A6 Rebooted

[Limehouse]

I have just been reading up on Usher,the man Hanratty referred to as having a "withered hand".His hand was missing two fingers.
The more I read Paul Foot about the statements of Mr Usher ,in the Lime St left luggage office,who recognised his photo and remembered the name "Hanratty" as "Ratty", the more it seems to have been a regrettable decision by the defence not to call him as a witness.

Hi Norma - when you say that Mr Usher remembered the name 'Hanratty' as 'Ratty' - does this mean Hanratty or Mr Usher signed a book or something to record the left luggage transaction? Surely the defence searched for a signature at the left luggage office? Might there have been a book somewhere with Hanratty's name in it? That could have been very valuable evidence indeed.

Julie

[Natalie Severn]

Re Hanratty"s three encounters in Liverpool

Julie,
Unhappily for the defence,inquiries about the lady and girl in the sweet shop,the man on the steps of the billiard hall were all left to the police.
According to Det Chief Inspector Harold Whiffen of the Bedfordshire police who was present when Hanratty spoke to his solicitor, Hanratty said,"There is something else to prove I was in Liverpool because on the 22nd I left my suitcase in Lime Street Station.A man with a withered arm took it and I gave him my name."It was a different man who handed the case over to me.
Foot adds, "If this is what Mr Whiffen heard then it differs sharply from that of Mr Kleinman ,Hanratty"s solicitor. In Kleinman"s notes and in each of the statements made about the incident in the left luggage dept, Hanratty referred to "a withered hand".
The result? The police did interview Mr Usher but they also found a man working in the gentlemen"s toilet who had an artificial arm,
and who from time to time helped out with the left luggage.
The prosecution produced Stringer at the trial to say he could remember nothing of Hanratty that day though he was on duty .
more:

[Limehouse]

Thanks Norma. It does seem that Hanratty was very unlucky that nothing was written down to prove he left his luggage there. I suppose that to Hanratty - an arm and a hand may have been just the same thing.

[Natalie Severn]

The man in "left luggage with the "withered hand",Mr Usher

Usher stated: A lot of pressure was put on me not to get involved[by the men in the left luggage].The policeman told me they had the man they wanted [Peter Stringer the toilet attendant] and I need not go to the trial to testify.
Gillbanks discovered the police hadn"t even bothered to take a statement from Mr Usher!
Paul Foot ,after interviewing Usher in April 1970 and after analysing the information in its entirety was of the opinion that ,despite the apparent discrepancies in timing- Usher"s shift ended at 2pm,overtime was very common - sometimes for half an hour, sometimes for four hours ,so Usher could easily have been there when Hanratty arrived in Lime Street [ at around 4pm].

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Julie, A number was given out for the left luggage-exactly like it was at Chester Railway Left Luggage until some fifteen years ago when IRA threats caused it to close .People were given the kind of tiny bit of paper you get for a raffle in a local pub with a number on it and wo betide if you lost it.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but seriously its a complete nonsense to think Hanratty would ever have gone round at the age of twenty four with the pockets of his tapered trousers bulging out with "saved" bus or train tickets for weeks at a time -most people did not then and most people do not now------- no more than they "automatically" signed their names in B&B"s, ---either then or now.[Hotels are different].
Kind Regards,
Norma

[Natalie Severn]

Really? A lot of guessing that one of the houses he allegedly visitied had a dog? Pull the other one.
KR,
Vic.

Mrs Walker had a big alsation dog.Hanratty was pressed by his father when he visited him in prison to recall any other features of his visit to South Kinmel Street.He remembered that there was a large dog there.He remembered other significant features such as the green bath at the top of Mrs Jones"s house, that it had no front garden,that it backed close to the Railway,that it had two tables where he breakfasted,that it had a small paved yard at the back.IF all these were wild guesses he was taking tremendous risks.As it happened the significant stuff stood out in his memory and was accurate.The less memorable,after six months had passed,was lost.

[RonIpstone]

"The most accurate "clock" is the time the sun sets ,which,on August 22nd 1961 was just before 8.30 pm.Lighting up time is about 30 mins after so she saw him after 9 pm."

That doesn't make sense, surely lighting up time is before it gets dark.

At last I can agree with something written by Natalie or Norma, well almost. Back in 1961, when the provisions of the Road Traffic Act 1956 were in force, it could be said that 'lighting-up' of vehicles was required 30 minutes after sunset.

Nowadays things are a little more complicated. By the Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 a vehicle must display front and rear position lights and registration plate lights between the hours of sunset and sunrise. In other words you must switch on your sidelights at sunset, so to this extent lighting-up now occurs at sunset.

The 1989 regulations provide that headlights must be used (excepting certain roads) during the hours of darkness, defined as 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.

Hope this helps.

[Victor]

Moreover after the sickeningly arrogant and contemptuous treatment doled out to Mrs Jones by Swanwick,

Hi Norma,

Have you got any evidence for that other than the utterly biased account of the murderer's brother? Grace Jones was treated just like any other defence witness by the prosecution.

Sherrard was probably anxious to avoid any more such ghastly, abusive and insulting behaviour by the prosecution as that dished out to Mrs Jones,implying she was a greedy liar etc

Well then he wasn't doing his job properly. In any case Grace Jones was being greedy, that's why she had an extra bed to let out in her bathroom.

Mr Dutton and other Rhyl witnesses had far more to lose in terms of their reputations than Swanwick"s bad bunch of "witnesses for the prosecution"

Seeing as Valerie had already suffered being raped, shot, left for dead, several major operations and was still left paralysed then surely a few people can take a verbal battering... Sticks and stones.

Nudds and Langdale and other such seasoned liars produced by the Swanwick and the prosecution.

Which other "seasoned liars"?

But don"t be too insulting about the late Mr Trevor Dutton.His sons are alive and well and run a thriving business near Rhyl and they do not and have no reason to believe their father was anything but a man of sterling integrity who believed throughout his life that it was James Hanratty who tried to sell him a gold watch.

Your the one who keeps quoting Sherrard saying he wasn't lying, he was mistaken, or words to that effect.

People have long memories and some of the people involved in Rhyl are non too happy about the way they or their parents were treated.

Ah diddums.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

....and who,for crying out loud,gave them the description?-----"deep set brown eyes----not too deep set"?

Hi Norma,

You've answerd the question yourself, how on earth could Valerie describe his eyes as "deep set... not very deep set"? Mackie obviously got flustered and nervous appearing on TV and didn't get his facts straight first.

It could have been no one else but Valerie ,who went on to "identify" a certain "Mr Micheal Clark" as Gregsten"s killer and her rapist .

But then what does it matter so long as her mistakes didn"t send Michael Clark to the gallows?

He obviously was summarising the description that Valerie had given but getting it wrong, so that doesn't qualify as evidence that Valerie ever said brown eyes.

There was absolutely zero chance that she could have sent Michael Clark to the gallows and her identification was flawed partly because Hanratty wasn't present on that ID parade so she had no opportunity to ID the man who had raped her.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Firstly Victor - sociology is not science. It is a human science certainly - but it is not science.

Hi Julie,

I didn't mention sociology, I mentioned sociobiology.

Secondly - a diagnosis of dyslexia is not a medical diagnosis and a medically qualified doctor would not be especially qualified to make such a diagnosis.

So how do you distinguish between a dyslexic, a dunce and a liar (like Hanratty)?

A condition such as dyslexia would certainly account for someone not being able to find a place he had visited only once in the dark.

It wasn't dark when he left though was it?

It would also account for his poor reading and writing skills - but as we know - Hanratty was often verbally strong - and this is also typical of people with dyslexia as they draw on their language strengths which are more often verbal.

It is quite possible that he was dyslexic, but it's equally likely he was just poorly educated - a near-illiterate would spell words phonetically too.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

So how could she have been "certain" if she was able to go to an identity parade and pick out Micheal Clark as the murderer?[a man she later agreed she thought looked like Alphon].

Hi Norma,

All we can conclude is Michael Clark looked more like Hanratty than Alphon did. So what?

If you really want to know about these gangster"s read up on them.What they did and what they said were after all of crucial importance to the prosecution,[ the police , Mr Swanwick,etc] men whose word you implicitly " trust".

The evidence of Nudds and Langdale was not "of crucial importance" at all.

Yet all the time you pour scorn and derision on the word of decent, law abiding people from Rhyl, Mr Dutton ,Mr Larman ,Mrs Walker, Mrs Vincent ,Mrs Margaret Davies and Mrs Betty Davies the landlady of Ingledene,Mrs Jones and her daughter Brenda Harris .There is a massive inconsistency of judgment here somehow.

Not at all, I think they were all mistaken and when they were remembering an incident from six months previously it's completely understandable.

Read up about the statements that were "tampered with" ,statements Hanratty made when he was being questioned-the alterations of which appeared to make out he was lying;

What statements were tampered with?

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Mrs Walker had a big alsation dog.Hanratty was pressed by his father when he visited him in prison to recall any other features of his visit to South Kinmel Street.He remembered that there was a large dog there. He remembered other significant features such as the green bath at the top of Mrs Jones"s house, that it had no front garden,that it backed close to the Railway,that it had two tables where he breakfasted,that it had a small paved yard at the back.IF all these were wild guesses he was taking tremendous risks.As it happened the significant stuff stood out in his memory and was accurate.The less memorable,after six months had passed,was lost.

Hi Norma,

They don't have to be guesses, he could have got the information from a previous visit to Rhyl, or he could have been told it by one of his gangster mates, like Terry Evans who we know had got Charlie White to falsify evidence.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

At last I can agree with something written by Natalie or Norma, well almost. Back in 1961, when the provisions of the Road Traffic Act 1956 were in force, it could be said that 'lighting-up' of vehicles was required 30 minutes after sunset.

Hi Ron,

Nowadays street lights are automatic, but my point still stands it's pretty stupid for them to come on after it gets dark, otherwise what's the point of having them?

KR,
Vic.

[RonIpstone]

Hi Ron,

Nowadays street lights are automatic, but my point still stands it's pretty stupid for them to come on after it gets dark, otherwise what's the point of having them?

KR,
Vic.

Hello Vic,

I think that the term "lighting-up" refers to the lighting-up of vehicles rather than when street lights start operating. In 1961 lighting- up time was 30 minutes after sunset.

The point that Natalie or Norma was making was that it did not become
properly dark until some time after sunset. This is correct, as when the upper limb of the sun dips below the horizon light is still refracted from the
atmosphere onto the area which had just been in receipt of direct sunlight. Indeed in the early Road Traffic Acts lighting-up time was fixed as starting one hour after sunset.

Ron

[Dupplin Muir]

Hello all

One aspect of the 'corporate culture' within the police which impacted on the A6 murder is their extraordinary reluctance to consider the possibility of a premeditated attack.

Some murders are fairly straightforward: two men get into a fight outside a pub, and one ends up with his throat slashed with a broken bottle and dies. The police are comfortable with this sort of crime. However, in the case of a premeditated murder, there will usually be a considerable element of deliberate misdirection involved in the crime: the killer will seek to provide an alibi and/or attempt to pin the blame on someone else. This kind of crime makes the police nervous, because it implies that a large part of the evidence they have is simply worthless, but they don't know which part: if they have evidence indicating that Fred Bloggs is responsible, is this because Fred Bloggs is guilty and careless, or has someone planted the evidence to incriminate him? The result is that the police will almost always plump for the 'random thug' explanation for a murder, and aim to get Fred Bloggs convicted.

Obviously the best way to get an alibi is to hire someone else to carry out the crime. For the A6 case, I doubt we'll ever know what Ewer was doing at the time of the murder, but I would venture two predictions:

- He would have had a cast-iron alibi
- It would almost certainly have been the kind of alibi that could be created at short notice (eg a visit to a friend's house, or dinner at a favourite restaurant, where he could chat genially to the Maitre d' all evening

Just some thoughts...

DM