scan of Hanratty statement re Rhyl alibi

[Graham]

Hi Norma,

The prison doctor is on record as saying that Hanratty could both read and write and explained this quite carefully,aware of previous comments made to the contrary it would appear! Hanratty's cursive writing at the top of the appeal for clemency certainly reveals a writer with reasonable competence-just as the prison doctor indicated in 1961.

Then why did Hanratty bother to trouble Gerrard Leonard to write postcards for him when he was on his Irish jaunt? You can't have it both ways....

I have never, ever, been required to sign a visitors book in any one of them and indeed

Then according to what I've very recently found out they're breaking the law.

As Mrs Jones and her daughter said the house was full and Hanratty ,like other unofficial guests she had put up when they were full up ,breakfasted in their back room -away from

And Mrs Jones and her daughter were also breaking the law. And Swanwick caught them out.

Huge huge risks all of them if Hanratty made the whole thing up in the middle of his trial and Ingledene had looked nothing at all like he had described

!

As far as the night of 22 August was concerned he most certainly did make the whole thing up in the middle of his trial when he realised his Liverpool 'alibi' wouldn't wash, and based his description of Ingledene upon that of many b&b's he'd formerly stayed in. Even his description of Mrs Jones was inaccurate.

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Graham,
The prison doctor is on record as saying that Hanratty could both read and write and explained this quite carefully,aware of previous comments made to the contrary it would appear! Hanratty's cursive writing at the top of the appeal for clemency certainly reveals a writer with reasonable competence-just as the prison doctor indicated in 1961.
With regards to these Boarding Houses you talk about Graham-and with all respect;I travel to Wales at least half a dozen times a year and stop in Stratford on Avon at least three or four times each year when I go to the Shakespeare plays.I have never, ever, been required to sign a visitors book in any one of them and indeed when I have chosen to write in one it has always been of my own volition to say how impressed I/we are with the kindness or comforts of the place etc and I/we usually , though not always, pay cash .
The exception is when we have stayed in hotels and then we have been required to sign the register.
The guests Mrs Jones had that week were either regulars or people on business like Mr Sayle who was someone who was out from dawn to dusk during his stay.
Hanratty says in his very first notes to his solicitor -ie the night of his very first mention of Rhyl- that he was originally going to stay at the B&B one night only---he remembers most notably the green bath at the top of that house -he asks if he can leave his case and only later decided to stay the extra night.He tells the solicitor there were two tables in the room he breakfasted in -why-? As Mrs Jones and her daughter said the house was full and Hanratty ,like other unofficial guests she had put up when they were full up ,breakfasted in their back room -away from the other guests and would certainly not sign any visitors book -thereby making their stay 'officially noted'.
Huge huge risks all of them if Hanratty made the whole thing up in the middle of his trial and Ingledene had looked nothing at all like he had described !
AtB
Norma

[Graham]

I satyed in a B&B only a few weeks ago and nobody asked me to sign a book.

Hi Julie,

Registration and Data Protection
Key facts
•All serviced and self-catering accommodation premises must keep a record of all guests over the age of 16. The record should include full name and nationality.
•If you hold any personal information on guests or any other individuals, including employees (other than on odd scraps of paper), the Data Protection Act applies.
•You must keep each guest's details for at least 12 months.

Full acknowledgment to www.accommodationknowhow.co.uk

I have not been able to discover if registration was compulsory in 1961, but I wouldn't mind betting that it was.

Before I retired I stayed at many hotels, large and small; b&b's; and pubs with rooms, and I can't recall a single instance of my not being asked to sign in via a register or card. Whether I gave them my real name and address, or not, was up to me. These days, virtually everyone pays by credit- or debit-card anyway, so presumably can be traced if necessary.

Never mind what Swanwick got up to in court, Grace Jones did have guests' registration books, and I am 100% certain that had JH actually signed in she would have been able to find it. Or at least some entry that she could have identified with him. Any argument that he was totally illiterate doesn't really stand up to scrutiny, as it seems that he was able to sign the book at The Hotel Vienna, albeit using an alias. And there are other instances of his being at least able to write in a very basic fashion, but it seems he wasn't up to composing anything like a letter or a postcard, viz, the postcards from Ireland and the letters he wrote from prison.

All the best,

Graham

[Limehouse]

I satyed in a B&B only a few weeks ago and nobody asked me to sign a book.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Caz,
I have always been amazed by some of the comments I have seen about staying in Bed and Breakfasts-its something I have done frequently since moving to London--I often drive up to the North West via Stratford and in the early days of doing this would call on those Boarding houses advertising vacancies.We rarely asked the landlady's name or noted the address unless it was a particularly good boarding house so had we needed to explain where we stayed and who we stayed with six weeks after the event I doubt we could have done so.
In the case of Hanratty does anyone seriously think he would have enjoyed tracking down Mrs Jones on 6th October with the police on his trail-Mrs Jones a stranger he only met for a few minutes on arrival and when he handed over his 25 shillings for his two night stay-and asking her if she would stand alibi for him as the police were after him for the A6 murder?
It doesn't really need explaining any further now dies it Caz!
AtB
Norma xx

[caz]

...so he thought it best to get his friends in Liverpool where he had arrived on 22nd August to give him an alibi for that night and not crack on about going to Rhyl----

Hi Nats,

You make it sound like Rhyl would have been a guilty admission. Why would it have hurt him to 'crack on' about staying the night in Rhyl, if it was the plain and innocent truth? You keep saying that he didn't have to prove his whereabouts, but he evidently thought lying about them was preferable to telling the truth.

What a dreadful state of affairs for Hanratty to find himself in.

He didn't 'find himself' burgling those houses, Nats. If he was facing a five stretch it was because he was willing to take that risk every time he set out to burgle. More fool him for not leaving a nice clear paper trail on the few occasions he went anywhere innocently - like Rhyl - so he couldn't be accused of crimes he had not committed as well as the crimes he had.

I'm sorry, but wouldn't five years have been a small price to pay compared with hanging for a crime you insist he did not commit? What did he think was coming to him if his criminal pals refused to support his false alibi? A slap on the wrist?

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Caz,
With regard to him changing his story:
Lets take a brief look again at what had been happening:
On 11th September,some 19 days after the murder police had been led via Alphon and used cartridge cases back to the Vienna Hotel-where they had been on 27th August, involving Alphon as a suspect. William Ewer was there [why?] who had previously helped police with their inquiries about the A6 murder by pointing out to them Hanratty on 1st September 1961 ,who Ewer said he thought might be the murderer --he had selected Hanratty out of 8 million Londoners and 50 miles from the A6 because 'this young man had eyes like a carbuncle" and therefore he thought might well be the murderer.
But the police,apart from thinking the Vienna Hotel had a part to play in this ,appear to have been very disinterested in Ryan/Hanratty and much more interested in Peter Alphon alias Durrant who they had interviewed previously with regard to the murder.On 23rd September they had put out a nationwide search,naming Alphon publicly as their prime suspect. Valerie had a go at her first line up identification but identified her rapist as a man 'she thought looked like Alphon'[ her words during the trial]-only it wasn't Alphon it was Michael Clark-a totally innocent line up volunteer-[this alone would disqualify Valerie from making a second identification by today's rules].
Alphon is then dropped -rather rapidly and back the police go to the Vienna Hotel. William Ewer had already led them to Hanratty on 1st September 1961, and the press had been informed [the Sketch and the Mail- said they had been informed by William Ewer at the time of Janet Gregsten's intuitive sighting ] that 'Ryan ' was Hanratty and police had discovered from the flower shop lady[Dorothy Morrell at Swiss Cottage at that time, that Ryan /Hanratty had sent flowers to his mother Mrs Hanratty---so police actually knew who Hanratty was through Mrs Hanratty's address and knew Ryan's real name-[as-presumably- did William Ewer].
Ok-what next?
All this time Hanratty was saying at the France's or Louise's - chauffeuring Louise Anderson back and forth to her shop in Soho each morning and dating various pretty girls etc
He was also busy burgling houses-----and police had been to his mum's telling her he was wanted for questioning about various burglaries.
And that Caz, was the problem.
When Alphon was dropped and Hanratty became their suspect he was suddenly 'dropped in it' and was in the most hideous position anybody could ever wish to find themselves in.
He knew if he handed himself in for questioning he would be put back in jail -possibly for 5 years.
So he telephoned Scotland yard to vehemently protest his innocence of the murder -6 October 1961-and in the final call he made to them that day [11pm] was asked about his alibi.
He could not remember his landlady's name in Rhyl---or the name of the road---it had been over 6 weeks before---what to do?
Not for one minute did he think he would have any trouble proving his innocence when he knew nothing at all about it!His innocence he believed would see him ok on this---nobody was going to fit him up for murder after all-----
so he thought it best to get his friends in Liverpool where he had arrived on 22nd August to give him an alibi for that night and not crack on about going to Rhyl----but how many fences and crooks would want do get involved in a murder trial?
They refused---McNally had seen him he said but 'if he won't open up why should I?' and he ended up contradicting himself and saying he hadn't seen him since he left prison.

What a dreadful state of affairs for Hanratty to find himself in.

ps---Why I can never accept it was Hanratty who was the gunman is partly due to the role I believe William Ewer played in all this---think about the fact that if it was Hanratty ,Ewer would never , not in a million years have been pointing him out to police---not, that is ,if Hanratty was connected to the crime in any way as Alphon claimed---Ewer's role may have been very mild-had nothing to do with guns---France may have bungled something up over it all as Alphon told the papers ---who knows---France apologised to Ewer we know that for certain from Ewer's own statement--- but Hanratty was the patsy when guns started going off however accidently---it was then that I believe it all went pear shaped!!!

[caz]

Norma - what a great researcher you are to have come up with that statement, written by the man himself. His writing isn't too bad at all, especially at the beginning. I've seen a lot worse written by educated people.

The flow of the handwriting says quite a lot to me. It's as though he didn't pause for thought but just wrote it all down as he remembered it. I think if he'd been inventing details the writing would have had a more faltering flow to it, but I'm no expert on handwriting (as no doubt will be pointed out to me).

Thanks so much for posting it Norma.

Hi Louisa,

I don't know about the other statements, including the one you are talking about here, but the one Nats posted in #2 was not written by Hanratty, as the final sentence shows:

This has been read to me: I fully understand it and hereby sign to this effect.

It's a great pity that Hanratty didn't come up with the green bath and his Rhyl 'bookings' (which were not true bookings since they were not entered into any book) to begin with, but chose instead to rely on his criminal pals to give him a false Liverpool alibi for the crucial night.

It makes no difference that he gamely stuck with the first part of his Liverpool story when tacking Rhyl on the end, because he completely changed the details of where he was during the hours when the crime was actually taking place. I'm not sure I've heard of any innocent person doing that in the long history of crime, but certainly not when their very life was at stake. What's the risk of a five-year stretch compared with having your neck stretched?

Love,

Caz
X

[louisa]

They could have got a fortune for that green bath on ebay.

I actually thought that Ingledene looked better in 1962 than it does today.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Louisa, it looks exactly the same as it did then judging from the photographs.I went there with James and his friend June last April and even the sign was still up 'Ingledene'. They have removed it since and they told us the green bath had only recently been removed.
Cheers
Norma

[louisa]

Thanks for those, Norma. It's interesting to see those old photographs of circa 1962.

I've had a look at 'Ingledene' via Google Maps street view. It's changed of course since 1962. I wonder what it's like inside now....whether the green bath is still there?

[Natalie Severn]

picture from page of my book-the houses at the bottom of the page are taken from Rhyl Railway and Coach Station at far end of KInmel Street.The first street with the little houses is South Kinmel Street where the witnesses Margaret Walker and Ivy Vincent lived.The larger houses seen in the background are those next-door but one to Mrs Jones and Mrs Betty Davies who was living next door to Mrs Jones at that time in 1961.

[Natalie Severn]

Last page of statement made on 29th January 1962 .It refers to hump back bridge[at far end of Kinmel St] also to Woolworths on Rhyl High Street.
[29/01/61 statement predated the discovery of any Rhyl witnesses-detectives had to go and search for these in final week of trial].

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks Louisa.This came via a friend of Bill Beadle who has done acres of research on the case in the past and sometimes looks in on casebook.The book was almost finished when I came across this 29 January 1962 statement.It actually appears to me it might have been the solicitors handwriting.I will definitely look into it as the writing here is similar to that written across the top of the Letter of Clemency which was definitely in Hanratty's hand.
Will get back to you
AtB
Norma

[louisa]

Norma - what a great researcher you are to have come up with that statement, written by the man himself. His writing isn't too bad at all, especially at the beginning. I've seen a lot worse written by educated people.

The flow of the handwriting says quite a lot to me. It's as though he didn't pause for thought but just wrote it all down as he remembered it. I think if he'd been inventing details the writing would have had a more faltering flow to it, but I'm no expert on handwriting (as no doubt will be pointed out to me).

Thanks so much for posting it Norma.