The attack on Swedish housewife Mrs Meike Dalal on Thursday, September 7th 1961

[Spitfire]

The gun wasn't disposed of by someone wanting it to be hidden; it was disposed of by someone who wanted it to be found. And by someone who knew that there would be no trace of Hanratty at the murder scene.

But who knew that Hanratty had worn a plastic boiler suit with rubber buttons and/or velco fastenings to commit his despicable crime?

[moste]

Yet how convenient the lengths to which Hanratty seemed to go to put himself in the frame.

First, he tells Dixie that the back seat of a bus is a convenient place to dump unwanted stolen goods....then he leaves the gun there. Second, he dumps it not just on any old bus but on a 36A bus which links to the Vienna Hotel and Nudds statement. Third, just in case the police can't work out who dumped it he stuffs it in one of his hankies. Fourth, he leaves the cartridge cases at the Vienna where he's stayed.

I think we all know Hanratty wasn't the brightest spark but even he could work out the difference between being tried for petty theft and being tried for murder. Even he could think of a thousand better ways of disposing of a weapon for it to remain untraceable....perhaps en route back from the A6 in some dense woods or even the broad expanse of the Thames.

The gun wasn't disposed of by someone wanting it to be hidden; it was disposed of by someone who wanted it to be found. And by someone who knew that there would be no trace of Hanratty at the murder scene.

,Thank You,Uncle A. I Couldn't have put it better myself.
It's interesting to me how incredibly incriminated in the crime Hanratty was. I mean to say they framed him so thoroughly it makes the mind boggle ,
I'm always reminded of the piece in ' Murder on the Orient Express' where Poirot looks around the railway sleeper compartment , and make the statement "Has anyone noticed, there are too many clues in this room?
There is certainly much much more about this whole affair that at first is apparent. I think that's why we're all here.

[uncle_adolph]

But if the cartridges were planted in the hotel room, by someone who knew which room Hanratty had stayed in, why not the gun too, along with the dirty hankie? France took a risk by mentioning his knowledge of the hiding place if he could have been seen by anyone boarding the bus that day. The weapon had to be found first, and then connected directly to Hanratty. The fact that Hanratty was provably in Liverpool at the time the weapon was unconvered could have backfired on anyone attempting to frame an innocent man. What if Hanratty had been able to prove he was in Liverpool the whole day (if not on the actual murder night)? The police would have turned their attention to who could have planted any of the evidence pointing to him.

The only way I can see France incriminating Hanratty is if he knew - or strongly suspected - that his 'friend' was the gunman. If he was getting Hanratty to carry the can for anyone else, he'd have been better off pleading total ignorance, not saying a word about anything and letting the planted 'evidence' do all the work.

Love,

Caz
X

Yet how convenient the lengths to which Hanratty seemed to go to put himself in the frame.

First, he tells Dixie that the back seat of a bus is a convenient place to dump unwanted stolen goods....then he leaves the gun there. Second, he dumps it not just on any old bus but on a 36A bus which links to the Vienna Hotel and Nudds statement. Third, just in case the police can't work out who dumped it he stuffs it in one of his hankies. Fourth, he leaves the cartridge cases at the Vienna where he's stayed.

I think we all know Hanratty wasn't the brightest spark but even he could work out the difference between being tried for petty theft and being tried for murder. Even he could think of a thousand better ways of disposing of a weapon for it to remain untraceable....perhaps en route back from the A6 in some dense woods or even the broad expanse of the Thames.

The gun wasn't disposed of by someone wanting it to be hidden; it was disposed of by someone who wanted it to be found. And by someone who knew that there would be no trace of Hanratty at the murder scene.

[Derrick]

...If he was blackmailing anybody it was more likely to be Justice and Fox....

When was the money paid and when did Justice and Fox FIRST meet Alphon?

[Alfie]

Blackmail?

...Alphon had told journalists that £5,000 had been paid into his accounts in about 8 instalments over the course of a couple or so months. It's not as if the whole 5 grand was paid in one lump sum which seems to have been the mistaken perception on this forum over the last several years. These round figured payments smack very much of blackmail payments ...

A blackmailer needs leverage. What was Alphon's? "Pay me the money or I'll tell the world I'm your hired killer"? Yeah, right.

If he was blackmailing anybody it was more likely to be Justice and Fox.

Edit: Darn it, I see Graham beat me to it again.

[Alfie]

The florist shop

There is absolutely no need to be smearing the man in the photographers shop and Dorothy Morrell by suggesting its all a bit of a tale they were inventing about the police being telephoned and arriving to question them etc when Ewer himself confirms that he did ring the police on that specific occasion about the man he was chasing after in their shops on the Finchley Road on September 1st 1961 who happened to be James Hanratty.

What seems unclear (to me at least) is whether Mrs Morrell attested to Ewer entering her shop in his search for blue-eyes, and whether the police visited her as the result of Ewer's phone call to them or for some other reason. Anyone?

[caz]

On an earlier point, the plastic boiler suit possibly worn by the car disposal associate, to greatly diminish the prospects of leaving a clue of his presence,from Bedfordshire to Redbridge,may well have had the latest Velcro as a fastening method, rather than the afor mentioned rubber buttons. I do remember my Dad being issued with this style of protective uniform,rather than the old Denim coveralls, in the early sixties, and Velcro was just making its appearance .Of course with this theory, and following the opinion of Chief Superintendent Mathews, (3 people involved)I believe a 'drop off 'driver was used, and a vehicle removal person,as well as an assassinator. I can't help pondering on the possibility that the assassinator was just that ,and was only at the predetermined location of dead mans hill very briefly, VS I believe was a complete surprise to all concerned and wasn't supposed to be part of the equation. Hence the **** up with disposing of her as a witness, Gregsten was supposed to have left her at home, and now presented the problem of not leaving a witness.
I am convinced ,mostly because of the massive amount of anomalies in this case,that Stories account of things , is a fabrication from beginning to end, concocted by Det. Acott and Oxford. Storie with her experience in amateur dramatics made a wonderful ally ,in the convincing the world of a single gunman nutcase. Much to the glee of the Home secretary,I have no doubt. Trouble is Home Secretaries have been dogged with the blasted thing for decades, and it never went away, even when they rigged a ridiculous dna test . Of course as the years roll by and more and more people who simply just wanted true justice die off, then and only then will the injustice of Hanrattys death be buried forever.

This tosh would be deeply offensive to the family and friends of the victims - particularly in Valerie's case - if it wasn't so obviously a conspiracy fantasy dreamed up by someone with an unhealthily overactive imagination.

Nobody was 'assassinated' here and this is not something from one of the weirder 60s Avengers scripts. The gunman was a very naughty boy with a new toy and the courting couple were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Sorry if that's not exciting enough for you, moste, but there it is. And you do the remaining genuine Hanratty supporters no favours at all. In fact, you are doing a nice little job for the opposition.

I'd urge you to think about that.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Yes that's fine Alf. listen, Charles France almost certainly placed that weapon in that location and niftily slipped the noose around his ex- friends neck. Nothing more than that.

But if the cartridges were planted in the hotel room, by someone who knew which room Hanratty had stayed in, why not the gun too, along with the dirty hankie? France took a risk by mentioning his knowledge of the hiding place if he could have been seen by anyone boarding the bus that day. The weapon had to be found first, and then connected directly to Hanratty. The fact that Hanratty was provably in Liverpool at the time the weapon was unconvered could have backfired on anyone attempting to frame an innocent man. What if Hanratty had been able to prove he was in Liverpool the whole day (if not on the actual murder night)? The police would have turned their attention to who could have planted any of the evidence pointing to him.

The only way I can see France incriminating Hanratty is if he knew - or strongly suspected - that his 'friend' was the gunman. If he was getting Hanratty to carry the can for anyone else, he'd have been better off pleading total ignorance, not saying a word about anything and letting the planted 'evidence' do all the work.

Love,

Caz
X

[Alfie]

... I am really talking about the effect on Mrs Dunwoody's ears having heard some very strong scouse during her two days in Scotland Road and noticing Hanratty's sing song intonation may well have reminded her of Welsh or Scottish voices ...

Anybody know if one of Hanratty's three Liverpool 'mates' was Welsh or Scottish?

[moste]

On an earlier point, the plastic boiler suit possibly worn by the car disposal associate, to greatly diminish the prospects of leaving a clue of his presence,from Bedfordshire to Redbridge,may well have had the latest Velcro as a fastening method, rather than the afor mentioned rubber buttons. I do remember my Dad being issued with this style of protective uniform,rather than the old Denim coveralls, in the early sixties, and Velcro was just making its appearance .Of course with this theory, and following the opinion of Chief Superintendent Mathews, (3 people involved)I believe a 'drop off 'driver was used, and a vehicle removal person,as well as an assassinator. I can't help pondering on the possibility that the assassinator was just that ,and was only at the predetermined location of dead mans hill very briefly, VS I believe was a complete surprise to all concerned and wasn't supposed to be part of the equation. Hence the **** up with disposing of her as a witness, Gregsten was supposed to have left her at home, and now presented the problem of not leaving a witness.
I am convinced ,mostly because of the massive amount of anomalies in this case,that Stories account of things , is a fabrication from beginning to end, concocted by Det. Acott and Oxford. Storie with her experience in amateur dramatics made a wonderful ally ,in the convincing the world of a single gunman nutcase. Much to the glee of the Home secretary,I have no doubt. Trouble is Home Secretaries have been dogged with the blasted thing for decades, and it never went away, even when they rigged a ridiculous dna test . Of course as the years roll by and more and more people who simply just wanted true justice die off, then and only then will the injustice of Hanrattys death be buried forever.

[moste]

Further more , when you consider the fact that Ewer and Gregsten would almost certainly not have been friends , and Ewer and Anderson (where Hanratty sometimes hung his hat,)were at the very least, business associates, if not a collaborating twosome in the crime of dealing in and receiving stolen goods ,quite possibly on some occasions by Hanraty, then I put it to anyone interested in listening to reason, that the suffocating coincidence of a strong connection between these people,and therefor an undeniable probability of an innocently framed co worker exists Our Sherlock in Baker Street ,would Iam convinced have been on to this obvious deduction in a heart beat!

[moste]

Catching up after a long absence from the forum so apologies if Graham's question has already been answered, but I would observe:
(1) He liked his gun; it made him feel like a cowboy.
(2) He thought VS was dead and therefore imagined his chances of being caught as vanishingly small.
(3) When he heard she was alive (imagine his shock) he panicked and disposed of the gun as soon as he could - using a hiding place he'd used successfully before.
(4) These are the actions of a dim-witted killer, and we all know our Jim wasn't the sharpest of tools.

Yes that's fine Alf. listen, Charles France almost certainly placed that weapon in that location and niftily slipped the noose around his ex- friends neck. Nothing more than that.

[Alfie]

The language about 'picking a man up at Slough' is quite precise in both cases so if we take Valerie at her word here ,as quoted in these early reports and bearing in mind her words were uttered before being interviewed properly by police -,then the gunman could indeed have had an pre-arranged lift with Michael Gregsten -and one which Valerie Storie knew nothing about.

I don't think there's much doubt Valerie told Kerr that Gregsten and she had picked up a man at Slough, but nor do I think there's anything sinister in this. What was she going to tell this stranger: that she was having a park-up in a field with a married man when accosted by the gunman? I think it's simply a case of her chosing to tell a white lie for propriety's sake. This was the early 1960s remember.

The police were soon given the correct account and the "hitch-hiker story" was dropped.

Edit: I see Graham made pretty much the same point in post 298. Great minds and all that ...

[caz]

I tend to agree, Alfie.

There is another possibility. In addition to getting rid of the gun, he would have been desperate to arm himself with a credible alibi. Leaving the gun on a London bus, to be found at some point later that day, when he would be safely a couple of hundred miles away in Liverpool, sending a telegram as proof, might have seemed like a good way to distance himself from the murder weapon and therefore the crime itself. I wonder if he panicked and let on to Dixie France that he had done something stupid with his new "toy" and didn't know what the hell to do. France may have advised him to dump it and run - the further away the better. He may well have had the telegram brainwave if Hanratty wasn't sharp enough to think of it himself.

Love,

Caz
X

[Alfie]

Disposing of the gun

If he stopped somewhere secluded on his journey south after the murder, then why didn't he dispose of the gun? Odd.

Graham

Catching up after a long absence from the forum so apologies if Graham's question has already been answered, but I would observe:
(1) He liked his gun; it made him feel like a cowboy.
(2) He thought VS was dead and therefore imagined his chances of being caught as vanishingly small.
(3) When he heard she was alive (imagine his shock) he panicked and disposed of the gun as soon as he could - using a hiding place he'd used successfully before.
(4) These are the actions of a dim-witted killer, and we all know our Jim wasn't the sharpest of tools.