys's son, not her husband.[/
I can’t see her son working, because she alludes to leaving him.

[Sherlock Houses]

Hi again Sherlock - a couple of points:

1. If you don't ask the step-sister for a photo and/or details of Michael's appearance, there's no way you'll hear anything from her. Obviously the request should be delicately phrased.

2. The longer you leave it, the more likely it is she will have died.

Having got this far and well done on that, stop faffing about and instead try to finish the job.

Regards,
OneRound

Such patronising condescension . Why don't you get off your butt and do some research yourself ?

[OneRound]

No, that's not quite the case Moste. The thing Sarah and I have in common is that we are both subscribers to the Ancestry.co.uk website doing family tree research. Sarah's Nanna, Gladys, was in fact Michael Clark's mother. After Michael passed away in April 2018 the handling of his estate was entrusted to his step-sister. I do have a 2018 address for her which I obtained last year but I don't know whether she is still alive. It's a delicate matter trying to approach a complete stranger by letter in the hope that she might have a photo of her step-brother circa 1961/62 which she would be willing, in one way or another, to share.

Hi again Sherlock - a couple of points:

1. If you don't ask the step-sister for a photo and/or details of Michael's appearance, there's no way you'll hear anything from her. Obviously the request should be delicately phrased.

2. The longer you leave it, the more likely it is she will have died.

Having got this far and well done on that, stop faffing about and instead try to finish the job.

Regards,
OneRound

[Sherlock Houses]

Interestingly, Sherlock, Sarah seemed to be under the impression that you yourself was somehow related, and following your last communication maybe decided not to continue a connection. Iâm taking it that the sworn to secrecy inference is with regards to the mystery of Michael and Sarahâs Nannasâ split up ? ( this of course makes Michael probably Sarahâs Grandad, or stepgrandad. ) Itâs a pity that this family was kept in the dark over Michaels existence , otherwise with your success as an investigator we may well have been on a winner here.

No, that's not quite the case Moste. The thing Sarah and I have in common is that we are both subscribers to the Ancestry.co.uk website doing family tree research. Sarah's Nanna, Gladys, was in fact Michael Clark's mother. After Michael passed away in April 2018 the handling of his estate was entrusted to his step-sister. I do have a 2018 address for her which I obtained last year but I don't know whether she is still alive. It's a delicate matter trying to approach a complete stranger by letter in the hope that she might have a photo of her step-brother circa 1961/62 which she would be willing, in one way or another, to share.

[gallicrow]

... this of course makes Michael probably Sarah's Grandad, or stepgrandad.

I believe that Michael was (Nanna) Gladys's son, not her husband.

[moste]

Interesting. I can see a younger Michael Clark leaving England if he had gotten unwanted publicity due to the line-up. He seems a very quiet and private man by the end of his life. It is all very poignant.

The only thoughts I could come up with on unwanted publicity due to the line up, Would involve Peter Alphon. But, I think he would have had bigger fish to fry. Even though we were not yet in the computer age we enjoy today, I still find it hard to believe Paul Foot with effort, could not have tracked down Clark, considering the very likely pivotal importance.

[moste]

Interestingly, Sherlock, Sarah seemed to be under the impression that you yourself was somehow related, and following your last communication maybe decided not to continue a connection. I’m taking it that the sworn to secrecy inference is with regards to the mystery of Michael and Sarah’s Nannas’ split up ? ( this of course makes Michael probably Sarah’s Grandad, or stepgrandad. ) It’s a pity that this family was kept in the dark over Michaels existence , otherwise with your success as an investigator we may well have been on a winner here.

[Pcdunn]

Interesting. I can see a younger Michael Clark leaving England if he had gotten unwanted publicity due to the line-up. He seems a very quiet and private man by the end of his life. It is all very poignant.

[Sherlock Houses]

So , just checking back in our posting history, I found the crux of the matter that you were alluding to Sherlock, regarding Acott and his notebook info .Page 200, back in 2015. Indicates Sherrards reluctance to Pursue further details on Stories wrong I D. Though Acott offered to read aloud what he had in his notes ,the judge intervened and had Acott read out only that which he had noted at the time from his own description of Clark. So some of Acotts notes thus were as others had stated of Clarkâs appearance , why Sherrard did not use all of these notes fully to the advantage of his client is a complete mystery to me. And then as recently criticized, made no effort to have Clark tracked down, when as it seems obvious now , and should at the time , Clark clearly looked absolutely nothing like Hanratty at all.

Hi Moste, re.Michael Clark, I was able, through some research on the Ancestry.co.uk website, to trace a relative of his by the name of Sarah. Back in late April 2020 I sent her a brief, speculative message, hoping she would notice it and reply to it. Almost 10 months passed by without any response from Sarah so you can imagine my great surprise when I received a notification on February 19th 2021 that Sarah had replied to my message. I thought I would share that message exchange as it helps to add some further information about Michael to the precious little we've gleaned over the years.........

April 29th 2020....

Hi Sarah,
I hope you will excuse me taking the liberty of contacting you this way but I was hoping if you could possibly furnish me with some information regarding Michael. I have been researching the A6 murder case of 1961 for several years now and Michael's name features in it, not at all in any sinister way I must add. You see there was an Identification Parade held on September 24th 1961 in which a totally innocent RAF Airman and volunteer was picked out mistakenly. That person was Michael Clark. I don't know if you or anyone within your family circle were aware of this. Apparently Michael emigrated around 1965'ish and I wonder if you know to which country he emigrated ?
Your sincerely, James.


February 19th 2021....


Hi James
Thank you for contacting me, and I am very sorry I haven't replied sooner. My family only found out about Michael maybe 5 years ago - my Nanna, Gladys Keast - who died in2000 -had never mentioned him, and although we have since found out that two of the older people in the family did know about Michael's existence, they would not/could not reveal the circumstances of why Gladys left him, if indeed that is what happened. The two relatives, who have also now died, would've been very young at the time, so may not have known much anyway, although it seemed they had been sworn to secrecy and would not break the confidence.

We found out about Michael through a friend of my Mum's doing an ancestry search. This was quite a shock, particularly as my Nanna had been an integral part of our family - having lived in an annex to my parent's house for over 20 years. She had a very close relationship with my Mum, and with me too - it is so sad that she carried this with her and could never tell us.

My parents were contacted by an 'heir hunter' after Michael's death, previously we had not had anyway of finding Michael - he had left a very small amount of money, most of which was spent on the funeral arrangements. He died in a Care Home in London - he had told them he had no family and had not talked to the carers about his life at all. My parents and my Aunt and Uncle went up to the funeral - just them and representatives from the home. The carers said he was a contented man, but quiet.

It is sad that I don't have any further information for you - we are pretty sure that he is the Michael who was identified, wrongly, in the line up, but we only know this through my Mum's friend's ancestry search, rather than a personal account. My Mum was not aware that Michael had then emigrated. Can I ask how Michael fits in with your family, and if you have any further information about him?
Kind regards Sarah.

There was a fairly long reply to Sarah's message in early April 2021, which Paul Foot's very good friend, Malachy, was largely responsiible for drafting, outlining the case in some detail and how Michael featured in it. Since then, however, there has been no further word from Sarah.

[moste]

Hi Sherlock, I too would like to know the origins of the full identification of Mr. Clark. That, plus the handling of the line of questioning presented by Sherrard ‘Is Mr. Clark available now? , and after Acotts answer, Well ,he was a while ago but not sure about right now.
or words to that effect. Then the attitude taken of the defence ,’oh well anyway, moving on . Smacks of someone going through the motions.Any clear thinking ,reasonable person has to see there is something seriously wrong here .

So , just checking back in our posting history, I found the crux of the matter that you were alluding to Sherlock, regarding Acott and his notebook info .Page 200, back in 2015. Indicates Sherrards reluctance to Pursue further details on Stories wrong I D. Though Acott offered to read aloud what he had in his notes ,the judge intervened and had Acott read out only that which he had noted at the time from his own description of Clark. So some of Acotts notes thus were as others had stated of Clark’s appearance , why Sherrard did not use all of these notes fully to the advantage of his client is a complete mystery to me. And then as recently criticized, made no effort to have Clark tracked down, when as it seems obvious now , and should at the time , Clark clearly looked absolutely nothing like Hanratty at all.

[ansonman]

Imagine sending someone to the gallows on the basis that they sounded just like the man You heard in the car.

On the hanky , since Hanratty paid to have Mrs France do his wash, and also Hanratty had explained to Mr.France the hiding place for stashing unwanted Items, what a surprise ,the gun and hanky are found together under the bus seat.special sleuthing required here me thinks.

Prior to the dismissal of Hanratty's appeal Mr. France had twice attempted suicide. The appeal was dismissed on the Tuesday, it was reported on the Wednesday and France finally managed a successful suicide attempt on the Thursday. "Yet another perplexing feature to an already tortuous case" says Woffinden. Hardly perplexing if France was complicit in the stitch up of Hanratty. More special sleuthing required here.

[moste]

Imagine sending someone to the gallows on the basis that they sounded just like the man You heard in the car.

On the hanky , since Hanratty paid to have Mrs France do his wash, and also Hanratty had explained to Mr.France the hiding place for stashing unwanted Items, what a surprise ,the gun and hanky are found together under the bus seat.special sleuthing required here me thinks.

[cobalt]

‘As such, I see very little to be gained from comparing facial descriptions of Alphon, Clark and Hanratty with each other, or with the photofit.’

In which case there was no reason to have an ID line up at all. It was a total waste of time. All that was needed was for Valerie Storie to listen to taped extracts of persons reading out some prepared statement and she could have made her ID on that basis. No need to look into Hanratty’s eyes and see his guilt, as she claimed.

The magic appearance of the handkerchief- which handkerchief - was indeed none of Valerie Storie’s making. As I often point out, anything that emerges from the basement of the police basement always seems to confirm guilt rather than innocence. The other stuff seems to have disappeared. A level playing field would help.

[caz]

If Acott was able to convince Storie that this time the guilty man was without a doubt in the line up, she might have been able to convince herself that whoever sounded most like the murderer was the murderer. After all, she barely saw his face at all on the murder night.

This was one of my original points, which got ignored in the rush by moste to ridicule my observation about the photofit, which clearly Valerie didn't relate to Alphon's physical appearance at the first ID parade - unsurprisingly if she was making bricks without straw, trying to reproduce a face she had barely seen.

As such, I see very little to be gained from comparing facial descriptions of Alphon, Clark and Hanratty with each other, or with the photofit. In the end, it was Hanratty's voice at the second ID parade, which Valerie was so sure she recognised from the night she was confined in that car with the chatty man who raped and shot her.

If she simply got it wrong, it was incredibly bad luck for Hanratty that the hanky found with the murder weapon was eventually proved to have been used by him. Valerie could never have predicted that such strong evidence for his involvement would one day support her identification.

Love,

Caz
X