A6 Rebooted

[Spitfire]

Here it is.

[moste]

Wonder if Tony had considered this.or anyone else for that matter, since Jim knew the Frances were working against him appearing for the prosecution, and Mrs France often did Jim’s laundry. and since Jim believed he was being stitched up, may he have come clean about ownership of hanky to thwart any proposal that he was lying by the Frances? It’s the only answer I can come up with. It must have been identifiable as his.
Also Jim must have realised that with the amount of evidence stacked against him ,his only chance was to have the jury believe he was framed.
p.s.hard to believe Cobalt after all these decades that M G and V S could well have been Coronation St. fans.

[Sherlock Houses]

As has been well noted several times on the A6 threads not one single hair fingerprint, fibre or anything else of Hanratty’s was found in the murder car. No shred of evidence. Uncannily enough, at the very same time that Mike, Val and murderer were cramped together in that small car, a drama was being screened on itv, the title of which was “Shred of evidence”.

[djw]

Author of The Long Silence, Paul Stickler has announced 5 further talks in the UK on the A6 murder

1. 14/01/2025 - Christchurch, Dorset
2. 16/01/2025 - Southampton, Hampshire
3. 27/05/2025 - Sherborne, Dorset
4. 28/05/2025 - Warminster, Wiltshire
5. 6/10/2025 - Wimborne, Dorset
6. 11/10/2025 - Peel, Isle of Man

[moste]

Oh good! I forget , is Stickler of the opinion that that Hanratty was guilty. So the purpose of these talks would be ? Other than a money spinner.

[ansonman]

He's got an impressive website and an events schedule running right up to the end of October. From church halls to cruise ships, no less. No mention of what he charges.
He presumably has a question and answer session at the end of his presentations and so at least one would have an opportunity to ask a penetrating question or two. My guess is that few members of the audience would have any detailed knowledge of the cases he presents.

[ansonman]

October 2025.

[cobalt]

He was charging £8 for an hour and a half presentation in 2023.

[moste]

I wonder if Stickler would know as much or more about dna, than we do. I have asked in as many ways as I can think of, on line, where discussions are on going about the degradation of dna ,in all of the possible situations. And amazingly I can’t seem to find anyone whether an expert in the field with letters after their name, or even a lab technician working in the field, to give an enlightening answer .
It isn’t a tricky one for the learned. A 40 year old piece of cloth with semen stains, treated understandably with total indifference where the still unknown dna is concerned, IE. no gloves worn during handling ,allowing other dna exhibits to come close or into contact ,breathing on ,talking over, while packing and unpacking. My guess is , any modern day specialist would not put their name to any so called results from a test of the said piece of cloth. The fact that the officials came up with a conclusion smacks of collusion,
borne out by the list of home secretary’s that exhibited an incredible act of non action and procrastination,

[moste]

I wonder if Stickler would know as much or more about dna, than we do. I have asked in as many ways as I can think of, on line, where discussions are on going about the degradation of dna ,in all of the possible situations. And amazingly I can’t seem to find anyone whether an expert in the field with letters after their name, or even a lab technician working in the field, to give an enlightening answer .
It isn’t a tricky one for the learned. A 40 year old piece of cloth with semen stains, treated understandably with total indifference where the still unknown dna is concerned, IE. no gloves worn during handling ,allowing other dna exhibits to come close or into contact ,breathing on ,talking over, while packing and unpacking. My guess is , any modern day specialist would not put their name to any so called results from a test of the said piece of cloth. The fact that the officials came up with a conclusion smacks of collusion.

[cobalt]

Moste,

Don't be so coy. I know you as a man who sees the bigger picture. If Hanratty's DNA was on the victim's underwear then he would be as guilty as sin. No argument.

Now it's possible to adopt a halfway house argument and claim that Hanratty's DNA was inadvertently leaked on to historic exhibits and that therefore he was innocent. That was the strategy adopted at the appeal in order to offer an off ramp to the judicial system. It was as we know rejected.

Therefore we sceptics are left with the very strong possibility that Hanratty's DNA was deliberately planted on the exhibits. This would be a conspiracy of course, the kind of which happens about every other week in the political and legal systems in order to maintain some semblance of credibility with the wider public. Most governments are a conspiracy against the people so there is nothing shocking in claiming this to be the case, especially where UK justice is concerned. It's par for the course as we have seen over the years in the cases involving Timothy Evans, the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six, Stefan Kisko or the Hillsborough disaster. Manufacturing evidence is just part of the legal apparatus, along with concealing evidence that is unhelpful to the prosecution case.

In the Hanratty case the concealment involved the murder car itself where we are still being encouraged to believe that no forensic evidence was obtained. This was seen as ludicrous even back in these pre- DNA days but remains an article of faith for those who believe Hanratty was guilty. They can never account for this forensic free car - any contributions welcome- but instead cling to a handkerchief (of dubious provenance) much as Othello did to prove his wife's guilt. They prefer evidence from the back seat of a public corporation bus to that of a car where the murder and rape occurred. They love DNA, except when there is none. So they were presented with some DNA to salve their conscience. Case closed.

[Sherlock Houses]

Therefore we sceptics are left with the very strong possibility that Hanratty's DNA was deliberately planted on the exhibits. This would be a conspiracy of course, the kind of which happens about every other week in the political and legal systems in order to maintain some semblance of credibility with the wider public. Most governments are a conspiracy against the people so there is nothing shocking in claiming this to be the case, especially where UK justice is concerned. It's par for the course as we have seen over the years in the cases involving Timothy Evans, the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six, Stefan Kisko or the Hillsborough disaster. Manufacturing evidence is just part of the legal apparatus, along with concealing evidence that is unhelpful to the prosecution case.

A good number of years ago while surfing the Internet [without even getting wet] I came across an interesting article on
the Liberal Democrat Voice website. The poster, Angus Huck, going off topic ['Cash for honours'] somewhat, mentions the Hanratty case.
He submitted three posts and apart from a couple of minor errors he makes some interesting comments. That article, from July 2007, is still available online and for anyone interested here is the link. [The relevant parts are contained within the first two thirds of the article.]......

https://www.libdemvoice.org/%E2%80%98cash-for-honours%E2%80%99-the-inquiries-continue-1068.html

[cobalt]

There are few claims in that exchange which would have to be confirmed.

It's generally accepted that William Ewer knew both Louise Anderson and Dixie France. Anderson was in the same line of work as Ewer whereas his relationship with France is open to conjecture, albeit that it was Ewer who acknowledged France had come to his premises to offer what seemed to be some sort of apology after the murder. That would certainly suggest a previous relationship of some kind.

However I have never come across evidence of Alphon and Ewer being acquainted. I can certainly imagine a few reasons why they might have been- a common political interest involving some links to the security services being one of them. Ewer, whose wartime activities remain unknown, emerges as someone doing a little more than running an antique dealers. The rarely employed Alphon rarely seemed short of money and the notion that he existed on successful betting coups flies in the face of everything we know about gamblers. He also received handouts from his parents although we are encouraged to believe his father was a humble clerical worker at Scotland Yard. Plenty of grounds for suspicion that they might have been acquainted but nothing concrete I am aware of.

The Ewer link to Hanratty would presumably have come via Anderson and France. It's speculated that Hanratty offloaded some of his swag to Ewer on occasion but again there is no proof of this. When Hanratty was abandoned by Anderson and France at trial he would presumably have made a link between their evidence and the promptings of William Ewer had he been associated with all three. Yet I don't remember Hanratty ever mentioning Ewer by name.

[moste]

Always had it my mind that although Hanratty dealt with Anderson for moving on treasures , it would always be smaller stuff. If for example a Wilson Steer needed finding a new home ,Ewer would be your man.No doubt Hanratty knew of him but allowed Anderson to do her stuff, no need to involve himself or contact Ewer unnecessarily. Mind you France being in the mix and Hanratty being so IN with that family , you never know.

[Sherlock Houses]

Recently I came across a very revealing letter that Jeremy Fox wrote to a Bedfordshire newspaper in April 1987.......