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

[moste]

PC Reginald Edwards examined the interior of the Morris Minor on the evening of August 23rd after it was discovered in Avondale Crescent. He gave evidence at the Committal Proceedings at Ampthill on November 27th 1961. His evidence makes for interesting reading and is in contrast to Det-Sgt Arnold's evidence......................

I wonder what the detectives were doing, allowing a police constable in and around a crime scene as heavy duty as that Morris 1000

[Sherlock Houses]

PC Edwards

I wonder what the detectives were doing, allowing a police constable in and around a crime scene as heavy duty as that Morris 1000

In all likelihood Moste, PC Edwards was the unnamed motor-cycle policeman mentioned in the two attached newspaper articles of August 24th 1961.

Here are those two articles. Strange that there's no mention of Alan Madwar.

[moste]

From the Guardian article this is a very interesting development from what we have understood. It was Mr.Kerrs statement V Ms. Storie's take on things, that has always been the issue. Now we have another witness apparently, which corroborates Kerrs notes . I would suggest that if Mr. Sherrard had pointed out these two statements to the jury, concurrently, it would have thrown considerably doubt on the whole statement of events from the Old Station Inn to the Lay-by. Acott obviously didn't want Kerrs notes compared with the statement of Miss Storie, that's why they disappeared in my view. Easy to convince the jury by comparing a fanciful teenagers eager notations, with that of the victim, who, though terribly wounded, was lucid, and compos mentis throughout. There never was a cornfield visit on that evening, the corn was flattened in the field from her Sunday outing with Gregsten in my view. There clearly was a pick up in Slough of a man, and the story changed and was edited and proofread by Acott, after his very long interviews with her. Interestingly we can feel free to make comparisons between Ms.Stories changes of story, and changes of, identifying the supposed assailant, with Hanratty's elaborations of his alibi. As an aside, I found it eyebrow raising, that as well as motor rallying in Summer, MG and VS, in more inclement weather i.e. throughout the winter months our couple had a passion for acting, being members of the Slough amateur dramatic society.

[NickB]

our couple had a passion for acting, being members of the Slough amateur dramatic society.

Like the motor rallying, the dramatics was done in an after-work office club.

This is what Valerie said about it:

"In the winter months when there were no car rallies we joined the works amateur dramatic society. I shall always remember the part I got in a play called 'My Three Angels'. Mike used to tease me about it and say I'd end up in the West End.

But this was only fun. Really we valued the dramatic society because it enabled us to do things together and to forget that in other ways we had so many difficulties in our life together."

Why do you think that the cornfield never happened?

[moste]

Hi Nick.
Mr.Kerr, and now according to Sherlocks post, a police officer concur that Valerie told them that her and Mike picked a man up in Slough, this all changed after she had been in conference with Mr.Acott, this for me just doesn't work.

[cobalt]

I've always felt that Ms Storie's initial reference to a hitch hiker was significant, but it's hard to see what advantage there was to the prosecution in shifting the initial meeting to the corn field. In fact the concept of a well-intentioned couple, no doubt full of the joys of life, picking up a disturbed hitch hiker actually makes slightly more sense than the official version.

Do you suspect that the contact with the third party was actually pre-arranged, and that is why the version of events was changed?

[NickB]

Kerr said Storie told him: “We picked him up about 9 or 9.30 at Slough.”

If she really meant the town of Slough, what happened between then and when they drove past Slough Post Office at 11.45?

[Derrick]

Kerr said Storie told him: “We picked him up about 9 or 9.30 at Slough.”

If she really meant the town of Slough, what happened between then and when they drove past Slough Post Office at 11.45?

Hi Nick

But isn't this the point that Moste is making? That Ms Storie's version of events isn't quite what she actually experienced.

One has to remember that Acott did indeed massage her story viz the actual whereabouts of the roadworks and the garage that the car stopped at for petrol; to make it seem that the killer knew the area around Kingsbury, which Hanratty would undoubtedly have.

Del

[Sherlock Houses]

I've always felt that Ms Storie's initial reference to a hitch hiker was significant, but it's hard to see what advantage there was to the prosecution in shifting the initial meeting to the corn field. In fact the concept of a well-intentioned couple, no doubt full of the joys of life, picking up a disturbed hitch hiker actually makes slightly more sense than the official version.

Do you suspect that the contact with the third party was actually pre-arranged, and that is why the version of events was changed?

When interviewed for the lunchtime edition of ITN news on the day of the murder John Kerr stated that Valerie Storie told him that they had 'picked up a man at Slough'. She didn't mention Dorney Reach at all, which seems rather surprising as Slough and Dorney Reach are two separate areas some 4 or 5 miles apart. Whatever the truth of the matter, whether the third party entered the car in the cornfield or was picked up hitch-hiking somewhere in Slough, one thing seems certain, namely that the gunman held the couple captive for almost 6 hours in the confines of a small car.

The gunman must have had some kind of idea or plan in his mind as to what he was going to do once he stepped into the car. If it was his intention to steal the Morris Minor why not just order MG and VS out of the car and drive away ? Perhaps he was not very proficient at driving and needed a refresher course, watching, from the back seat, MG handle the car. Maybe he had another agenda and was not in the least bit interested in stealing their car. What then might have been his motivation in holding up this young couple ? Was he after any money or valuables the occupants of a humble 5 year old Morris Minor might have on their person ? If so, why not just take whatever they had, leave them stranded in a cornfield and drive away in their car ? Why the ensuing mind games which were to occupy the next 5 to 6 hours ? There must have been considerable tension between the three parties in the claustrophobic confines of that Morris Minor. One of them was in the dominant position of having a loaded handgun pointing at the two people in front. Was he playing some sort of cat and mouse game with them and looking for a certain response from one [or both] of them which never materialised ? All rhetorical questions I know but important nonetheless.

MG and VS were very involved in car rallies, planning them and driving in them. For argument's sake let's suppose that the gunman knew who this couple were without them knowing who he was. Let's also suppose that he was aware of their passion for car rallies. If these suppositions are true perhaps the gunman was thinking in terms of directing the couple on his own, so to speak, sort of midnight car rally which was to take in several points/places before finally ending up at Deadman's Hill, perhaps an appropriate and pre-meditated location in the gunman's peculiar logic. It would go a little way in trying to explain the mystery of that midnight drive from an isolated cornfield in Dorney Reach to a lonely lay-by some fifty miles to the north.

[Graham]

The question as to why Valerie referred, on two known occasions, to picking up a hitch-hiker near Slough is very valid.

A point to consider with regard to early reporting of the crime is, as has recently been posted, the failure of at least some of the press initially to mention that it was Alan Madwar, not a patrolling policeman, who first noticed the car in Avondale Crescent. Alan Madwar's name came into the case and therefore into public notice at some later time. Bear in mind that according to John Kerr, Valerie's actual words were "We picked up a man near Slough". At that stage at least she made no mention of a hitch-hiker according to Kerr, but it's easy to see how people put two and two together to come up with the idea that she and Gregsten had actually picked up a hiker. Doubtless Valerie herself corrected this misunderstand when she was first interviewed in hospital.

At about 11.00am on the Thursday following the murder, the police issued their first description of the wanted man, per information Valerie gave to Woman Det Gwen Woodin who passed it onto Det Sgt Rees. There was a description of the man (no mention of colour of eyes at this stage), and the statement 'it is believed the suspect forced the deceased and the woman to give him a lift in the car at about 9.30pm at Dorney'. So not very long after the crime Valerie was referring to Dorney and not, as apparently she did earlier, to somewhere 'near Slough'.

I don't think there's anything sinister in all this - Valerie must have been in a state of shock initially, mentioning 'near Slough' rather than 'Dorney', and because she had referred to 'picking up' a man it was rather naturally assumed she meant a hitch-hiker.

Graham.

[Sherlock Houses]

The question as to why Valerie referred, on two known occasions, to picking up a hitch-hiker near Slough is very valid.

A point to consider with regard to early reporting of the crime is, as has recently been posted, the failure of at least some of the press initially to mention that it was Alan Madwar, not a patrolling policeman, who first noticed the car in Avondale Crescent. Alan Madwar's name came into the case and therefore into public notice at some later time. Bear in mind that according to John Kerr, Valerie's actual words were "We picked up a man near Slough".At that stage at least she made no mention of a hitch-hiker according to Kerr, but it's easy to see how people put two and two together to come up with the idea that she and Gregsten had actually picked up a hiker. Doubtless Valerie herself corrected this misunderstand when she was first interviewed in hospital.

I don't think there's anything sinister in all this - Valerie must have been in a state of shock initially, mentioning 'near Slough' rather than 'Dorney', and because she had referred to 'picking up' a man it was rather naturally assumed she meant a hitch-hiker.

Graham.

I hope you'll excuse me for correcting you here Graham but John Kerr did say VS had picked up the man "at Slough" not near Slough. He mentions it twice. This is evidenced in the following Youtube link...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPZuWAG0HJM

Interestingly the ITN reporter before turning to speak with John Kerr mentions the word 'hitch-hiker'.

Does anyone recall the name of this reporter ? His face seems very familiar from the 1960's. He was the same reporter seen on camera outside the Bedford Court on the evening of Saturday, February 17th 1962 after the jury's verdict had been delivered.

[Graham]

Hi SH,

First, the TV interviewer (sorry, I can't remember his name either) said that the couple had 'set off from Slough' and, you are correct, said that they 'picked up a hitch-hiker'.

Then, John Kerr says first that Valerie told him that she and Gregsten had been held up by a gunman at Slough; he then corrects this to say that they had 'picked up a gunman at Slough', and that he'd then held them up and 'shot her''

As far as I can make out, Dorney Reach is 3.5 - 4.0 miles from Slough, to the west. Not perhaps 'at Slough', but certainly 'near Slough'. Yet Kerr never says 'near Slough'; twice he says 'at Slough'. Was he accurately repeating what Valerie said to him, or what?

I think from this brief exchange alone it's easy to see how the initial media reporting of this crime led to some quite serious confusion.

Graham

[j.kettle1]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There were a myriad of hairs, fibres and fingermarks found in the car that were eventually matched to either Ms Storie or Mr Gregsten or members of Mr Gregsten's family.

There were only 2 fingermarks that were found that matched nobody from Gregsten's family or from Ms Storie.

Neither of these fingermarks matched either Alphon or Hanratty

The car could not have been cleaned as you say, or all other forensics would have been lost or destroyed.
If one was so minded then an inference could be drawn from the evidence that remained.

[NickB]

Graham,

You may be thinking of the Horizon programme when Kerr recalls Storie said to him: "We picked up a man around 9.30 last night near Slough."

Whether she said 'at' or 'near' I assume she said Slough because she would not expect anyone to have heard of Dorney Reach.

[moste]

Graham,

You may be thinking of the Horizon programme when Kerr recalls Storie said to him: "We picked up a man around 9.30 last night near Slough."

Whether she said 'at' or 'near' I assume she said Slough because she would not expect anyone to have heard of Dorney Reach.

I don't believe Ms. Storie would have been in a fit state to be concerned about the geographical knowledge of the first person at the scene. She said "at Slough "because that's where the unknown man got into the car. To answer Cobalt's question. Yes, I do suspect the third person was arranged previously by M G and, there was a purpose to the trip to Bedfordshire. However I have a suspicion that V S was not supposed to be in the car. After a discussion in Huntercombe Lane south,( where they were clearly spotted by David Henderson, on his way home from his girlfriends house,) Mike may well have wanted to drop Val off at home in Anthony way, about 3 or 4 minutes from where they were parked. She sealed her fate when she insisted on going with him. Pure conjecture I know, but once we can acknowledge that there are far too many anomalies for this saga not to be conspiracy related, then there are many avenues to muse over. At the end of the day we can always rely on that ingredient used by all great sleuths 'Gut Feeling'