A6 -location of scene and 2nd appeal

[Natalie Severn]

Graham-Thankyou,yes please. I am not suggesting that this does not appear in your book of 1999-I am saying its very odd that it appears nowhere else -not in any earlier statement by Woffinden ,Foot or Valerie Storie.I would therefore be very grateful if you could send it me-normabuddle@gmail.com.
I think I will write to Woffinden and ask why he has altered his wording about that happening.
Best
Norma

[Graham]

Done!

G

[propatria27]

I thought the whole thing about the car in 2 cornfields was a little odd when I re-read BW's hardback copy, hence the reason I raised this in the first place. If they were parked in the first field in Huntercombe Lane South, but left due to being disturbed, then what was that disturbance. If they hadn't been disturbed, would the whole hijacking, murder and rape have happened?

Pete

[Natalie Severn]

Thanks very much Graham for going to that trouble I was easily able to read the scans-and I must admit a bit surprised because Woffinden has indeed altered his description of the drive into the cornfield in that 1999 edition.Maybe he decided the 19 year old's statement was more interesting than he had previously thought.The statement of the motor cyclist isn't corroborated by anyone else which is a pity because if you picture him driving along with his headlights on its likely he only caught a passing glance of a car parked there and the recall of detail seems a bit improbable along with the interior light being on of the Morris Minor.But OK he looked and saw the car.
But I still don't really see how this alters the possibility that the car was followed.Mary Lanz mentions in her statement just after the murder that she saw the couple as usual and that in the bar there were quite a few people who were strangers/ non regulars and that she also noticed two strange men in the saloon bar that night.If those two men -or another couple from the other room ,had followed the couple out and followed them in their car it may be why the couple moved on from Huntercombe Lane in the first place.Once they had entered their cornfield they were clearly not followed there and in fact once they appeared settled that may have been when the gunman was 'dropped off'.
Thanks again though for providing those pages Graham-most interesting!

[Limehouse]

A bit off subject, but Julie, I was reading some posts from a couple of years ago about the social and political situation in 1961 and noticed that you went to see West Ham, Tottenham and Leyton Orient (or Orient as they were then) and it brought back so many memories as that is exactly what I did from about 1967 - I remember some great nights at White Hart Lane, big European matches and seeing the great West Ham side with Moore, Hurst and Peters (and Harry Rednapp!). Also seeing Orient almost get promoted into the old 1st Division in 1970/71 but being denied on the last day of the season. Happy days!

Pete

Hi Pete,

Yes, from about 1973 or so I frequented all three grounds, because my friends were either Spurs, West Ham or Orient fans. Orient were my favourites and I followed them until I moved to Peterborough. Of course, it was very different back then. Very rough, loud - virtually no loos for the girls - and we had to stand up the whole time! I think the last time I saw Spurs, Steve Perryman was still captain! Remember the shock when Spurs bought Ozzy Ardiles and Riki Villa?

We had to pick our matches carefully back then and NEVER went if Leeds United were playing! We used to avoid Millwall too (no one likes us, we don't care!!) West Ham were gods back in those days - but that was before the big money and football clubs being launched on the stock market (Spurs were the first to do that).

I have been a Peterborough United fan for a good many years now and matches are nearly always peaceful and I get to sit down! Well, if you love live football and you live in a city with a football team, it's your duty as a citizen to support them!

I wonder if we ever stood within a few yards of each other on the terraces at Brisbane Rd or White Hart Lane?

[Graham]

I think we do tend to forget that Michael Gregsten put himself about a bit, and it's not beyond the realms of possibility that an angry husband might have been on his tail. Personally, I doubt it, but you never know.

The other thing is, if MG and VS decided to go from The Old Station Inn direct to the cornfield, there was no need for them to drive down Huntercombe Lane, as Marsh Lane forms a junction with the A4, I think first on the right if you turn left onto the A4 from the Old Station. I walked it once, all the way from Taplow Station to 'the' cornfield, on a blazing hot day. Incidentally, the rowing events at the recent Olympics were held at Dorney.

All Paul Foot says is that the left The Old Station Inn and took the third right off the A4 onto Huntercombe Lane, before stopping at the cornfield. He doesn't say that they stopped at Huntercombe Lane.

G

[Limehouse]

Thanks very much Graham for going to that trouble I was easily able to read the scans-and I must admit a bit surprised because Woffinden has indeed altered his description of the drive into the cornfield in that 1999 edition.Maybe he decided the 19 year old's statement was more interesting than he had previously thought.The statement of the motor cyclist isn't corroborated by anyone else which is a pity because if you picture him driving along with his headlights on its likely he only caught a passing glance of a car parked there and the recall of detail seems a bit improbable along with the interior light being on of the Morris Minor.But OK he looked and saw the car.
But I still don't really see how this alters the possibility that the car was followed.Mary Lanz mentions in her statement just after the murder that she saw the couple as usual and that in the bar there were quite a few people who were strangers/ non regulars and that she also noticed two strange men in the saloon bar that night.If those two men -or another couple from the other room ,had followed the couple out and followed them in their car it may be why the couple moved on from Huntercombe Lane in the first place.Once they had entered their cornfield they were clearly not followed there and in fact once they appeared settled that may have been when the gunman was 'dropped off'.
Thanks again though for providing those pages Graham-most interesting!

I think that, even if the couple did move from Huntercombe Lane to Marsh Lane it is still possible that someone knew where to find them. I think it is probable that MG and VS had several regular spots where they stopped and possibly so did other couples so that if one spot was 'occupied' they just moved to the next spot.

This scenario does not rule out the possibility that the gunman looked for the couple in several places and struck lucky at Marsh Lane.

[Stevo7395]

Hi all, I'm new to this forum and started this thread, not trying to suck up but the amount of research you have all clearly done on this case and the depth and scrutiny to which you have all gone to just overwhelms me on both sides of the debate. I'm clearly talking to writers and historians here but you all should have been Police officers from 1961 onwards. Norma, I remember Mr Baden skit, he was Chief Constable in 1993 at Herts when I joined. He was a well respected but not to be messed with chief as I and others recall.

I'm still trying to read all the posts on all the threads and all the arguments guilty or not but you guys should be proud of your research and Norma....payday Friday I will be buying your book. Cheers , Steve

[Natalie Severn]

Steve-have sent you a private message about the book.Great to have you posting on here x

[propatria27]

I've been looking into the Webley .38 revolver used in the murder and I have a few thoughts:

1. The weapon was found with 5 x 12 round boxes, all full = 60 rounds, plus 2 loose

2. 2 rounds were fired into MG and 5 into VS, then VS states 3 more were fired but missed = 10, plus the 2 found on the bus = 12

3. That means 2 full chambers, but it also means VS was only hit by 4 rounds originally, then by one other after the reload, then 3 missed.

4. When the gunman reloaded at the scene, what did he do with the used cartridges?

5. VS stated that the gunman tapped his pocket and there was a sound like the rattle of marbles (BW hardback, 1997, page 4). That means he had removed the rounds from the box. But did he have the other 5 boxes on him - they are quite heavy (take my word for it, I served in Her Majesty's Armed Forces for 25 years) and he had enough rounds for a major seige! If he didn't have the boxes, where were they and when did he retrieve them?

6. Audrey Willis was held up in her home by a man who "produced a short, black gun" (BW hardback, 1997, page 41). The Webley .38 is not a short gun (see attached photo, which shows a Webley .38 similar to the murder weapon and a Smith and Wesson .38 pistol - which is a short gun) - I don't believe she is describing the same weapon that killed MG.

7. Were any of the bullets that hit either MG or VS actually found at the scene or were the only ones retrieved those taken from the 2 victims? Were any used cartridges found at the scene?

Anyone have any thoughts on these comments?

Pete

[propatria27]

Just to add to my previous post - BW in his hardback 1997 book, page 55, describes the whole package of pistol and rounds as " extraordinarily bulky" - would you want to carry all that around with you? Did he have a bag - I don't recall any mention from VS of the gunman having a bag,

Pete

[Natalie Severn]

All really important questions Pete !---and ones that I would have to look into and check up to be certain about what I was saying .

I know there were a couple of cartridge cases found at the crime scene and two cartridge cases were found at the Vienna Hotel [the day Nudds was sacked -11th September, 19 days after the murder].
The gunman had no 'case' on him -just a gun , presumably he had some spare bullets in his pockets that he tapped and the lower part of his face-glimpsed when he got out of the car --was covered with a handkerchief or scarf-it must have been large enough to secure at the back of his head as not all men's handkerchiefs are big enough to tie like that.

[Limehouse]

I've been looking into the Webley .38 revolver used in the murder and I have a few thoughts:

1. The weapon was found with 5 x 12 round boxes, all full = 60 rounds, plus 2 loose

2. 2 rounds were fired into MG and 5 into VS, then VS states 3 more were fired but missed = 10, plus the 2 found on the bus = 12

3. That means 2 full chambers, but it also means VS was only hit by 4 rounds originally, then by one other after the reload, then 3 missed.

4. When the gunman reloaded at the scene, what did he do with the used cartridges?

5. VS stated that the gunman tapped his pocket and there was a sound like the rattle of marbles (BW hardback, 1997, page 4). That means he had removed the rounds from the box. But did he have the other 5 boxes on him - they are quite heavy (take my word for it, I served in Her Majesty's Armed Forces for 25 years) and he had enough rounds for a major seige! If he didn't have the boxes, where were they and when did he retrieve them?

6. Audrey Willis was held up in her home by a man who "produced a short, black gun" (BW hardback, 1997, page 41). The Webley .38 is not a short gun (see attached photo, which shows a Webley .38 similar to the murder weapon and a Smith and Wesson .38 pistol - which is a short gun) - I don't believe she is describing the same weapon that killed MG.

7. Were any of the bullets that hit either MG or VS actually found at the scene or were the only ones retrieved those taken from the 2 victims? Were any used cartridges found at the scene?

Anyone have any thoughts on these comments?

Pete

Brilliant post Pete. The issue of whether the gunman had all of the boxes of ammo on him at the time of the abduction has been discussed and, as you say, given their bulkiness it seems unlikely. However, he must have taken a fair few rounds with him (in his pocket) to have loaded, discharged and loaded about three times. As I have mentioned before, if the motive for the attack was 'robbery' it does seem odd that the gunman took so many rounds with him. At that time of the night, he was hardly going to find a bank to rob, where he might have to discharge a few rounds to scare people.


I have also written in detail about the feasibility (or otherwise) of the cartridge cases being found at the hotel in the way officially described. If i can find my comments, I'll repost them as you might be able to comment the questions I pose concerning how the cartidge cases are ejected.

[Graham]

Pete,

ref: your post about the gun and its ammunition, a question for you. When a Webley 38 is broken for re-loading, are the spent cartridges automatically ejected from the chamber, or do they have to be removed manually?

As to where he kept the gun, it was strongly suggested that it was stashed in Dixie France's flat somewhere, to the horror of Charlotte France when she was told about it. Was it Louise Anderson who made this suggestion? I haven't got my books to hand at the moment, to check.

Graham

[propatria27]

To help us understand how the Webley .38 revolver is loaded, fired and unloaded, I found this very good film on YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfcU0PoZ8nU&noredirect=1

Note how the weapon is opened, and loaded. This is an expert, in ideal conditions, but it takes him some time to load all 6 rounds. What happend on Deadman's Hill in the dark having already shot 2 people? It may give some idea of the personality of the gunman.

Additionally, see how little kick-back there is with the weapon when fired with one hand and the ease of firing 2 or more rounds quickly.

Finally, see how, when unloaded, all the rounds will fall out together. It would be reasonably easy to catch them all and put them in your pocket, despite the darkness.

Having seen this film and from my own personal experience, I think the gunman had some experience with the weapon and may have practised with it previously, even if only with a dry run i.e. loading and unloading but not firing the weapon.

Pete