A6 Rebooted

[louisa]

Hiya Limehouse

Thanks for that welcome.

I think I may have missed the best of the discussions though.

[Natalie Severn]

Hiya Limehouse

Thanks for that welcome.

I think I may have missed the best of the discussions though.

I would add to that welcome Louisa! So lovely to see your post!!!
Normax

[OneRound]

Louisa - a warm welcome from me too.

I'm probably an unusual poster on this forum as I feel Hanratty was probably guilty but consider his trial to have been unfair and the latest Court of Appeal judgment shoddy and biased. More on that at the weekend.

That said, my main wish is to listen and debate this mystifying case. No one needs to agree but all need to show respect. I'm sure this forum will benefit considerably from your presence.

[louisa]

Thanks all.

[Natalie Severn]

Louisa - a warm welcome from me too.

I'm probably an unusual poster on this forum as I feel Hanratty was probably guilty but consider his trial to have been unfair and the latest Court of Appeal judgment shoddy and biased. More on that at the weekend.

That said, my main wish is to listen and debate this mystifying case. No one needs to agree but all need to show respect. I'm sure this forum will benefit considerably from your presence.

Hi One Round,
It would be helpful to know why you feel Hanratty was probably guilty.
-There wasn't any forensic evidence to link him with the Morris Minor.
-He did not have any history whatever of violence towards women.His girl friends praised his gentle courteous manner.
-he was never placed in London between 22nd and 25th August 1961 by anyone
-he was never seen anywhere near Dorney Reach , Buckinghamshire
-He was definitely placed in Liverpool by Mrs Dinwoody on the afternoon on either 21st or 22nd August and it could not have been 21st because 5 witnesses placed him in London on 21st!9 witnesses came forward from Rhyl too.
The prosecution witnesses were shady to see the least -for the most part-especially Langdale and Nudds -who happened to leave the Vienna the very day the cartridge cases were found.
I for one find it extremely strange too that France went and 'apologised' to William Ewer about his brother in laws death
and that Ewer confessed in the Sunday Times of May 16th 1971 that he had followed Hanratty into the Flower shop in Swiss Cottage on September 1st 1961 just a few days after the murder and knew his mother's name was Hanratty and that he called himself Ryan--he followed him because of his staring blue eyes-when the nationally circulated description at the time was of a man with deep set brown eyes[Valerie's new description on 31st August was of a man with blue eyes but before that the circulated description was brown eyes.Valerie did say she was absolutely certain Hanratty was her attacker and rapist but she had been absolutely certain Michael Clark was her attacker and rapist three weeks before-ad he was a totally innocent volunteer .
Nobody has ever explained how the cartridge cases could have been fired a day before the murder---or why the gunman would return to the 36A bus to hide 60 cartridge cases and a gun and -we are told-Hanratty's hanky under the upstairs back seat of a bus that terminated at the bottom of Charles France's [Boundary] road and also passed the bottom of Sutherland Ave![yes it passes lots of other places including the Grosvenor Hotel .
But you seem so fair minded so let us know why you still think Hanratty's guilty?On what exact evidence?

-Norma
-

[louisa]

I agree with Norma. Hanratty was set up - no doubt about it.

The reason he was convicted? Because vital evidence was withheld from the defence team.

Also because Valerie Storie picked him out (after first being primed by Det. Alcott). Don't forget she had already picked out a WRONG MAN in a previous line-up.

The public wanted closure - were clamouring for it - and the police had the unfortunate task of having to clear Alphon -the prime suspect (simply because Valerie Storie had not picked him out). The police chose the next best suspect - Hanratty.

So the jury saw the pitiful sight of Valerie Storie in her hospital bed - paralysed - and felt sorry for her. They believed everything she said without question. Prior events proved that she was NOT a reliable eye witness.

The other witnesses - Langdale and Nudds - well, enough said about those two jailbirds already. And another witness (forgotten his name) who couldn't possibly have seen the car driver from where he was standing. All these people were believed.

Hanratty was hanged on flimsy and erroneous evidence that wouldn't hold up in a court of law these days, and neither would the fatally flawed police and court procedures that were presented at the trial.

[Limehouse]

The Rhyl alibi

Many people agree that Hanratty's change of alibi during the second week of the trial was possibly a deciding factor in sealing his fate. Some argue that he lied about Rhyl when it seemed that his Liverpool alibi could not be proven.

However, in reality, it was aspects of the Liverpool alibi that were lies (staying with three men) but so convinced was Hanratty that his presence in Liverpool could be established, and so convinced was he that there was not a firm case against him, he did not have enough confidence in the Rhyl alibi to mention it at the outset.

Woffinden describes how Hanratty concluded tghe Rhyl alibi was weak because it was difficult for him to remember details, whereas the Liverpool alibi was stronger because of the people he had spoken to. he was also, I feel, hoping to secure an alibi from some of his 'friends' up there (he, after all, went there to sell stolen goods, so he must have had some people in mind who might buy them). However, these 'friends' obviously did not want to be associated with the case and additionally would want as few people as possible to know about their role as fences.

Woffinden also describes how Hanratty had told several associates he was going to Liverpool (the Frances, his girlfriend etc) to visit an aunt and he had not mentioned his Rhyl trip to any of them on his return to London. Therefore, he concluded it would have been hard to have it accepted as an alibi at the outset. When the Liverpool alibi fell apart, he had to fall back upon Rhyl.

It is not difficult to see how Hanratty may have reached all these conclusions. When arrested for the crimes, he was so sure it would not go to trial because he was iinocent. How could they have any evidence against him when he wasn't in the area at the time? All he had to do was describe the people he met and spoke to in Liverpool and it would all be cleared up.

More to follow.

[Limehouse]

Natalie wrote: Nobody has ever explained how the cartridge cases could have been fired a day before the murder

Quite right. isn't it strange how those cartridge cases turned up in that room after three weeks? Of course, had anyone been able to establish for sure where Hanratty had been in the hours and days [B]after[B] the murder, the cartridge cases would no doubt have been found in one of those places!

[louisa]

I agree with Bob Woffindon (and Limehouse) on all points. As Hanratty said (regarding the Rhyl albi) "I decided to tell the truth because I started to realise the more lies I told the worser it got for me".

I would say that Dixie France placed the gun and cartridges (and handkerchief) under the bus seat. He had been given the gun back from Alphon when they met in Southend. It would be an easy matter for Dixie France to obtain one of Hanratty's used handkerchiefs as his wife did Hanratty's laundry for him.

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Julie and Louisa.
Louisa-Charles France committed suicide just after Hanratty lost his appeal and with just days to go before he was executed. He had been into William Ewer's shop ,which was just down the road from his flat in Boundary Road, to 'apologise' for the death of Ewer's brother -in- law,Michael Gregsten.
Something was clearly disturbing him and/or preying on his mind don't you think?
I must admit I sometimes wonder if France was the man seen by the Cobbs in
the Marsh Lane area of Taplow on the afternoon of 22 August 1961.They described the man as having receding dark hair brushed straight back,pale complexion,deep set dark eyes.France was 42 and they put the man's age at around 30---but age can be difficult to assess when someone is slim built and has dark hair that has not gone grey and a smooth complexion as France appears to have had.
Best
Norma

[louisa]

Hi Norma

I would think that the man seen in Marsh Lane was Peter Alphon - the description fits him well.

Regarding France, Ewer and Louise (forgotten her last name) - it seems a huge coincidence that they all knew eachother, doesn't it?

Ewer knew a LOT more about all of it than he ever let on. I suspect he was the man behind it all. He had engaged Dixie France to set things up and Dixie France found Alphon - a braggart who said he would, and could, do anything.

The bullets found in the Vienna Hotel were planted by Alphon or fell out of his pocket when he returned to that room to pick up his suitcase. Dixie France knew that Hanratty had already stayed there because Hanratty showed France the receipt.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Louisa,
Ewer admitted in 1971 he had followed Hanratty a few days after the murder because of his staring ,carbunkle eyes[what???]
My own view is that he had met France [definitely] but in my own opinion its more likely Alphon
MET EWER ---he had already met him [according to Alphon] at a fascist sympathisers meeting in Central London two years before the murder and which he told Jean Justice about and Paul Foot .Alphon actually became a member of this far right movement [its widely believed and so he told several people anyway ],but Ewer was more of a sympathiser-a 'little Englander' with sympathies for the likes of Mosley because of his nationalism. Ewer, went and stayed a weekend at Jean Justices country cottage in the 1960's and explained to Justice -who was more of a 'centre liberal' his reasons for being attracted to aspects of the right wing Nationalist movement.
Alphon said he had had a long discussion with him two years before but its not clear whether he met him since-and if so where or when but all such groups have 'contacts" ofcourse so had they wanted to arrange something it could have been done easily through a middleman [or woman].
Best
Norma

[louisa]

I had no idea that Ewer stayed with Jean Justice. That wasn't mentioned in either of the Woffindon or the Paul Foot books.

[Natalie Severn]

Louisa, the specific remark is on page 241 of Le Crime de la Route A6 published by Olympia Press Paris in French to avoid libel in 1964.
Ewer was at Justice's weekend cottage as a guest and when he discovered Justice was going to write a book about the case.He told Justice 'if you talk about me or Janet you will have me to deal with and I am not Alphon.' He spoke in a similar somewhat threatening way to another person I have mentioned who I shall refer to here as M.G. and whose parent's friend was Dick Taverne [?] he changed from believing in H's innocence to believing him guilty--and then I think back again..This person, MG, developed a great interest in the case in his youth and went to see Ewer- in the late 80"s I think he said- and he spoke similarly to him---sort of don't dare say this or that about us etc .A bit of a one by all accounts.....

[louisa]

I know about the book Jean Justice wrote but as it was in French I didn't attempt to try and find it.

I don't know how anyone could think Hanratty was guilty because he just could not have been in the sweet shop in Liverpool at 5pm and then appear - on foot - in an obscure field, way down south in Slough, at 9pm. Then to do what he is alleged to have done. None of it makes sense.

However, if the facts of the case are applied to Peter Alpon it all makes perfect sense.