A6 Rebooted

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[gallicrow]

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

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

[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.

[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]

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 ?

[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.

[moste]

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

LOL. Loved it

[moste]

It may be that Sarah has become embroiled in the A6 murder saga. ( poor lady) given that Malachy gave her more in-depth info.

[gallicrow]

[QUOTE=moste;n778655]

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.

Well in the 1939 register Gladys is called Gladys Clark and living with her husband, Herbert Clark, but by 1942 she seems to be living with Richard Keast in Weymouth as there is a notice in the London Gazette announcing that she intends to take the surname Keast. My guess is that she left her son, Michael Clark, with Herbert. I think Richard had two children born in the 1920s from his marriage, both of whom are now dead. Then he and Gladys had two children, born in the 1940s, one of whom died in 2019. Richard Keast died in 1949.

[OneRound]

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

Sherlock,

I don't mean to be condescending. I again congratulate you on having successfully explored so far but do wonder if you appreciate the enormity of having come closer than all others, including Foot and Woffinden, to cracking an important feature of this case. It just seems so frustrating not to go on and try to finish the job.

Regards,
OneRound

[Spitfire]

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

OR

Perhaps you might offer to draft a suitable delicately phrased request. I am sure it would be appreciated by Sherlock H.

I think that the Sarah in question is the late Michael A F Clark's step-niece and thus 30 years or so younger than he was.

[Spitfire]

[QUOTE=gallicrow;n778673]

Well in the 1939 register Gladys is called Gladys Clark and living with her husband, Herbert Clark, but by 1942 she seems to be living with Richard Keast in Weymouth as there is a notice in the London Gazette announcing that she intends to take the surname Keast. My guess is that she left her son, Michael Clark, with Herbert. I think Richard had two children born in the 1920s from his marriage, both of whom are now dead. Then he and Gladys had two children, born in the 1940s, one of whom died in 2019. Richard Keast died in 1949.

Thanks for that Gallicrow. That explains a lot.

Am I correct in thinking that Gladys Lily died in 2000 and that Michael's dad Herbert William died in 1968?

Woff has Michael A F Clark emigrating in 1965 and we now know he died in the UK in 2018 but when did he return? I assume it was sometime after Woff's book was written.

Footy was unable to discover the identity of the man picked out by Storie in the Alphon ID parade and repeated the rumour that the man was a Spanish sailor.

One can only assume that Michael Arthur Falkner Clark having been wrongly identified by Valerie Storie wanted no more involvement in the case.