A6 Rebooted

[Alfie]

Sherrard and Alphon

Glasgow Herald, Feb 14 1962, reporting Sherrard's closing speech at the trial:

"Durrant alias Alphon, was the one man who could have cleared up the whole mystery as to which room he stayed in, but he was not called, the prosecution preferring to rely on Nudds. Mr Sherrard went on: ‘I confess it, I would have welcomed the opportunity of cross-examining Mr Alphon about certain matters.’"

And Lord Russell, page 87:

"The documentss corroborated his [Nudds'] second statement which dealt with Frederick Durrant who was, in fact, Alphon, and which Nudds subsequently withdrew and said that it was ‘all lies’. Mr Sherrard very properly said that he had been waiting and waiting for this matter to be cleared up satisfactorily, and that the only way in which this could have been done was if the Crown had called Alphon himself to say, ‘my name is Peter Louis Alphon. I signed the register in the name of Frederick Durrant and gave a wrong address for the following reasons. I stayed in room 6 and was never in room 24’."

My question is, was there anything preventing Sherrard from summoning Alphon to the witness-box himself?

[GUT]

My question is, was there anything preventing Sherrard from summoning Alphon to the witness-box himself?

Nothing.

But if he had he would not be able to cross-examine him, unless he could be declared hostile.

[Alfie]

Nothing.

But if he had he would not be able to cross-examine him, unless he could be declared hostile.

Thanks GUT, that's what I thought. But I don't quite get the import of what you're saying. What would the drawback be for Sherrard if he wasn't able to cross-examine Alphon? Surely he'd be able to elicit the answers to the questions he was posing during his examination-in-chief?

[NickB]

It would be interesting to see whether Swanwick referred to this in his closing remarks. He may have pointed out that Sherrard could have called Alphon himself.

It appears that Alphon was in Bedford during the trial.

I think Sherrard’s strategy was to drop heavy hints implicating Alphon. He could do this more effectively by not having Alphon in the witness box denying everything.

Sherrard said, in the context of who Nudds implicated, that the difference between Alphon and Hanratty was that one was in the running and the other was not. He also said: “One of the curiosities of the case was the resemblance between Alphon and the assailant.”
(initially misquoted by the Herald and corrected the next day)

Alphon was mentioned so many times the judge felt compelled to say:
“Members of the jury I cannot sufficiently press you here not to look upon this case as a case of saying ‘Was this murder committed by the prisoner or by Alphon?’ That is not the right approach at all.”

[barnflatwyngarde]

There was a documentary on the A6 on television a few years ago.

I remember that they showed a rare photo of Hanratty that was the spitting image of the police photofit based on Valerie Storie's description. It was this photofit that also had a striking resemblance to Alphon.

Also on the documentary was a prison worker (not sure if he was a warder) who stated that Hanratty confessed to him.

Bearing in mind the DNA evidence, I think it is a very big leap for anyone to seriously question Hanratty's guilt.

[barnflatwyngarde]

I attach a link to a talk Hanratty's lawyer gave, where he said that in effect the evidence was too weak to convict, but that he did think Hanratty was guilty.

Apologies if this has already been posted.

https://web.archive.org/web/20050212101709/http://www.clsg.org.uk/hanratty.htm

[Graham]

The photo of Alphon posted by NickB looks disconcertingly like my stepson....

Strange, isn't it, how Alphon is usually described as a scruffy sod, yet here he is looking smarter than a new pin!

BFW,

which documentary are you referring to? There were several, and I think I have them all (on video tape). It's a fact that when Hanratty was at the Frances' house one evening shortly after the crime, a photofit was flashed onto the screen, and Charlotte France said to Hanratty, "That looks just like you!" But of course Hanratty's supporters continue to deny that either of the 'published' photofits look anything like Hanratty.

The 'prison worker' you refer to sounds like a Mr John Needham, who was an RAF Police corporal at RAF Halton. He said that he was guarding Hanratty during an ID parade at Halton, and stated that Hanratty was 'openly cocky' about the case, telling Needham that he had done it, that the police knew he had done it, but couldn't prove it. The thing is that no ID parade was held at Halton, but I understand that some RAF Halton personnel were seconded onto the ID parade at Stoke Mandeville Hospital, the parade in which Valerie Storey identified Hanratty as Gregsten's killer and her rapist. Mr Needham was basically mistaken. Mr Needham also said that Hanratty was smoking; Hanratty did not smoke.

There is however a possibility that Hanratty did confess to the A6 Crime, perhaps on at least one occasion; but more of that anon.

Welcome to the A6 Case, Mr BFW.

Graham

[NickB]

Needham said on the Channel 4 programme: “I was told that this was Hanratty and that he’d been to the local hospital for an ID parade to pick him out as a possible suspect in the A6 murder, and I was to look after him.” So it appears that the meeting was after the ID parade at the hospital.

Needham said in the Independent: “I asked him if he'd like a cigarette and a cup of coffee.” So it could be that Hanratty accepted the offer of a cigarette, as he did during the carjack, even though he didn’t normally smoke.

There is however a possibility that Hanratty did confess to the A6 Crime, perhaps on at least one occasion; but more of that anon.

Apart from Langdale’s claim, there is also what John McVicar told Dick Taverne when asked if he thought Hanratty was guilty.

JM - Guilty as hell.
DT - How do you know?
JM - Because in prison he used to boast about how he raped the girl and how it still gave him a hard-on.
(link to Taverne’s book in post 1640)

[GUT]

Thanks GUT, that's what I thought. But I don't quite get the import of what you're saying. What would the drawback be for Sherrard if he wasn't able to cross-examine Alphon? Surely he'd be able to elicit the answers to the questions he was posing during his examination-in-chief?

G'day Alfie

In Examination in chief he can't ask leading questions, in cross he can. In chief basically he has to take the answer he's given in cross he can dig deeper and challenge the first answer, I once heard it put this way:

In Examination in chief a witness tells their story

In Cross examination they tell the questioner's story.

[Graham]

Needham said on the Channel 4 programme: “I was told that this was Hanratty and that he’d been to the local hospital for an ID parade to pick him out as a possible suspect in the A6 murder, and I was to look after him.” So it appears that the meeting was after the ID parade at the hospital.

Needham said in the Independent: “I asked him if he'd like a cigarette and a cup of coffee.” So it could be that Hanratty accepted the offer of a cigarette, as he did during the carjack, even though he didn’t normally smoke.



Apart from Langdale’s claim, there is also what John McVicar told Dick Taverne when asked if he thought Hanratty was guilty.

JM - Guilty as hell.
DT - How do you know?
JM - Because in prison he used to boast about how he raped the girl and how it still gave him a hard-on.
(link to Taverne’s book in post 1640)

As I (and Leonard Miller) recall it, Mr Needham was saying that this conversation with Hanratty took place at RAF Halton. Hanratty was never at RAF Halton. On top of which, I rather suspect that once Valerie had identified Hanratty as her attacker, he would have been literally surrounded by police, and not RAF police, and very quickly removed from the hospital.

So what on earth would John McVicar, big-time badman, know or care about the minor doings of a nondescript such as James Hanratty? Where did he get this information? From Langdale? From someone he knew who knew who knew Langdale? Or what? Taverne was never a supporter of the 'Hanratty Is Innocent' campaign. In fact, Jean Justice stood against him in a by-election at Lincoln.

Louise Anderson claimed in News Of The World 27 November 1966 that Hanratty had told her that he'd killed a man. This claim can be accepted or not. Up to you. I don't think that she was quite the hysterical scatter-brained individual she was made out to be.

Charlotte France claimed in an article in the Sunday Pictorial of 18 March 1962 that Hanratty had told her, quote, "I've done something that scares me. I've never done this thing before and I can't understand it".

Both of the above quotes may be apocryphal, but in my view they do tend to illustrate that there is at least a possibility that Hanratty was not as strong and silent as some would like to believe,

Graham

[NickB]

I agree Needham claimed to have met Hanratty at Halton. I was just (rather clumsily) saying that he did not claim to be ‘guarding Hanratty during an ID parade at Halton’.

Taverne was never a supporter of the 'Hanratty Is Innocent' campaign.

Taverne says he was one of the few MPs who signed a commons motion calling for a posthumous pardon for Hanratty, and was disappointed when this was rejected by the government.
Then when he became a Home Office minister he asked to examine the files.
“Much to my dismay, after study of the documents I concluded that the evidence that Hanratty was guilty was overwhelming.”

[Alfie]

Hanratty and the handkerchief

I've not long finished reading Foot, Woffinden, Hawser and Russell, as well as the reports of the trial in the Glasgow Herald and Evening Times, and I cannot recollect reading anywhere that Hanratty confirmed in court that the handkerchief found on the bus was his.

Yet this seems to be accepted as a fact on this board.

I seem to recall the poster P.L.A. writing some time back that he thought it was a fantasy. Could somebody please point me to a source for this 'fact'?

Cheers

Alan

[NickB]

This rumour appears to have started, or at least been given credence, in post 2,726 by ‘Tony’ on the original thread (page 273) where an apparent exchange between Swanwick and Hanratty is quoted.

It doesn’t make sense to me because the Appeal Judgment makes no mention of it - either as a prosecution point or when presenting the DNA evidence regarding the hanky.

[Alfie]

Paddington or Euston?

I was looking back at Hanratty's movements on Monday, August 21, and reached the point where he arrived at the Broadway House Hotel on Portman Square and, finding it full, went on instead to the Vienna Hotel in Sutherland Avenue.

I recalled some poster (it escapes me now who) saying that he probably went to the Broadway because it was close to Euston Station, so I got the trusty A-Z out and - blow me down - saw that Portman Square was quite some distance from Euston, but - guess what? - very much closer to Paddington.

The AA route planner says Paddington was about 1.2 miles away, whereas Euston was a 2.5 mile walk - more than double the distance.

What about the Vienna? AA says it was 1.4 miles from Paddington, but 3.5 miles from Euston.

If Euston was his destination, why go to a hotel so far away?

Doesn't this suggest that Hanratty always planned to go to Paddington on the morning of the 22nd, and when he was redirected from the Broadway House asked to be put up somewhere within an easy walk of that station?

[Alfie]

This rumour appears to have started, or at least been given credence, in post 2,726 by ‘Tony’ on the original thread (page 273) where an apparent exchange between Swanwick and Hanratty is quoted.

It doesn’t make sense to me because the Appeal Judgment makes no mention of it - either as a prosecution point or when presenting the DNA evidence regarding the hanky.

Thanks Nick. That's one less blind alley I need to blunder down.

Does Tony still post? If he does he might like to say where he found that exchange between Hanratty and Swanwick.