Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A6 Rebooted

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I am not so sure that Matthews concluded that Hanratty was not the murderer but that he thought that on the evidence Hanratty should not have been convicted.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by NickB View Post
      In case the link is blocked asking you to subscribe, it says Matthews "concluded the man who carried out the attack on 22 August 1961 at Deadman's Hill, Bedfordshire, was probably hired to break up the illicit liaison. His report is believed to recommend that a new inquiry should in particular examine evidence regarding Peter Alphon, a salesman who was the original suspect."
      I would be very surprised if any top detective really believed that 'someone was hired to break up the illicit liaison '

      I can't imagine any scenario where that would be possible , not after 4 years, except for one, and that would involve

      Valerie's father who had only just become aware of Gregstens true persona. Of course what followed was a major

      Phuque up!

      Comment

      Working...
      X