Mail's feature of 1999 on Hanratty by Roger Matthews

[Natalie Severn]

The earlier reference I posted [now on previous page ] mentioning that France had been sacked as a 'doorman' at the Rehearsal Club and also had connections to the 'Billiard Hall' in Great Windmill Street doing 'marking ' there is significant[also Page 146 of Foot] .
Great Windmill Street Billiard Hall was quite notorious for attracting big shot gangsters .It was run by Jack Solomon the boxing promoter who 'marked Bob Monkhouse's card ' [see page 179 Chapter 14 "Those were the Krays" in James Morton's book , "Gangland Soho'.See also "Crying with Laughter" by Bob Monkhouse page 133.
Gangland Soho in particular gives some background to Solomon's Gym with its Billiard Hall in Great Windmill Street and the characters who frequented in in the late 1950's and early 1960's and by default who France was 'mingling' with when 'marking' there in 1961.The Rehearsal Club itself is across the street-not even 2 minutes away.
Image below is from page 146 of Foot's book on the A6

[Natalie Severn]

Defence investigators went to Rhyl after his photo taken on the 5th.

Then you are absolutely right.So why there was such a delay?

[Natalie Severn]

Does anyone have a link to a text [ possibly in a the newspaper article or magazine] stating that William Ewer had business connections with Louise Anderson's shop in Soho ?

[Victor]

Hi Nats,

Victor ,regarding your post accusing me of 'smearing Valerie' I was simply quoting a legal expert analysing Valerie's entire testimony; Louis Blom-Cooper Blom -Cooper was in fact a distinguished barrister and legal commentator and he impugned the entirety of her testimony .Blom-Cooper analysed a number of points of evidence,demonstrating for example how totally ludicrous the 'roadworks' evidence was and stating,crucially ,that "Once Storie's evidence was discounted,the only other evidence was Langdale's-[who was a notorious prison grass.]*-from Bob Woffinden,Hanratty :The Final Verdict.

I've got Blom-Cooper's book, which basically says the trial wasn't as clear and straightforward as it should have been, but the result was correct. LBC did flip-flop from guilty to innocent (with Foot's book) and back quite a lot.

And I did correct the "smearing" suggestion to "unintentional splash-damage".

Can we now have some 'concrete' evidence about Hanratty's role in the A6 murder rather than repeatedly smearing him and presenting us with your own prejudices and value judgements.

Well for a start, even Del-boy accepts that Hanratty blew his nose on the handkerchief that was discovered wrapped around the murder weapon. Several witnesses (including the victim) positively identified him. He stayed the night in the hotel room where cartridge cases from the murder weapon were found. He has no alibi that stands up to scrutiny. And his ejaculate was found in the victim's underwear.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Of crucial importance to him [LBC] was Valerie's evidence ,whose sole account of what happened was never corroborated by anyone.

Hi Nats,

Well that's only true in the sense that her entire account was not corroborated, but large chunks of it have been.

She was shot 5 times.
She was raped (ejaculate was found in her underwear).
Gregsten was shot dead.

I doubt you'll find anyone who was the sole survivor after being taken hostage in a rural area, whose entire account is corroborated.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Nats


Well for a start, even Del-boy accepts that Hanratty blew his nose on the handkerchief that was discovered wrapped around the murder weapon. Several witnesses (including the victim) positively identified him. He stayed the night in the hotel room where cartridge cases from the murder weapon were found. He has no alibi that stands up to scrutiny. And his ejaculate was found in the victim's underwear.

KR,
Vic.

Hi Vic,
Only your final point still needs to be explained.The rest is disputed and/or circumstantial-not concrete.

[Victor]

...France had been sacked as a 'doorman' at the Rehearsal Club and also had connections to the 'Billiard Hall' in Great Windmill Street doing 'marking ' there is significant[also Page 146 of Foot] .

Hi Nats,

What are you attempting to do here? Dixie and Hanratty were close friends and associates. If you trying to make Dixie out to be more than a small time crook, then Hanratty gets tarred with the same brush. "Sauce for the goose" &tc.

KR,
Vic.

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Nats,

Well that's only true in the sense that her entire account was not corroborated, but large chunks of it have been.

She was shot 5 times.
She was raped (ejaculate was found in her underwear).
Gregsten was shot dead.

I doubt you'll find anyone who was the sole survivor after being taken hostage in a rural area, whose entire account is corroborated.

KR,
Vic.

All true-but none of this is concrete proof that Hanratty had anything to do with it---let alone was the murderer .
Contamination , even back in 2002, was a recognised possibility.Today the DNA LCN testing of 2002 and its reliability is becoming a different story entirely .

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Nats,

What are you attempting to do here? Dixie and Hanratty were close friends and associates. If you trying to make Dixie out to be more than a small time crook, then Hanratty gets tarred with the same brush. "Sauce for the goose" &tc.

KR,
Vic.

We know Hanratty was a small time crook but you appeared to implying the other day that France was not.

[Victor]

We know Hanratty was a small time crook but you appeared to implying the other day that France was not.

Sorry Nats, you can go back and read what I said in post #177...

France a petty criminal who killed himself because Hanratty had dragged him from the little league into the serious, vicious, nasty big boys game.

I asked for evidence that France was anything more than a small time crook. You appeared to be saying France was bigger-time than Hanratty, when the opposite seems to be the case.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

All true-but none of this is concrete proof that Hanratty had anything to do with it---let alone was the murderer .

Hi Nats,

LBC thinks it "of crucial importance" that the evidence of the sole survivor of a rural hostage taking lacks corroboration.

I say it's entirely expected, and attempts to cast doubt on the victim's account because of this are unwarranted.

Contamination , even back in 2002, was a recognised possibility.

A possibility yes, but a very implausible one given the results obtained. One-in-a-billion is a possibility and also a quantified probability.

Today the DNA LCN testing of 2002 and its reliability is becoming a different story entirely .

Yes, it's established fact that legally speaking it's reliable.

The Court rejects the possibility of contamination and accepted the prosecution’s submission that the DNA evidence, standing alone was, in fact, certain proof of James Hanratty’s guilt.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Hi Vic,
Only your final point still needs to be explained.The rest is disputed and/or circumstantial-not concrete.

I counter with...

The DNA evidence does not “stand alone” and the Court refers to some of the more striking coincidences in the light of the DNA evidence if James Hanratty was not guilty. He would have been wrongly identified by three witnesses at identification parades; first as the person at the scene of the crime and secondly (by two witnesses) driving a vehicle close to where the vehicle in which the murder was committed was found. He had the same identifying manner of speech as the killer. He stayed in a room the night before the crime from which bullets that had been fired from the murder weapon were recovered. The murder weapon was recovered from a place on a bus which he regarded as a hiding place and the bus followed a route he could well have used. His DNA was found on a piece of material from Valerie Storie’s knickers where it would be expected to be if he was guilty; it was also found on the handkerchief found with the gun. The Court concludes that this number of alleged coincidences mean that they are not coincidences but provide overwhelming proof of the safety of the conviction from an evidential perspective.

KR,
Vic.

[Victor]

Does anyone have a link to a text [ possibly in a the newspaper article or magazine] stating that William Ewer had business connections with Louise Anderson's shop in Soho ?

Hi Nats,

There's Ewer's "15 point statement for The Sunday Times" in response to "She saw him at the cleaners" where he specifically denies any business connections. I think it's from 1971.

KR,
Vic.

[NickB]

he specifically denies any business connections.

In fact Ewer said he didn't even know her (post 87) but Anderson contradicted this when they interviewed her.

The police interview with Ewer as a result of this article is at the National Archives. A poster here made an official application for it and was refused.

[Natalie Severn]

In fact Ewer said he didn't even know her (post 87) but Anderson contradicted this when they interviewed her.

The police interview with Ewer as a result of this article is at the National Archives. A poster here made an official application for it and was refused.

Thanks for this information Nick-its not what I was thinking of-but I am in fact quite gobsmacked that it won't be available for another 60+ years

Do you or anyone here have any idea why this is so ?