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

[caz]

And of course he was well aware that as Hanratty had been found guilty and paid the penalty, there was no chance of him, Alphon, being charged.

I agree, Graham - if he was innocent.

Just a decade earlier, John Christie wasn't allowed to get away with murder because the authorities didn't want to admit they may have hanged the wrong man, Timothy Evans.

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Nats,

But the defence wanted the appeal and fully expected the DNA results to provide this 'overwhelming evidence' of Hanratty's innocence.


X

Caz,
I have always understood that it was the Crown who wanted the DNA tested.The family simply did as they were asked.

[caz]

Rather cheap that Graham. Mrs Dunwoody was a devout Christian and only testified because her conscience made her. I am sure she was not a liar---and interestingly so was Acott which was why he made the absurd suggestion that Hanratty might have taken a helicopter or a plane from Speke Airport to Buckinghamshire.

I took Graham to mean that Hanratty was the liar (admitted by Hanratty himself), not Mrs D, who was certain she saw Hanratty on an impossible day, so clearly mistaken and not reliable, but hardly dishonest.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Likewise proof of Alphon's whereabouts on the murder night ,anywhere other than that car would have cleared his name.....but there wasn't was there? Just saying.....

Alphon's name doesn't need clearing, does it? I thought you were trying to clear Hanratty's, but it seems you are admitting a) that he couldn't prove he wasn't in that car, and b) the DNA tests could never have proved his innocence either if they were inherently flawed.

Just saying...

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Graham,

If Hanratty really had seen and spoken to all those people in Rhyl, and really had stayed overnight in a guest house there, why on earth would he ever have considered the fake Liverpool alibi a safer bet?

Love,

Caz
X

Hanratty was in the most awful situation imaginable on the day he first spoke to Acott October 6th . He knew the police were after him for burglary and knew he would get five years for it .He also knew he was innocent of the murder - it didn't occur to him he might get fitted up for it and because he knew he was innocent assumed all he had to do was get one of his Liverpool mates to provide an alibi for him ...no big deal-so he thought!!!

When he was in Liverpool earlier -on 22nd August - on the off chance as usual - he had made no fencing contacts that afternoon -even the billiard hall manager didn't want to know-but remembered Hanratty had tried to sell him the gold watch 'in the early evening' ..and so he hopped on the Rhyl bus standing where it always was ,outside Lime Street Station and headed off to Rhyl -on the off chance-again - nobody seemed to be around willing to buy his bits and pieces that day after all-

[caz]

Caz,
I have always understood that it was the Crown who wanted the DNA tested.The family simply did as they were asked.

Really? I thought the family were convinced of their boy's innocence and wanted the chance to prove it, while the Crown would have taken the attitude "if it ain't broke...".

Here you make it sound like the family reluctantly agreed to the DNA tests, as if they suspected what the results would reveal.

Surely nobody on Hanratty's side was expecting the worst, while the Crown could hardly have banked in 2002 on flawed tests supporting the original conviction so convincingly.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hanratty was in the most awful situation imaginable on the day he first spoke to Acott October 6th . He knew the police were after him for burglary and knew he would get five years for it .

Five years hardly compares with death by hanging, Nats.

He also knew he was innocent of the murder - it didn't occur to him he might get fitted up for it and because he knew he was innocent assumed all he had to do was get one of his Liverpool mates to provide an alibi for him ...no big deal-so he thought!!!

Since when did you know what was going on inside his head? If he knew he was innocent, he also knew he had a genuine alibi, with possibly a dozen witnesses he had seen or spoken to, so why would he have needed to rely on a fake one, provided by a fellow criminal - who arguably found it a very big deal indeed to risk being charged as an accessory to murder?

..and so he hopped on the Rhyl bus standing where it always was ,outside Lime Street Station and headed off to Rhyl -on the off chance-again - nobody seemed to be around willing to buy his bits and pieces that day after all-

Yeah, funny that. Yet many honest citizens were around in Rhyl, and apparently saw him and spoke to him, but he didn't trust a single one to vouch for him until his Liverpool lie was exposed and then it was all too late.

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

Alphon's name doesn't need clearing, does it? I thought you were trying to clear Hanratty's, but it seems you are admitting a) that he couldn't prove he wasn't in that car, and b) the DNA tests could never have proved his innocence either if they were inherently flawed.

Just saying...

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,
-One of the most serious omissions of the prosecution case was that Alphon ,who had for several weeks prior to Hanratty's arrest been the Prime Suspect ,had stayed at the very same hotel as Hanratty and had even arrived as Hanratty left ...yet Alphon was not allowed by Acott to be questioned in court by Sherrard . Nor,btw, was Sherrard allowed to have the man Valerie first identified as her rapist ,the 5 ' 9" in Michael Clark [who had dark brown eyes and was well built-according to Acott] brought to the court for comparisons. That would have been very important for the jury to consider surely in terms of comparison since Hanratty was exceptionally slim according to Louise Anderson and his eyes were light blue and he was just over 5'7' tall.

[Spitfire]

No one from the defence would have been present when Dr Whitaker performed his LCN tests in 2000 on behalf of the Crown.

Thank you. That may or may not be right, but no one on behalf of the defence complained about the access afforded to the defence for the purposes of observing the tests. I therefore have assumed that the defence was happy with the observation arrangements.

[Graham]

Rather cheap that Graham. Mrs Dunwoody was a devout Christian and only testified because her conscience made her. I am sure she was not a liar---and interestingly so was Acott which was why he made the absurd suggestion that Hanratty might have taken a helicopter or a plane from Speke Airport to Buckinghamshire.

To give her the benefit of the doubt she was not a liar. She was simply mistaken, and the investigation was handled incompetently. And does being a devout Christian make one completely and totally dedicated to the truth in all things?

And yes, as Caz correctly points out, I was never suggesting that Mrs D was the liar, unless of course she and not Hanratty thought up the Liverpool 'alibi'. Which of course she did not. Just out of interest, why did you mention only Mrs D in response to my post, and not Mrs Grace Jones?

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

Just out of interest, why did you mention only Mrs D in response to my post, and not Mrs Grace Jones?

Graham

Mrs Grace Jones was also a very decent woman who kept an exemplary guest house despite Swanwick 's disgraceful comments about her book keeping and an attack on her about them which caused the books that the prosecution had taken [without her knowledge as I understand] -from her guest house, to fall to pieces on the ground.Her good character is vouched for by her friend ,the owner of a well run still thriving printing shop across the road in Kinmel Street .Mrs Grace Jones is of crucial importance in my view because her house answered every description Hanratty gave to his solicitor after Sherrard had left the room upset at Hanratty changing his alibi during a critical point in his trial at Bedford hundreds of miles from Rhyl .Hanratty under severe stress as moments later Kleinman wrote rapid notes as Hanratty dictated what he could remember about a house you entered directly from the street , a green bath at the top ,hearing the noise of railways from his room , the paved courtyard at the back what he had paid and he assisted in a sketch which showed Kinmel Street leading to a cinema and a hump backed bridge-both still there .Hanratty stayed with Mrs Jones on the night of 22nd August. He was seen the very next day by Trevor Dutton-once a customer of the printshop and greatly respected in Kinmel Bay where he held posts of responsibility in the community.And as you well know there were 8 or 9 other people who remembered seeing Hanratty that night in Rhyl.No witnesses saw Hanratty in either London or Buckinghamshire or Slough or anywhere else in the South of England.

[Natalie Severn]

Really?

Yes really Caz.

[Graham]

Hi Nats,

When he was in Liverpool earlier -on 22nd August - on the off chance as usual - he had made no fencing contacts that afternoon -even the billiard hall manager didn't want to know-but remembered Hanratty had tried to sell him the gold watch 'in the early evening' ..and so he hopped on the Rhyl bus standing where it always was ,outside Lime Street Station and headed off to Rhyl -on the off chance-again - nobody seemed to be around willing to buy his bits and pieces that day after all

1] Mr Kempt the billiard-hall manager did NOT remember Hanratty at all. He gave a description of a young man which might possibly have been similar to that of Hanratty, but I do not believe that Mr Kempt was shown any photos for the purposes of identification. Also, Mr Kempt is not specifica about the date he saw this young man - all he says is that 'one evening when I was standing at the door a young fellow in his early twenties came to me and asked if I wanted to buy a watch'. Woffinden in fact hints that this encounter on the billiard-hall steps may well have taken place when Hanratty was in Liverpool from 7 October until 11 October when he was arrested in Blackpool. Mr Kempt was not contacted by the defence until some time in December.

2] Regarding Hanratty's claim to have travelled from Liverpool to Rhyl, his own timings make it impossible for him to have been in Rhyl at the time he claimed. I'm not going into these timings now - all been posted before, and are in Woffinden anyway.

Hanratty was no more in either Liverpool or Rhyl at the critical time than I was on Mars.........

Graham

[Natalie Severn]

To give her the benefit of the doubt she was not a liar. She was simply mistaken,
Graham

She was not mistaken.She originally told [prosecution]police that she saw Hanratty-on the Tuesday. It was only later she said it must have been Monday after all the cross questioning etc because her granddaughter was only with her helping to serve on the Monday - not on the Tuesday.But then the granddaughter and her friend remembered that was not entirely correct and they reminded her and told police that they were back from shopping in Central Liverpool and at her shop by 4pm on the TUESDAY and even more importantly that Barbara had even sold lollipops to some children while her friend was there as she had the day before.

[cobalt]

Just a decade earlier, John Christie wasn't allowed to get away with murder because the authorities didn't want to admit they may have hanged the wrong man, Timothy Evans.


Not the best analogy to choose in respect of Hanratty. John Christie was never charged with the murders of Mrs Evans and her daughter, so the guilt or innocence of Timothy Evans never surfaced as part of Christie’s trial. There was no need to do this, since Christie had enough dead bodies of his own to be going on with: two in his back garden, three in a kitchen cupboard, and his missus under the floorboards. So there was no problem convicting Christie, irrespective of any issue relating to the Evans case.
There are interesting links with the Hanratty case nonetheless.

1. Both executed men were around the same age, came from a similar background, and had a poor educational record.

2. In both cases potentially valuable evidence (the sheet written by Kerr and workmen’s time sheets from Rillington Place) was misplaced by the police.

3. Both men gave differing accounts of their movements in relation to the murders, which ultimately cost them dear.

4. In both cases another credible suspect emerged, although in Evans’ case his accusations against Christie were completely discredited at trial.

5. In both cases subsequent evidence emerged which would almost certainly have led to a different verdict. (Would a jury have convicted Evans had the police searched the back garden properly and found two corpses buried by Christie? Would a jury have convicted Hanratty if Alphon had given his Paris interview earlier?)

6. Both men proclaimed their innocence to the last, and asked their family to clear their name.