A6 Rebooted

[Spitfire]

[I]. This was his initial story before the Rhyl alibi was revealed and quite likely to be true in my view.

What is quite likely to be true? The initial story or the Rhyl alibi. You seem to be saying that they are both true or at least likely to be true.

A simple question, where do you say Hanratty was on the night of 22/23 August 1961?

[cobalt]

The original embargo was until 2040, which I suggested would in theory have been Valerie Storie’s 100th birthday.
The extension until 2063 would be 101 years after the trial, if that is significant.

The situation regarding secrecy with the A6 murder is similar to that in the JFK assassination: in both cases the official version is that a lone nutter was the culprit. Yet, bizarrely, this simple explanation requires certain documents to be kept from public view. Why?

In the case of Oswald, the need for secrecy is pretty much self-evident in that he had connections with the security services, some of which would cause severe embarrassment. There would always be political sensitivity anyway when the victim happens to be the president of the USA.

But the A6 Case? We have exhausted most of the conspiracy theories here without much success. Gregsten as a cold war scientist involved in top secret work? Gregsten stumbling on corruption in relation to Ernie Marples, crooked government minister in charge of transport policy? Gregsten and Ms Storie picking up a ‘contact’ and receiving a different sort of payoff than anticipated? Gregsten and Ms Storie skinny-dipping at Clivedon along with Profumo and Christine Keeler? None of the above makes much sense from what we know, especially since the ‘hitman’ was so appallingly inept.

Yet it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that there is some political reason for placing such an embargo on documentation referring to a case from 1961. The two characters who emerged unscathed from the A6 case were Alphon and Ewer, both keen observers of the trial itself. Alphon was able to commit assault, threaten verbally and even admit to the crime with astonishing impunity whilst successfully suing the police for wrongful arrest. That takes some doing for an alleged oddball. Maybe we should dig deeper into his father’s work at Scotland Yard.

Ewer of course was connected to the ESP vision of Mrs. Gregsten which he later denied, although the police were making enquiries for some reason in the shopping arcade where he had premises. Dixie France found it necessary to visit Mr. Ewer after the crime, apparently to offer his condolences. Like Alphon, Ewer had the wherewithal to sue those questioning his role in the A6 murder, being sensitive to the allegation that he had benefited romantically from the death of Mr.Gregsten. It would be interesting to know exactly what Mr.Ewer’s role was during WW2.

Finally, in relation to both these persons above, it was Alphon who came up with a motive for the kidnap in the cornfield. He claimed the purpose was to end the affair between Gregsten and Ms Storie, although I am not sure he ever named William Ewer as the instigator. It has been pointed out that this plan was unlikely to be very successful and may have actually driven them closer together. Perhaps that was the point, ensuring that Gregsten left the family home for good and divorced his wife.

[cobalt]

A simple question, where do you say Hanratty was on the night of 22/23 August 1961

The simplest answer is that he was in Rhyl as witnesses testified at the trial.

His story of the three mates from Liverpool, which I think he abandoned, was presumably an encounter involving stolen goods which they were unprepared to support.

[moste]

A simple question, where do you say Hanratty was on the night of 22/23 August 1961

The simplest answer is that he was in Rhyl as witnesses testified at the trial.

His story of the three mates from Liverpool, which I think he abandoned, was presumably an encounter involving stolen goods which they were unprepared to support.

Brilliant posts both.

My feelings on the case precisely.

Even the' hit man 'being inept though, could have been for maximum effect,

after professionally disposing of Gregsten, he goes on to mimic an amateur

where Storie was concerned.

[moste]

"]Maybe we should dig deeper into his father’s work at Scotland Yard."

Often thought this myself.

I wonder what if anything. Chief Super. Mathews found out?

[Spitfire]

A simple question, where do you say Hanratty was on the night of 22/23 August 1961

The simplest answer is that he was in Rhyl as witnesses testified at the trial.

His story of the three mates from Liverpool, which I think he abandoned, was presumably an encounter involving stolen goods which they were unprepared to support.

So Hanratty was at Ingledene.

Hanratty was not in Liverpool with three mates.

Balmer has nothing to do with the case. Hanratty could not get support for his Liverpool alibi which was based on a lie.

As you are now tying yourself to a Rhyl alibi as supported by Mrs Grace Jones could you be so kind as to say in which room in Ingledene Hanratty stayed?

In the short time available the prosecution was able to rebut the Jones/Hanratty evidence by showing the Ingledene was full on the night of 22/23 August.

[Graham]

Been said before, but needs I think to be said again: It was not Hanratty who 'identified' Ingledene as the place where he'd stayed on the night of 22 August, but Joe Gillbanks who traipsed around Rhyl knocking on doors and showing just the single photo - of Hanratty - until someone (Mrs Jones) said she 'thought she recognised' the subject. Had Hanratty himself given even slight but specific details of the place he claimed to have stayed at before Gillbanks set off for Rhyl, and had these details been confirmed, then Hanratty's alibi may have stood a chance. A description of a place 'near the railway' applied to literally dozens of Rhyl b&b's, and his description of the landlady -which incidentally wasn't much like Mrs Jones - could have applied to dozens of middle-aged b&b landladies anywhere in the country. Gillbanks himself effectively shot down the alibi by virtue of the single photo.

Alphon's father was little more than a minor clerk at Scotland Yard, and seemed not much interested in what his wayward son was up to. Alphon himself admitted that he didn't 'get on' with his father. To try and insert Mr Alphon Sr into an imagined conspiracy is ludicrous IMHO.

Having left the A6 alone for quite a long time I recently came back to it thinking that in 2018 just about the only way this case could be resolved in favour of James Hanratty would be for new, important and supportive evidence to emerge. Woffinden still states on his website that a 'new edition' of his book is in the offing, but hasn't been seen yet, and to publish a 'new edition' would really depend upon new supportive evidence being found. The much-vaunted 2011 appeal never happened, due presumably to a lack of worthwhile new evidence and a lack of finances. Bindman & Co no longer represent the Hanratty family and their cause. Nearly all the major players in the A6 Case are dead. If there are any ongoing investigations, then I'm certainly not aware of them. Unless the police and possibly other records are opened to public view before the lot of us on these threads shuffle off, and show that they contain astonishing new evidence to prove or even suggest his innocence, then I believe that the only sensible conclusion is to accept the verdict of the 1961 trial.

Graham

[Derrick]

Been said before, but needs I think to be said again: It was not Hanratty who 'identified' Ingledene as the place where he'd stayed on the night of 22 August, but Joe Gillbanks who traipsed around Rhyl knocking on doors and showing just the single photo - of Hanratty - until someone (Mrs Jones) said she 'thought she recognised' the subject. Had Hanratty himself given even slight but specific details of the place he claimed to have stayed at before Gillbanks set off for Rhyl, and had these details been confirmed, then Hanratty's alibi may have stood a chance. A description of a place 'near the railway' applied to literally dozens of Rhyl b&b's, and his description of the landlady -which incidentally wasn't much like Mrs Jones - could have applied to dozens of middle-aged b&b landladies anywhere in the country. Gillbanks himself effectively shot down the alibi by virtue of the single photo.

Gillbanks was told by Kleinmann to enquire at boarding houses and ask if they had a green bath in the attic. You failed to mention that.

...Bindman & Co no longer represent the Hanratty family and their cause...

Reference for this please.

[caz]

Even the' hit man 'being inept though, could have been for maximum effect,

after professionally disposing of Gregsten, he goes on to mimic an amateur

where Storie was concerned.

Hi moste,

I'm not really seeing the evidence for Gregsten having been disposed of 'professionally'. Unless Valerie Storie was lying [and I know you think she was ] or seriously confused after the event [which I admit is just possible], then it would appear the gunman shot Gregsten in a panicky, knee-jerk reaction to his sudden movement with the duffle bag.

The whole thing - the long drive, the chatting to his victims, the first, fatal shooting and finally the getaway, without even making sure his female victim could not survive and tell the tale, screams 'inept' to me. Why could Gregsten and/or Storie not have been shot dead where they were in the cornfield, and any valuables taken, if this was a hit man pretending it was just an opportunistic stick-up and robbery? Seems an awful lot of trouble to go to, to take 'inept' to the extreme in this way.

If one considers this most peculiar crime as the work of a genuinely inept, borderline psychopathic opportunist, trying out his first stick-up, using his very first firearm, the name Hanratty fits the bill all too well IMHO. If someone else had done it, it would be almost as if they had known Hanratty inside out and set out to impersonate "Jim" and his "finking" from the get-go.

Love,

Caz
X

[NickB]

I would likewise.

The 23rd May article is reproduced by Natalie on a thread entitled 'Extracts from 23rd May Sunday Times article' or something like that (I am on a primitiive laptop).

From memory they specifically say they do not believe Ewer was involved, presumably on the advice of their lawyers, but point out how his statement to them contained errors.

[Spitfire]

I'm not really seeing the evidence for Gregsten having been disposed of 'professionally'. Unless Valerie Storie was lying [and I know you think she was ] or seriously confused after the event [which I admit is just possible], then it would appear the gunman shot Gregsten in a panicky, knee-jerk reaction to his sudden movement with the duffle bag.

A professional hitman executing a pre-prepared plan would not shoot his victim whilst the latter was sitting in the driving seat of the car in which the former intended to drive away.

A professional hitman would have killed Valerie Storie and not left her alive.

[Graham]

Derrick,

as has been debated and discussed for years on this Forum and elsewhere, green baths were not exactly uncommon in 1961. There was one at my parents' house around that time.

Re: Bindman & Co, I am sure I read on this Forum some time ago that they no longer represented the Hanratty family. Perhaps Natalie posted to that effect. If Limehouse is still in contact with the family, perhaps she can confirm or otherwise now she's posting again.

Graham

[Derrick]

...green baths were not exactly uncommon in 1961...

Graham

Gillbanks and his batman certainly enquired at a heck of lot of boarding houses in Rhyl that didn't have one in the attic.

Derrick

[Graham]

The 23rd May article is reproduced by Natalie on a thread entitled 'Extracts from 23rd May Sunday Times article' or something like that (I am on a primitiive laptop).

From memory they specifically say they do not believe Ewer was involved, presumably on the advice of their lawyers, but point out how his statement to them contained errors.

Nick,

go to Members List, Natalie Severn, Search all threads started by her, then 'Extracts from Sunday Times article of May 23rd 1971' and there are links to 5 articles. I haven't read them myself yet.

Graham

[NickB]

Hi Nick

Where does this quote come from? It sounds like an answer given by Hanratty to Swanwick during cross-examination, but it does not seem to appear in either of the books by Foot or Woffinden.

Yes it was an answer to Swanwick. But he is only saying that he stayed in a New Brighton b&b on the second occasion - ie when he was on the run. It was the 'spend a night' expression that I was remembering when I mistakenly said he claimed to have stayed at a b&b there after Rhyl.

I thought he said he saw Guns of Navarone in the afternoon. I don't know how long it took to get across to New Brighton and back, and how frequently the ferry ran, but it looks like he is packing in too much - as he certainly did with the Liverpool/Rhyl join in order to try and keep the sweetshop in the new alibi.