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

[moste]

While we're on the subject of Alphon v Hanratty. Selling almanacs door to door ,is a classic method of "casing a joint." Used by burglars as a good reason to be wandering around a persons property with the ruse to be peddling something.
I myself sometimes wonder if Jim and Pete perhaps knew each other, and even in league with each other, Pete would do the reconnoitre, with books in bag ready for a sale ,while checking for absent home owners,then later, passing on his addresses to Jim, who, by moonlight, will relieve them of their valuables. All that is required then is a fence, maybe like Mr.E or Ms. A, and its "share out time". Very nice little business, I would say,(always remembering to keep people like the Almanac people sweet with a few quid in case an alibi may be required at some later day). If anyone believes Alphons almanac selling was a legitimate job of work, then he could tell you anything.
just a thought.

[moste]

That phrase "the wrong man wasn't hanged" is stupid and meaningless, regardless of who said it. Everyman was the wrong man and wasn't hanged, except for the right man, whom in our case is unknown.
If on the other hand you believe Hanratty was guilty, then, the right man was hanged, I think if Sherrard did actually say that, he was having a tease.

[Spitfire]

Everyman was the wrong man and wasn't hanged, except for the right man, whom in our case is unknown.

Maybe I can help.

In the context of this debate only one man was hanged (Hanratty) and he was not the wrong man, in that he committed the crime of which he was charged, and was the right man to be hanged.

[cobalt]

The truth in this case will continue to be hard to fathom.

Hanratty: Self confessed criminal
Dudds: Ditto
Alphon: Dodgy character accused of serious assault
Ewer: Self styled antique dealer with unaccounted for wealth
Gregsten: Philanderer
Acott: Dodgy cop with an alleged track record of fit ups.
Oxford: Ditto

Not much to go on there.

[Spitfire]

The truth in this case will continue to be hard to fathom.

Hanratty: Self confessed criminal
Dudds: Ditto
Alphon: Dodgy character accused of serious assault
Ewer: Self styled antique dealer with unaccounted for wealth
Gregsten: Philanderer
Acott: Dodgy cop with an alleged track record of fit ups.
Oxford: Ditto

Not much to go on there.

Dudds being the most interesting character of the lot.

[Natalie Severn]

There wasn't a great deal going for the notion that Alphon was the A6 Murderer back in 1962. There is even less going for it 53 years later after Hanratty's 1962 Counsel (Sherrard) has said the wrong man was not hanged and his 2002 Counsel (Mansfield) has said that Alphon did not commit the crime.

Other facts point to Hanratty rather than Alphon, the spent cartridge cases were found in Room 24, a room occupied by Hanratty not Alphon. Hanratty's DNA was found on the hanky and knicker fragment, Aphon's was absent.

True-there wasn't a 'great deal' going for it in 1962 since Valerie Storie had positively identified two other men by then as the A6 killer ;one a 'heavily built ' mousey haired man the same height of 5'9" as Alphon ,the other a very slim man of 5'7" named Hanratty .
But from day one of the A6 murder in 1961 when a very agitated Alphon arrived in the Alexandra Hotel ,Finsbury Park, there was suspicion about his agitated behaviour from a retired school teacher then other guests at the hotel which led to police questioning him 5 days later which actually was their very first lead to the Vienna Hotel where he had checked in on 22nd August 1961, the night of the A6 murder. Later police took a very significant interest in Alphon and began a nationwide search for him.
Mansfield ruled out Alphon in 2002 solely on the basis of the absence of his DNA on the knicker fragment which at the time was thought to be proof that he did not commit the crime.However we know today that this was wrong and that Mansfield made a mistake in saying this and that you can not rule someone out on the basis of absence of DNA if you are using LCNDNA testing methods.

It appears that Chief Supt Roger Matthews of Scotland Yard who in 1996 saw a lot more information than we have seen of police files etc , apparently did not 'rule him out' .I also understand that Matthews believed there were three people involved in the A6 murder, not one.

[Natalie Severn]

re 'DUDDS'
mind we know ' Nudds ' had an astounding collection of eleven false names in all ....! Maybe he was nicknamed 'Dudds' by the cops after he did a complete turn around over the Alphon/Hanratty alibis telling the cops first one story in which he gave his alibi for Alphon,then another in which he gave his alibi for Hanratty, then ,after a metaphorical kick up the bum and seven hours of interrogation from very same cops plumped for giving back Alphon an alibi and was rewarded by being made a 'witness for the prosecution' at the trial.lol !

[Graham]

Hi Nats,

After Alphon was interviewed following the Alexandra Court incident, he was dismissed as a suspect for the A6 crime. (Incidentally, he wasn't the first man to be interviewed about the A6). It was only when the cartridge cases were discovered at The Vienna that the police became instantly interested in him again, even though he didn't actually stay in Room 24 - unless you believe old Nudds, that is. It then became clear that someone called Ryan had stayed in Room 24 on the night in question. Alphon gave himself up willingly, hardly the action of a man responsible for one of the most brutal crimes of the 20th century, and admitted to the press that the prospect of being grilled by Acott & Co 'terrified' him. Acott played down the severity of his grilling of Alphon, who said it was a terrible ordeal, and I know which of the two I'm more prepared to believe - and it's not Mr Acott.

Alphon's weird behaviour at The Alexandra was absolutely typical of him, as I mentioned in a previous post, and more than one person who knew him testified as such. I once had to share an office with a bloke who was completely unable to keep still for more than about a minute, and it drove me crackers as he fidgeted and paced up and down, to the point where I moved to another office and sanity.

You mention Matthews and his report quite a lot, Nats. Obviously you accept what he says. It seems that he was confident that 'three people' were involved in the A6, so would it perhaps be possible if these three people were named? Do you know who he was referring to? (I can probably guess the i.d. of two of them, anyway).

Graham

[OneRound]

Hi Nats,

Following on from Graham's post and queries, surely Mansfield would have had access to Matthews' report - is that right? If so, do you know why he didn't fully utilise it?

Thanks,

OneRound

[caz]

Hey Caz Part of the problem here with this back and forth argument re- Alphon v Hanratty, Lies in your belief that Alphon was mentally fragile. Alphon I believe was a cunning ,misleading, calculating, ne'er-do-well and about as mentally fragile as Einstein. Gregsten was mentally fragile, check out Woffindens book chapter 2. Poor man needed medical help he wasn't getting.

Hi moste,

It was Norma who suggested that Alphon "may have had a schizoid or borderline schizophrenic personality and if he did, then that personality type can indeed commit such crimes as the A6 murder...".

If this is true, any unsupported confession he made should not be relied on or used against him.

I'm not sure what Gregsten's mental capacity has to do with anything. He was the murder victim.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

While we're on the subject of Alphon v Hanratty. Selling almanacs door to door ,is a classic method of "casing a joint." Used by burglars as a good reason to be wandering around a persons property with the ruse to be peddling something.
I myself sometimes wonder if Jim and Pete perhaps knew each other, and even in league with each other...

Well they'd have had to be close associates if Alphon had been the gunman and used Hanratty's hanky when disposing of the murder weapon.

However, any actual evidence of such a relationship seems to be totally lacking.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Caz-What on earth is going on here? Why are you deliberately stonewalling any discussion on Alphon and choosing instead to make offensive and personal attacks on me, calling me names like hypocrite and taking the high moral ground ? Get Lost.

Me stonewalling, Nats? Everyone is most welcome to discuss Alphon and I couldn't stop you even if I wanted to - which I don't.

But no, I won't 'get lost'. You have consistently claimed the moral high ground when defending Hanratty against what you insist was 'gross contamination' of DNA tests, which were a 'complete joke'; what you insist have been lies and corruption from the police, the prosecution, the FSS and the justice system in general, from 1961 to 2002 and beyond. You keep bringing up other cases, particularly Hillsborough, as if this terrible miscarriage of justice has any bearing on the evidence in the A6 case, and you can't even see that in seeking to incriminate Alphon for the murder and rape (which in itself I don't object to in the slightest - freedom of opinion and all that) you are doing everything that you so thoroughly condemn in others.

In short, if you consider the case against Hanratty (even with his DNA on the knicker fragment and hanky) was grossly unfair and grossly unsound, what does that make any case against Alphon? Safe and sound? No, not remotely.

It would just be nice if you could admit that much.

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

Caz, I don't accept that having a look at Alphon's stay at the Vienna Hotel and how it then led to Hanratty and Hanratty's subsequent execution is remotely comparable to what happened to Hanratty.
It is also a fact that the nationwide search put out by police in 1961 for Alphon and his subsequent questioning by police and the police dropping him from their inquiries led directly to police questioning Hanratty. So Alphon remains someone we have to deal with when looking at the case.This astounding and extraordinary co-incidence and it was not the only astonishing co-incidence .
But you have decided this is hypocritical of me because in your opinion I am not using the same yardstick of justice for Alphon when I consider his possible role in the A6 murder as I do for Hanratty and other justice campaigns say Hillsborough. Alphon did not die Caz, was not a victim of police--- or anybody else----'fitting him' up or police altering his statements- so far as we know -yes he was in prison briefly [ my mistake previously when I said he was not imprisoned in this post ] -he was briefly in Brixton prison and he was freed from Brixton upon being given an alibi by the almanac sellers ,his occasional employers. So how can there be a 'miscarriage of justice' for me to campaign around?
I think the way you are personally attacking my integrity on these boards is uncalled for.My suggestion to you is that we ignore each other's posts to avoid you continuing your personal attacks .
Best Wishes
Norma

[Graham]

Hi Nats,

Mansfield ruled out Alphon in 2002 solely on the basis of the absence of his DNA on the knicker fragment which at the time was thought to be proof that he did not commit the crime.However we know today that this was wrong and that Mansfield made a mistake in saying this and that you can not rule someone out on the basis of absence of DNA if you are using LCNDNA testing methods.

I don't mean to be flippant, but if what you say is true then the number of potential A6 killers must be infinitesimal. I mean, my late Uncle Ted lived in Harrow, quite close to where it all began, and as his DNA wasn't on any of the fragments, then could he be considered a legitimate suspect? He was an odd 'un, quite true, but I couldn't see him as a killer and rapist.

The simple fact is, Nats, that Hanratty's DNA was found on the fragments, and Alphon's wasn't. Michael Mansfield, one of the most senior appeal lawyers in the judiciary, was perfectly prepared to accept this, as was Michael Sherrard. It must rest there, I feel.

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Nats,

Following on from Graham's post and queries, surely Mansfield would have had access to Matthews' report - is that right? If so, do you know why he didn't fully utilise it?

Thanks,

OneRound

Don't know whether Mansfield had access to it One Round.Assume he did -you can pick up bits of it as you read through the record and documentation of the appeal court .It must have been persuasive to have been allowed to go to appeal 42 years after the execution at all .Personally I believe they were all quite astounded by the DNA results.And I understand that ----at that time, 2002, its extraordinary propensity to contamination was not known.Now there are much greater safe guards from the crime scene and sterile labs and sterile handling in the lab.