Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A6 Rebooted

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

  • I suspect that the gunman wasn't 'temporarily mad' but a person who was quite mad most of the time. A mental case in many respects, but not enough to be locked up for it (somebody like Alphon?).

    I just can't imagine a normally sane person committing a crime of this sort, even if a bit of 'moon madness' had set in (as the newspapers described it).
    This is simply my opinion

    Comment


    • Originally posted by caz View Post
      Hi Nats,

      I said comfortable in his 'oddball' skin - meaning a permanent weirdo, yes indeed, rather than someone only temporarily mad enough to do what the A6 rapist and gunman did. This was very much a one-off crime, and Hanratty - who was hanged for it - gives us the obvious explanation. The guilty man was taken out of society.

      You need Alphon to have been very crafty if you want him to have committed this singularly shocking crime, then managed to control himself sufficiently not to do the like again, while rambling on about his involvement yet pulling the wool over smarter eyes than his own.

      Love,

      Caz
      X
      Caz,
      I have said before that my mum worked for years as an art therapist working with both the occupational therapists and the people with the severe mental health problems.
      I know of a man who had been hospitalised for a spell having suffered paranoid schizophrenic episodes.He was a bit older than Alphon was---and was considered sufficiently well to go home.He hadn't been more than a day when he killed his wife----the doctors had never suspected such a thing to happen.But it can,when triggered by sufficient stress.It is a baffling illness and people who suffer it are not 'permanently dangerous' and certainly not permanently mad---though they can appear odd balls.
      A crucial test at the hospital was always,"Does this person's work record match his mental abilities?' ---and in almost every case it did [does] not-in fact its frequently found the person will be in a menial job where nobody expects too much of them like being a night watchman of a relatively secure place---then its discovered by some accident or other that he knows more about the solar system than Patrick Moore ---again this from a typical case -or the person could even be a tramp---that is quite common in fact too-Alphon veered towards that sleeping under the pier at Southend on the nights of 20th and 21st August.Alphon got a scholarship to an exclusive school indicating high cognitive ability---but did he do anything with it?The truth is he did not.He occupied himself studying strange religions , joining the fascist party and bumming about---absolutely case book classical stuff.

      But looking mad every day is far from the case---an oddball yes but not barking!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by louisa View Post
        I suspect that the gunman wasn't 'temporarily mad' but a person who was quite mad most of the time. A mental case in many respects, but not enough to be locked up for it (somebody like Alphon?).

        I just can't imagine a normally sane person committing a crime of this sort, even if a bit of 'moon madness' had set in (as the newspapers described it).

        I think you may be right Louisa!

        Comment


        • You both seem to be missing my point. If Hanratty didn't commit this crime, the person who did was evidently able to control himself sufficiently well mentally and physically for the rest of his life, not to do anything as mad or dangerous again, and not to say or do anything for the rest of his life that would have given the game away about his involvement in the A6 case.

          It's a big ask for anyone with the kind of mental health problems being described here. Alphon was either very clever, cool, calm and calculating when deliberately not quite incriminating himself, or he couldn't have done so because he was innocent.

          Love,

          Caz
          X
          "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


          Comment


          • Originally posted by caz View Post
            You both seem to be missing my point. If Hanratty didn't commit this crime, the person who did was evidently able to control himself sufficiently well mentally and physically for the rest of his life, not to do anything as mad or dangerous again, and not to say or do anything for the rest of his life that would have given the game away about his involvement in the A6 case.

            It's a big ask for anyone with the kind of mental health problems being described here. Alphon was either very clever, cool, calm and calculating when deliberately not quite incriminating himself, or he couldn't have done so because he was innocent.

            Love,

            Caz
            X
            How do the KNOW the person responsible 'didn't do anything as mad or dangerous again'?? If it wasn't Alphon or Hanratty, it could have been someone who went on to have a completely different criminal career, almost equally wicked and dangerous, but who was never identified as the A6 killer.

            Comment


            • However, if it was Alphon then, for my money, post-murder, he behaved in the kind of erratic way that we might expect an unbalanced person to behave after committing these crimes.

              His description of the day after the crimes when he met Charles Frances in Southend sounds very plausible to me. I know there were discrepancies in his story but he tended to put these in, even in his later confessions (possibly to cover himself). He certainly behaved very oddly, tying up a lady in Richmond and asking for food, harassing people on the phone, that kind of thing.

              Alphon's video confession also sounded very convincing, to me anyway.
              This is simply my opinion

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Limehouse View Post
                How do the KNOW the person responsible 'didn't do anything as mad or dangerous again'?? If it wasn't Alphon or Hanratty, it could have been someone who went on to have a completely different criminal career, almost equally wicked and dangerous, but who was never identified as the A6 killer.
                Absolutely true Julie!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by louisa View Post
                  However, if it was Alphon then, for my money, post-murder, he behaved in the kind of erratic way that we might expect an unbalanced person to behave after committing these crimes.

                  His description of the day after the crimes when he met Charles Frances in Southend sounds very plausible to me. I know there were discrepancies in his story but he tended to put these in, even in his later confessions (possibly to cover himself). He certainly behaved very oddly, tying up a lady in Richmond and asking for food, harassing people on the phone, that kind of thing.

                  Alphon's video confession also sounded very convincing, to me anyway.
                  This is very true Louisa. As I said in my last post, he behaved in such an extraordinary and suspicious way post A6 murder that it raised the alarm with the other guests in the Alexandra Ct Hotel---sufficiently to have him hauled in for questioning by the police.Whereupon his mother provided an immediate alibi for him which she later withdrew-with the approval of her husband,Alphon's father.
                  Juliana Galves , the manager of The Vienna Hotel did provide an alibi for him at the time but later withdrew it ,on 13th September,saying
                  that she had not set eyes on Alphon until the middle of the day on the 23rd August.This left Alphon with no alibi for that night or the following morning.


                  I am glad Louisa, that you included his statement [to Paul Foot] -in a taped telephone conversation about having agreed to meet France in Southend.That had been the direction of the route the Morris Minor was taking when it was heading towards Redbridge where the car was abandoned .His words have a chilling authenticity here as he describes France and himself meeting up in Southend as agreed to hand over the gun and goes on to describe France's anger and distress at the way it had all turned out.
                  When you tie this up with France telling the police ,when he was questioned in late September, about the back seat of a bus being a good place to hide stuff and France then going on to apologise to William Ewer about Gregsten getting killed---this last apparently happening after the trial and therefore only days before France committed suicide----then you must begin to ask questions about this chap.
                  Last edited by Natalie Severn; 01-17-2012, 11:48 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Absolutely. Also I get the impression that Charles France was a nervous, probably terrified, little man after the events. He must have been scared witless to have become involved in a high profile murder case when the intention had been simply to scare a courting couple with a gun. Alphon's description of them both going into an Angus Steak House and France not being able to eat anything sounds about right - he was probably sick with nerves, unlike Alphon who seemed to take it all in his stride.

                    France also demonstrated his fears by going into William Ewer's shop and talking nervously to him. We'll never know what was actually said because we only have Ewer's account. I think Ewer only told the police about the encounter because he was afraid that France had been seen either going into or coming out of his shop.
                    This is simply my opinion

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Limehouse View Post
                      How do the KNOW the person responsible 'didn't do anything as mad or dangerous again'?? If it wasn't Alphon or Hanratty, it could have been someone who went on to have a completely different criminal career, almost equally wicked and dangerous, but who was never identified as the A6 killer.
                      Er, we know because a crime of this nature (ie equally mad or dangerous - not less so) - particularly an unsolved one - is pretty much as rare as the Miller's Court murder and mutilation of Mary Jane Kelly! If the person responsible for the A6 murder and rape had ever pulled off a repeat performance I suggest we would not only have heard about it, but you clever old Hanratty supporters would have put two and two together and forced a successful appeal in no time, whether or not the man was caught.

                      Love,

                      Caz
                      X
                      "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by louisa View Post
                        However, if it was Alphon then, for my money, post-murder, he behaved in the kind of erratic way that we might expect an unbalanced person to behave after committing these crimes.
                        That's an extraordinary thing to claim, Louisa. How are you remotely qualified to judge what sort of person typically commits a thankfully all too rare crime like this, and how they are likely to behave afterwards? Rape and murder are not crimes generally associated with 'balanced' individuals, yet the vast majority of rapists and murderers do everything possible not to get caught, and do not go out of their way to draw negative attention to themselves. Those who just can't help themselves, as you are suggesting was the case with an 'erratic' Alphon, are the most likely to incriminate themselves and least likely to outwit everyone from the authorities to the Hanratty supporters.

                        What you are suggesting is that you can see Alphon was the 'type' and to hell with any actual case against him. But as he was self-evidently not unbalanced enough to incriminate himself, he must be presumed incapable of doing so and therefore innocent. For someone who seems so concerned about poor Hanratty not receiving a fair trial, you are all too ready to put the boot into a man who, like thousands of others, was an unbalanced oddball who was more comfortable with fantasy than reality.

                        Hanratty behaved in exactly the way a desperate, but not very bright criminal would have behaved after committing a desperate, not very bright one-off capital crime: he lied about his whereabouts and movements, to try and distance himself from the A6. Alphon did the polar opposite: he lied to try and put himself at the heart of the A6 action. They were both incompetent liars, which is why they both failed. Had this unbalanced Alphon really been the guilty party, it should have been a doddle to expose him if by some faint chance he had not exposed himself.

                        Love,

                        Caz
                        X
                        "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                        Comment


                        • Caz - in your above post you wrote:

                          "That's an extraordinary thing to claim, Louisa. How are you remotely qualified to judge what sort of person typically commits a thankfully all too rare crime like this, and how they are likely to behave afterwards?"

                          I could equally ask you the same question because your last paragraph states::

                          "Hanratty behaved in exactly the way a desperate, but not very bright criminal would have behaved after committing a desperate, not very bright one-off capital crime."



                          Incidentally Caz, For all you know I could be qualified to judge somebody's personality.

                          Maybe if we could accept that each one of us is allowed to make their own judgement of this case (based on our own personal opinions) without being impolite towards eachother, then we can get on examining the case impartially. I think we all have interesting and valid points to bring to the table.
                          Last edited by louisa; 01-19-2012, 10:03 PM.
                          This is simply my opinion

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by caz View Post
                            Er, we know because a crime of this nature (ie equally mad or dangerous - not less so) - particularly an unsolved one - is pretty much as rare as the Miller's Court murder and mutilation of Mary Jane Kelly! If the person responsible for the A6 murder and rape had ever pulled off a repeat performance I suggest we would not only have heard about it, but you clever old Hanratty supporters would have put two and two together and forced a successful appeal in no time, whether or not the man was caught.

                            Love,

                            Caz
                            X
                            What if the person responsible for the A6 crime had committed equally mad and dangerous crimes (such as armed robberies and kidnaps) and had been punished for those but never identified as the A6 killer?

                            You are looking for an identical crime, but if it was such an unplanned, one-off event as you seem to think, the man responsible could have gone on to other types of crime and been caught and punished, but never identified as the A6 killer.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by caz View Post
                              Hanratty behaved in exactly the way a desperate, but not very bright criminal would have behaved after committing a desperate, not very bright one-off capital crime: he lied about his whereabouts and movements, to try and distance himself from the A6. A
                              Well the judge certainly didn't think so, Caz.He was at at pains to point out that a person not having an alibi does not make that person guilty----Alphon had no alibi either!
                              In so far as Hanratty's behaviour post 23rd August was concerned it was quite in keeping with that of any young man involved in petty crime.
                              First off he wanted to buy himself a sports car -all he needed to do was sell the diamond solitaire ring he had stolen worth 350 get a licence to buy a car -the deposit for this being 113.He found Louise Anderson couldn't afford it so he thought he might try his luck in Liverpool where he had sold jewellery to a jewellery shop on July 26th ie just before he took himself off to Rhyl for the first of the two visits .In Rhyl he met and got friendly with Terry Evans with whom he had had an overnight natter about who might be able to 'sell on stolen stuff'.
                              Once he sold his stuff---in either Liverpool or London or both---his next business was getting himself a driving licence and he went to Ireland,hired a car and got himself fixed up with an Irish Driving License.
                              Then with a 113 deposit he purchased a Sunbeam Alpine Sports car and took Louise Anderson, Gladys Deacon, and Mary Meaden out in it.He also went to the London Palladium with Mary Meaden-who said in her testimony in court that he always behaved like a gentleman-never forced himself in any way and with whom she had no sexual contact even though they saw each other and went out with each other several times.

                              Nothing in any of those 5 weeks since the murder indicates he had played any part in the A6 atrocity.
                              Best, Norma
                              Last edited by Natalie Severn; 01-19-2012, 11:15 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by caz View Post
                                he lied about his whereabouts and movements, to try and distance himself from the A6.X
                                Caz - It sounds as if you are making a statement of fact about Hanratty. Whether he lied or not regarding his whereabouts is a matter of some conjecture.
                                This is simply my opinion

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X