A6 Rebooted

[NickB]

But would Nudds have been given reason to believe at this time that the police were seeking Durrant as part of the A6 murder investigation

I don't think it really matters. Nudds would have 'jumped to the conclusion' that Kilner wanted Durrant for something. The turning point for Nudds was not when he found out that it related to the A6 murder, but when he realised how far Acott wanted to go to pin it on Alphon.

However if you look at Henry Crocker's statement, it appears that he did know the enquiry had been about the A6 murder before he found the cartridge cases. I suspect Crocker was contacted by the police when no-one had turned up to make the promised written statement, and told about the murder connection as a way of persuading him that it was to be taken seriously.

[Alfie]

I don't think it really matters. Nudds would have 'jumped to the conclusion' that Kilner wanted Durrant for something. The turning point for Nudds was not when he found out that it related to the A6 murder, but when he realised how far Acott wanted to go to pin it on Alphon.

However if you look at Henry Crocker's statement, it appears that he did know the enquiry had been about the A6 murder before he found the cartridge cases. I suspect Crocker was contacted by the police when no-one had turned up to make the promised written statement, and told about the murder connection as a way of persuading him that it was to be taken seriously.

You're right Nick, in the overall scheme of things it doesn't matter much. I'm just trying to figure out which lies Nudds might have been volunteering off his own bat, as opposed to those he might have been prompted to tell by Acott and Oxford. I reckon the "jumped to the conclusion" one was his own, as I'm fairly sure Kilner wouldn't have discussed the specifics of the Durrant inquiry with him. But I'm not familiar enough with police procedure to know for certain.

That's a good point about Crocker being aware of the A6 connection at the time he found the cartridge cases and I suspect you might be right about the police filling him in on the background to the Durrant inquiry.

While I think of it, the Galves couple are described by Foot (p. 58) as speaking only Spanish (thus, says Foot, forcing Acott to rely on Nudds' account of happenings at the Vienna), but I simply can't imagine how Juliana Galves could help run a London hotel, and give statements to the police, without having at least some proficiency in English. Can anyone?

[Graham]

Crocker said that his first impulse on discovering the cartridges was to chuck them out, but he recalled hearing the pleas of the police to the public concerning the A6 murder, and thought it his duty to advise them of his discovery. Had he not done so, chances are we wouldn't be discussing it much today. Obviously at the time he found the cases he hadn't the first idea they came from the murder weapon. Does anyone know if Crocker was called to give evidence at the trial?

I was always under the impression that Juliana Galves was fairly proficient in English, but her husband not at all.

Graham

[Alfie]

Crocker said that his first impulse on discovering the cartridges was to chuck them out, but he recalled hearing the pleas of the police to the public concerning the A6 murder, and thought it his duty to advise them of his discovery. Had he not done so, chances are we wouldn't be discussing it much today. Obviously at the time he found the cases he hadn't the first idea they came from the murder weapon. Does anyone know if Crocker was called to give evidence at the trial?

I was always under the impression that Juliana Galves was fairly proficient in English, but her husband not at all.

Graham

Crocker was a witness at the trail, giving evidence on Jan 29 in regard to finding the cartridge cases and the Vienna's records.

After another read through my notes I can't say for sure what prompted him to contact the police about the cartridge cases. It's intimated by Foot & Co that the police's earlier interest in Durrant was the trigger, but only intimated. I can't find any reference to him saying it was because of the police's appeals to the public. But you're right Graham, it was a pivotal event in the investigation: without the cartridge cases, the chances of the police latching on to Hanratty were practically zero.

[Graham]

Alfie, I just checked Woffo, Pg 58. The police contacted The Vienna on 27 August regarding Alphon advising them at The Alexandra Court that he'd stayed at The Vienna on the murder night. The police needed a written record of the telephone verification of his booking, and Juliana Galves made a statement concerning that at Harrow Road Police Station on 6 September. Obviously Crocker as manager was made aware of this and hence his decision to advise the police of his discovery on 11 September. I definitely read *somewhere* that Crocker said he remembered the police's public appeals, but maybe he was including their previous visit to The Vienna in this.

Graham

[NickB]

Does anyone have the full statement made by Crocker on the day he reported the cartridge cases? It is mentioned briefly by Woffinden on page 60.

[Alfie]

Mrs Dinwoodie's evidence at the trial that she told Alfred Harding on the Monday about the man asking directions to Tarlton Road, and Harding's testimony two days earlier that he saw Mrs D and her grand-daughter at the shop on the Monday, but not on the Tuesday when he called in after work: taken together, am I right in thinking that these two pieces of evidence are fatal Hanratty's claim that he visited the shop on the Tuesday, notwithstanding Sherrard's attempts to muddy the waters by introducing Harding's log of delivery journeys?

[Sherlock Houses]

Albert, not Alfie, Alan.

[Alfie]

One aspect of the case I'm struggling to reconcile is Alphon's alibi, as told to Sgt Kilner on Aug 27, and Acott's reliance on Nudds' second statement when, on Sept 22, he went public with his desire to trace Alphon. The two statements clash jarringly in at least one crucial respect.

Nudds had Alphon booking a room the Vienna by phone at 11 am on Aug 22, and then calling at the hotel at 1 pm and being shown to his room by Nudds and Snell. Alphon said he went to the Broadway House Hotel at about 8 pm on Aug 22 and, there being no vacancies, booked and paid for a room at the Broadway's sister hotel before going off to meet his mother in Streatham.

Years later the hotel owner, Mr Pichler, confirmed to the Sunday Times (Sept 10, 1967) that the police had visited the Broadway and spoken to the manager that had arranged the room at the Vienna for Alphon. I would hazard that it's inconceivable that a report of that interview didn't find its way to Acott, so I'm thinking the crucial question is when.

If Acott was aware before Nudds made his second statement that the Broadway manager confirmed Alphon's account, surely he was only inviting trouble be relying on Nudds' second statement when making his appeal for Alphon? Then again, if he only learned about Alphon's Broadway visit afterwards, why didn't he include it among the 12 reasons he gave for excluding Alphon at Hanratty's trial - since if Alphon went to the Broadway at 8 pm (as per the Kilner statement, or 8.30, as he averred later, or 9 pm as Pichler reckoned) it would be almost impossible for him to be in Dorney knocking on the Morris's window at 9.20-25 pm?

I'm inclined to think Acott knew before Nudds changed his statement, as Nick also seems to have reasoned when he said (#5980):

"A key document which needs to be uncovered is the the statement made to police by the manager of the Broadway House Hotel saying that he and his assistant Pichler saw Alphon at about 9pm on 22-Aug-61 and arranged his stay at the Vienna that night.

In court on 2-Sep-67 Detective Chief Inspector Henry Mooney gave evidence that Alphon could not have done the crime because Mooney “knew where he was at the time”. I take this to mean Mooney knew that Alphon went to the Broadway House Hotel, indicating the statement was still in police files at that time.

Alphon hoped this new found evidence would be revealed to the public and finally clear him (Woff – page 359) but the police must have realised that by doing so they would be raising some uncomfortable questions about Acott’s unscrupulous targetting of Alphon."

As Foot observed (p. 378): "The first time the hotel was mentioned in connection with Peter Alphon’s alibi was in the Sunday Times ... more than six years after the murder."

Acott's silence on this point suggests to me that he was only too aware of how badly it would reflect on his handling of the case.

[NickB]

When enquiries were made by a poster about viewing the court transcript, the reply said that they were welcome to come and see it but please note two days are missing. Those two days correspond to Acott's evidence!

The newspaper reports of Acott's evidence give the impression that he is dancing around certain issues and the 12 reasons for rejecting Alphon are a good example. He does not give a satisfactory answer to Sherrard asking how he could have reconciled Storie's description of the assailant (blue eyes etc.) with Alphon. Either he did not believe Storie (which is what Sherrard was suggesting) or he should not have pursued Alphon.

Acott may have been burning with a desire to say that Alphon had the Broadway alibi, but he realised this would have raised more questions about his conduct rather than close the issue. It also meant that Nudds was hung out to dry and I think he had some justification in his grievance that it had scuppered his efforts to pursue honest employment.

With regard to your earlier point about the sweetshop, I simply think that the contortions that are needed to make it work as an alibi make it unbelievable. Even if you resolve the timing issues, which I think are unresolvable, you have to believe that he entered just at a moment the child went behind the counter to serve another child.

[cobalt]

‘Nudds was hung out to dry and I think he had some justification in his grievance that it had scuppered his efforts to pursue honest employment.’
He’d never showed any interest in doing so before, so he could hardly complain. He was a prison grass, the lowest of the low.

Alfie is opening up an area that to me has far more potential than the Liverpool alibi in that there must be- as he stated- police statements which shed some light on what actually took place. As a sceptic regarding Hanratty’s guilt I am surprised than anyone would pay for a room at one hotel then travel across town to another. I can understand a booking would be made by phone, and a room reserved until a cut off time. But did anyone pay upfront at a sister hotel in the early 1960s? Since when was Alphon a man who paid up front? I thought his game was to bilk the bill.

The second point is our old friend of eyewitness evidence. Was it ever established in court, or even in a police statement, that the man who entered the Broadway Hotel was the same man who turned up (or didn’t – take your preferred Nudds evidence) at the Vienna Hotel?

[NickB]

Anyone who turned up at the Broadway House Hotel asking to book a room for that night might have been given a room there or at either of the other hotels in the chain. So if the plan was for a bogus Durrant to turn up at the Broadway and ask to book a room there but be diverted to the Vienna it was liable to go wrong.

[Graham]

Re: eye-witness evidence and ID parades. On 23 September, Alphon was on two parades. On the first, amongst others, Florence Snell picked out someone else, but Nudds picked out two men, one of whom was Alphon. There was then a second parade, on which Mrs Dalal picked out Alphon as her attacker, but later he was cleared when the two men from whom he collected his almanacs stated that he had been at their premises at the time of the attack. So it would seem that there was sufficient evidence via Nudds for the police to accept that it was indeed Alphon who had checked in at The Vienna after going to The Broadway House. Woffo describes Nudds' identification as 'perverse', which just about sums him up.

Booking a hotel from another hotel in the same group would not be, or should not be, problemmatical.

Graham

[NickB]

Alphon said he saw the Broadway in the ABC railway guide and went there and asked for a room. He didn't ask to stay at the Vienna, they suggested it to him because they were fully booked.

[Graham]

Alphon said he saw the Broadway in the ABC railway guide and went there and asked for a room. He didn't ask to stay at the Vienna, they suggested it to him because they were fully booked.

Better than Southend Pier, one of his favourite kipping spots when times were hard and his selected growlers weren't winning.

Graham