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

[Natalie Severn]

William Ewer, in a statement he made to the Sunday Times of 16 May 1971, regarding the 'She Saw Him At The Cleaners' tale, said that Janet Gregsten had not been in any way involved. He also said that in September 1961 he was in a cafe and saw a man with 'quite unusually staring eyes'. So he telephoned the local police and that was that.

Graham

But that was not all Graham. Dorothy Morrell testified to Paul Foot in a recorded interview August 1970 she gave to him that she remembered the police visit and them coming into her shop and speaking to them in early September 1961 very well.She said that the young man who came into her shop and ordered flowers for his mother gave his name as J.Ryan and sent the card attached to the flowers he paid for "To Mum " on September 1st 1961 and addressed it to "Mrs Hanratty of Sycamore Grove Kingsbury," and yet the young chap had written his name down as J.Ryan which she remember having queried with him.

I have spoken with Paul Foot's son about all this when I was writing my book,which includes an extract by Tom Foot himself and Tom told me his father Paul had kept a vast number of his notes of that time-still with the family .Tom stated that his father was convinced of Hanratty's innocence and that the DNA must have been faulty and like Det Supt Roger Matthews and others who had had access to the files ,remained convinced that Hanratty had been wrongly accused .A few weeks later I spoke with Mat Foot also Paul Foot's son now a leading Human Rights Lawyer in the City of London .Paul Foot was known throughout journalism as a journalist of great integrity who was interested in reaching the truth about this extraordinary case and whose research into all the statements and articles by journalists was thorough and second to none.

[Graham]

William Ewer, in a statement he made to the Sunday Times of 16 May 1971, regarding the 'She Saw Him At The Cleaners' tale, said that Janet Gregsten had not been in any way involved. He also said that in September 1961 he was in a cafe and saw a man with 'quite unusually staring eyes'. So he telephoned the local police and that was that. Only later, when it was public knowledge that the police were looking for a man called J Ryan did Ewer go to the Burtol shop tp ask if anyone called Ryan had been a customer, and they confirmed this. OK, Ewer may have turned a strange story into something like a Greek drama, and exaggerated some 'facts' just a little, but as Leonard Miller correctly points out, journalists were involved from the start of this story, and journalists, quote, 'seem chronically incapable of transmitting any information with 100% accuracy'.

Ewer, in 1971, sued the Sunday Times and Jonathan Cape, publishers of Who Killed Hanratty? for libel. Cape settled out of court for £1000, and the Sunday Times also settled out of court for what is believed to have been a much larger sum. Leonard Miller, writing his book Shadows Of Deadman's Hill in 2001, apparently found out that Ewer was still alive at that time. If so, he would have been in his nineties and, although he had definite grounds for further legal action for libel, took none.

It should also be remembered that in 1994, at her invitation, Paul Foot met Janet Gregsten, and confessed himself surprised that she was, quote, 'impressive, quite unlike the jealous demon of my imagination'. (London Review Of Books 1997).

Finally, posters have alluded to the £5000 they allege Ewer paid Alphon to commit the crime. As I posted a long time ago, in 1964 the Krays forked out only £1000 to a 'professional' hitman (Jack 'The Hat' McVitie) to get rid of a gangland rival (the hitman failed, and the Krays did him in). Later, in 1974, it was alleged that Lord Lucan had hired a professional hitman to kill Lady Lucan. One of His Lordship's close associates said that Lucan could never have done this, as he could never at that time lay his hands on the £2000 cash that such a hitman would require. So if Ewer forked out five grand for an amateur nutter like Alphon to bump off an ordinary man like Gregsten, Ewer was either naive, crazy, or both. Ewer as a monied Mr X? Never.

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

If you bothered to read my post, I never referred to anything you said.

Graham

Your reply suggested you never bothered to read my post and were misinterpreting my argument Graham.That was what I found offensive.

[Natalie Severn]

So from the above I gather that you have not seen any report at Scotland Yard regarding Ewer nor have you seen any statement by Mrs Morrell.

I have looked at Ewer's statement which is in Woffinden's book (1999 ed) at page 380 and which (subject to one or two minor abbreviations in BW) was published in the Sunday Times on 16 May 1971 in reply to an outpouring by Paul Foot on 9 May 1971.

Hi Spitfire ,
I have seen Ewer's statement which is in Woffinden's book page 380 but I don't have the book with me in Wales where I am atm.I also have an in-depth article in London published in the Sunday Times all about the inconsistencies in William Ewer's statement regarding his early September sighting in the trail leading to Hanratty.
One of the leading arguments against Ewer is his lack of precision about exactly what he found 'inaccurate' in the Daily Sketch and Daily Mail articles-especially about the date he did the following of Hanratty early in September and the exact involvement of police.
Paul Foot's interview with Mrs Dorothy Morrell in August 1970 confirms that police were put on the trail of James Hanratty on 1st September 1961 .Dorothy Morrell was the manageress of Cater's Florist in Finchley Road and she corroborated the visit of Hanratty to her flower shop and the visit of the police soon afterwards and she corroborated the reference to this made in both Daily Mail and Daily Sketch articles dating the sighting as September 1st. This was long before Hanratty became a police suspect in early October 1961.There is an additional report by Robert Traini of the Daily Herald of the Murder squad immediately being put on the trail of the newly described suspect of 31/08/61 with the large icy blue eyesand this report is dated September 2nd 1961.

[Graham]

What I was saying Graham was that I never said what you were saying I had said !

If you bothered to read my post, I never referred to anything you said.

Graham

[Graham]

Can I ask you btw Spitfire ,not to make insulting remarks like 'outpouring ' to describe my posts ? Lets try to keep the posts amicable can we

That's a bit rich, after accusing me of telling 'porkies'.

Graham

[NickB]

The two facts that seem to be unchallenged are:

Ewer did indeed go into the photographic shop and ask about a customer.
The police did indeed question the manageress of the florist’s regarding a recent customer.

It is perfectly reasonable to assume that these events happened around the same time, and that Ewer was involved in both. (Why else would the police be making enquiries at a flower shop?)

As I said, the police visited Hanratty’s parents to notify them that he was wanted for house breakings and would have seen the flowers he had sent. The card would have had the name of the florist and it would be natural for them to call in to see if there was any clue about where he was.

[Spitfire]

Hi Spitfire ,
Please refer to the Sunday Times article of 16th May 1971 which contains a full statement by William Ewer himself and which confirms every salient point made in my post.viz:
Ewer on 1st September 1961 followed a young man who turned out to be James Hanratty.He wore a blue suit was sipping coffee in the same cafe and had large staring eyes 'like carbuncles'-exactly like,Ewer thought, the new description issued by Scotland Yard of the suspect on 31st August 1961.He followed him to several shops on the Finchley Road ,including the photographer's who was himself an ex policeman . Ewer called police who came.took statements and went away. It corroborates the florist Mrs Morrell who was interviewed by the police she told Paul Foot and confirmed the incident and showed Foot the written evidence of the flower order for Mrs Hanratty[card was addressed to his mum which Mrs Morrell thought odd because the man gave the name of Ryan]-The police had apparently never heard of any Ryan -and nothing further happened though Foot says a report was made by police after their visit and sent to to Scotland Yard. [the report was made by the same police who came and questioned Ewer, Mrs Morrell and the photographer shop manager.
Can I ask you btw Spitfire ,not to make insulting remarks like 'outpouring ' to describe my posts ? Lets try to keep the posts amicable can we .AtB Nats

So from the above I gather that you have not seen any report at Scotland Yard regarding Ewer nor have you seen any statement by Mrs Morrell.

I have looked at Ewer's statement which is in Woffinden's book (1999 ed) at page 380 and which (subject to one or two minor abbreviations in BW) was published in the Sunday Times on 16 May 1971 in reply to an outpouring by Paul Foot on 9 May 1971.

Ewer describes sighting a suspect in early September (not specifically 1st September).

Ewer describes the man going into what initially he thought was the photographers and what could have been the florists.

Para 4 Ewer says he reported over the phone his sighting to the local police, which was the last he heard about it. He saw Hanratty at the trial and could not say whether Hanratty was the man he saw.

Ewer went to Burtols the dry cleaners to ask whether a Ryan had ever gone there. This was after it was public knowledge that the police were looking for a suspect called Ryan.

I can find nothing in Ewer's 1971 statement to confirm anything you have written so effusively about reports at Scotland Yard or statements by Mrs Morrell.

[moste]

So what we have is, Sept.1st, Janet and\or Bills vision. Same day, Valerie's transfer to Guys from Bedford, and on same day, a new description of killer by Valerie to detectives at her bedside, suddenly remembering his icy-blue saucer like eyes,

[moste]

'Taken from Grahams post' "Of course Ewer had no idea that James Hanratty had been in Louise Anderson's shop on the morning of Hanratty's visit to her. Why should he? The name 'Hanratty' was unknown to him"
I have problems accepting this statement. Hanratty actually lived at Louise Andersons place, over a period of time. It is easy to see that she would be in the fencing business with Jim. How do we know that she didn't take the smaller stuff from him, like gold watches, cuff links, decent jewellery etc. Big Bill, may have been handling the larger stuff like for example Phillip Wilson Steer Interiors. Obviously we don't know this as fact, but we don't know either that Bill didn't know Jim. He knew France well enough to give him a shoulder to cry on. Jims mentor and confidant. Yes very likely Big Bill framed Jim. End of.

[cobalt]

The two facts that seem to be unchallenged are:

Ewer did indeed go into the photographic shop and ask about a customer.
The police did indeed question the manageress of the florist’s regarding a recent customer.

It is perfectly reasonable to assume that these events happened around the same time, and that Ewer was involved in both. (Why else would the police be making enquiries at a flower shop?)

So rather astonishingly, by sheer chance, the brother-in-law of the victim’s wife was a step ahead of the police investigating a high profile murder case. Ewer had fingered Hanratty before they did.

Ewer’s motives for going public with his steering operation are slightly puzzling. He was not a man desperate for money, nor does he appear a reckless character keen for his 15 minutes of fame. He must have realised the scepticism that was going to greet his story, and even the potential danger that his prior knowledge might bring upon him.

[moste]

And the name Ryan didn't figure in police inquiries until September 11 when the cartridge cases were found at The Vienna and Acott and Co descended upon the place like avenging angels (that is, once the case had been shown forensically to have been fired by the murder weapon - which didn't take long).

Nats, you may have forgotten that after the trial, both Ewer and Janet Gregsten dismissed the story as 'an invention of the gutter press', and they weren't far wrong. Ewer described the story as 'a farrago of nonsense', and Janet agreed, saying that 'it is absolute total nonsense - it's come out of Duffy's (Daily Sketch journalist) imagination'. She added that Bill Ewer 'wouldn't say that because there isn't any basis on which to say it'.

To this day, it's still not 100% certain how the police made the vital connection that Ryan was Hanratty, but you can bet your pension it was nothing to do with 'She Saw Him At The Cleaners'. Or whatever.

Of course Ewer had no idea that James Hanratty had been in Louise Anderson's shop on the morning of Hanratty's visit to her. Why should he? The name 'Hanratty' was unknown to him.

Graham

Graham

Hi Graham. You did say recently that you were in the process of re-reading Paul Foot's book.
Maybe if its the copy I have, you have not reached page 53, and the build up to his interview with Mrs. Morrell.
Duffy, actually was given the story of the incredible sighting at Swiss Cottage by a good friend and associate. No fewer than four newspaper company's were in on the original story, The whole point is, and you have to read a couple of preceding pages where Foot (as a journalist)gives the run down on the reports, reports only heaven knows what the purpose of them being dreamt up would be, knowing that (a) Ewer would immediately deny everything and (b) possibly might even sue. I say the whole point is, Foot adds all the weight required to the newspaper articles, with his simple interview with Dorothy Morrell. Who confirms Hanratty's visit, and the visit soon after by 'two plain clothed detectives'. Now if you cannot draw a conclusion from this regarding Ewers involvement, then that's too bad.

[Natalie Severn]

Some questions spring to my mind following that outpouring.

.

Hi Spitfire ,
Please refer to the Sunday Times article of 16th May 1971 which contains a full statement by William Ewer himself and which confirms every salient point made in my post.viz:
Ewer on 1st September 1961 followed a young man who turned out to be James Hanratty.He wore a blue suit was sipping coffee in the same cafe and had large staring eyes 'like carbuncles'-exactly like,Ewer thought, the new description issued by Scotland Yard of the suspect on 31st August 1961.He followed him to several shops on the Finchley Road ,including the photographer's who was himself an ex policeman . Ewer called police who came.took statements and went away. It corroborates the florist Mrs Morrell who was interviewed by the police she told Paul Foot and confirmed the incident and showed Foot the written evidence of the flower order for Mrs Hanratty[card was addressed to his mum which Mrs Morrell thought odd because the man gave the name of Ryan]-The police had apparently never heard of any Ryan -and nothing further happened though Foot says a report was made by police after their visit and sent to to Scotland Yard. [the report was made by the same police who came and questioned Ewer, Mrs Morrell and the photographer shop manager.
Can I ask you btw Spitfire ,not to make insulting remarks like 'outpouring ' to describe my posts ? Lets try to keep the posts amicable can we .AtB Nats

[Spitfire]

Can we keep to reality here Nick or are you too ,like Graham appears to be, unaware of the facts surrounding all this which are on record in Scotland Yard ?
This police report still exists in Scotland Yard, as far as I am aware ,which documents William Ewer's call to them on the afternoon of September 1st 1961 about a man with large blue eyes who Ewer thought might be the A6 killer who answered the new description issued the day before changing his eyes from 'brown ,deep set staring' to 'large light blue staring' who William Ewer believed he had just seen entering Cater's the Florists in Finchley Road on September 1st 1961.The man did indeed turn out to be James Hanratty who William Ewer had been following on that day from shop to shop viz from the coffee shop where he first spotted Hanratty >Photographers shop> Dorothy Morrell's Florist Shop where police took a statement from Mrs Morrell [this statement still in Scotland Yard -who was the manageress there .She told police about a bunch of flowers that had been sent by a J.Ryan[James Hanratty ] to Mrs Hanratty of Sycamore Grove that day.

Some questions spring to my mind following that outpouring.

Have you seen the report which you say still exists in Scotland Yard?

Are you saying that by reason of the information imparted by Ewer to the police, the murder squad were made aware on 1st September 1961 that Ewer suspected Ryan to be the murderer?

Are you saying that the police interviewed Mrs Morrell on the 1st September 1961? And from this interview learned that Ryan on 1st September 1961 had sent flowers to Mrs Hanratty of Sycamore Grove?

Have you seen Mrs Morrell's statement given as a result of this interview?

If what you have written is correct, then the murder squad could have known that the suspect Ryan was Hanratty and when the spent cartridge cases were discovered in Room 24 of the Vienna on 11th September, they should have been able to easily reconcile the Ryan in the Vienna's register as James Hanratty. That they did not consider Ryan to be a suspect tends to indicate that either the ramblings of Ewer did not happen, or if they did happen, they were not taken seriously enough to be conveyed to Acott or Oxford.

I agree with Nick B and Graham that most of this is journalistic invention with some minimal basis in fact.

[NickB]

I know that William Ewer claimed, in the Sketch article, to have called the police on 1-Sep-61, but where is any corroboration of his claim?

Similarly when you look at the shops he claims to have gone into in hot pursuit, apart from Edmund King at the photographers, where is any corroboration of his claim?