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

[caz]

Hi Caz,

Did you know that blood was on the hanky that was tested and proved to be animal blood?

Did you know that Charlotte France's brother in law who worked with slaughtered animals in a butchers shop brought Charlotte her meat each week?

Did you know also that a gun was kept at the very top of the airing cupboard in France's flat in a rolled up white butchers bag?

It is small clues like this you need to incorporate into the framing -again pinned on Hanratty at the time after the shocking murder-

And your point is?

Again, what purpose would the Frances have thought was served by taking the trouble to transport Hanratty's hanky to the bus? It was not shown to be his until the DNA from his mucous matched his remains, and the Frances had no reason in 1961 to believe it ever would.

Love,

Caz
X

[Natalie Severn]

Hi Nats,

The reason Hanratty gave for not mentioning his stay in Rhyl on the murder night, but lying about being in Liverpool instead, was that he thought at the time that the police merely wanted to 'interview' him
X

That was not the reason he gave Caz .

[Natalie Severn]

And your point is?

Again, what purpose would the Frances have thought was served by taking the trouble to transport Hanratty's hanky to the bus?

How about the most obvious;Charlotte France had been washing Hanratty's hankies.He had left some of his dirty laundry with her which she washed and ironed.

[Ed James]

I think that now is a good time to take stock.

.

Hi Spitfire

I think it right to try and summarise but perhaps you roll up too many different and contradictory elements in your stocktake.

Unlike Caz, I don't think the basic proposition is implausible of Ewer seeking to frighten a weak, impressionable Gregsten to end the illicit relationship. Certainly no more implausible than ,say, a house burglar/car thief with poor attention span, tooled up for the first time, coming across a Morris Minor and just having a mask to hand and thinking I'll have some fun. Then holding the couple hostage for 5 hours after a purposeless drive across the country.

But we need to be careful about what is erected on the basic proposition and points needed to be critically tested , not dismissed by simple assertion.

I wouldn't give credence to the suggestion of a plan to kill Gregsten from the outset , nor one to incriminate Hanratty from the start ( yes, use some of his broad experiences as a useful model when speaking to the pair but no intent to have him charged).

Trying to put Alphon into the mix is problematic in my view. I'll give two reasons. First, as you say, planting the cartridges in the Vienna would have risked bringing Alphon into the frame. Secondly, I think the gunman was more accomplished than either Alphon or Hanratty - based upon the rapid two shots fired into poor Gregsten from the spurless 0.38 tank gun and the 'line' of bullets fired into Valerie Storie.

Whether or not as an individual the basic proposition is considered plausible, can elements be tested. For example, how would the 'commissioner' and those enlisted know enough about the couple's movements, or at what point would things become so hot for the perpetrators that the planting of the cartridges become a necessity, and is there anything to suggest that the perceived 'heat ' was so much that a distressed France needed to go to the police with the back seat of the bus story.

regards

Ed

[Natalie Severn]

And your point is?

Would have thought it was pretty obvious.

[caz]

Caz-Scotland Road is just round the corner from Lime Street Station! You can walk up to Mrs Dunwoody's shop in less than 12 minutes!nx

But Hanratty's supposed purpose was to go to Carlton or Tarleton Road, not Mrs D's sweet shop in Scotland Road! Did her shop double up as 'Directions Are Us'? He only went there seeking directions to somewhere else, so why not hail a taxi from the station to locate his cronies?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

That was not the reason he gave Caz .

Care to enlighten us all then, Nats? It was certainly one of the reasons - quoted on this thread a few pages back (see posts #632 and #633). Hanratty claimed he would have told the truth about Rhyl if he'd known he was wanted for the actual murder, and not just for an 'interview' about it.

Love,

Caz
X

[uncle_adolph]

Hi uncle,

I keep hearing this, but could you explain how you know Valerie was told in advance of the second line-up that the latest suspect would present with 'strange colour hair'? Of course she knew about Hanratty's accent because she got permission for him to speak! She recognised his voice as the one she had been subjected to for several hours in the car.

If Hanratty may as well have had a "pick me" sign over his head, why didn't Valerie just pick him then, instead of spending some considerable time over it and then wanting to hear him speak before committing herself?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz, and many thanks for your reply.

I am away at the moment (wretched weekend conference!) and so do not have access to my Hanratty tomes. However, I do believe that Paul Foot goes into some detail over this. I will leave you to look it up or will come back to you next week.

As for Valerie taking so long to pick him out....my belief is that she genuinely could not recall with certainty who the attacker was. I am sure we have all been in a position of trying to put a face to a particular occasion or having been in a situation and trying to recall the face we then saw....it can be difficult. So it may well have been, so far as the ID parade is concerned, that she realised who the police wanted her to pick but she was struggling in her own mind to put him in that car. But once that link has been made, even though it may be an incorrect one, the belief that it was him becomes unshakeable.....as, indeed, it has been so far as Valerie is concerned.

Just my belief which you are welcome to dispute!

[NickB]

Valerie told the court that she had recognised Hanratty early in the id parade but strung it out because: “I wanted to be sure. I wasn’t going to make a mistake this time.”

Sherrard: “I am right in saying, am I not, that you made no identification for as long as twenty minutes,”
Storie: “I don’t think it was that long.”

However in the second Today article her account differs. She again says she recognised Hanatty early, but says she prolonged the id parade to twenty minutes because she could see Hanratty was suffering.

I don’t have the article, entitled ‘My twenty minutes of revenge’, but have pieced together the following from other sources.

“I had seen fear and hope flicker in those cold, staring blue eyes. I had waited for twenty minutes knowing that this man who had trampled my life underfoot like a worm was suffering in that empty thing he no doubt called his soul.

Suddenly, at the very end of the twenty minutes allowed for the identification parade, I was asked if I recognised anyone. I said quietly, ‘Number 6’. In a second the door of the room had slammed shut behind me as I was quickly wheeled out into the corridor. Superintendent Acott gripped my arm, and said, ‘Well done’. I knew I had settled my score with Hanratty.”

[Natalie Severn]

#633).
X

No its not the reason he gave Caz---look it up yourself --quite frankly all you seem to want to do is sneer

[Natalie Severn]

Valerie told the court that she had recognised Hanratty early in the id parade but strung it out because: “I wanted to be sure. I wasn’t going to make a mistake this time.”

Yes-understood.But these days you have to recognise somebody at once.Hesitation is not allowed.Moreover Valerie had 'identified' a totally different looking man with dark eyes first time round.Again this would not be permitted.You cannot 'identify' twice over.
Did you know that it has been confirmed that Hanratty was the only man with a London accent on the parade born within 100 miles of London.Nowadays that would be totally discredited.

[Natalie Severn]

How relieved everyone involved in this conspiracy must have been when she played into their hands and fingered their chosen scapegoat
X

She didn't though did she? On her first identification parade she selected a dark eyed, heavily built man of 5ft 9ins named Michael Clarke who was totally innocent and just a volunteer.Nowadays this would not only make all subsequent 'identifications' null and void but would simply be totally discredited.

[uncle_adolph]

Valerie told the court that she had recognised Hanratty early in the id parade but strung it out because: “I wanted to be sure. I wasn’t going to make a mistake this time.”

Sherrard: “I am right in saying, am I not, that you made no identification for as long as twenty minutes,”
Storie: “I don’t think it was that long.”

However in the second Today article her account differs. She again says she recognised Hanatty early, but says she prolonged the id parade to twenty minutes because she could see Hanratty was suffering.

I don’t have the article, entitled ‘My twenty minutes of revenge’, but have pieced together the following from other sources.

“I had seen fear and hope flicker in those cold, staring blue eyes. I had waited for twenty minutes knowing that this man who had trampled my life underfoot like a worm was suffering in that empty thing he no doubt called his soul.

Suddenly, at the very end of the twenty minutes allowed for the identification parade, I was asked if I recognised anyone. I said quietly, ‘Number 6’. In a second the door of the room had slammed shut behind me as I was quickly wheeled out into the corridor. Superintendent Acott gripped my arm, and said, ‘Well done’. I knew I had settled my score with Hanratty.”

Many thanks for the comments, Nick.

Of course, Valerie's subsequent statements regarding the ID parade were all made with the benefit of knowing that this time she had chosen the suspect the police wanted her to pick. Who was in a position to dispute what she said particularly given her physical appearance in court? And yet at the previous ID she had been quite happy to potentially send an innocent man to the gallows. It quite clearly showed she had no real idea....leaving her mind totally open to suggestion.

The comments in Today probably owe more to the journalist's imagination than anything Valerie actually said. What does the truth matter when there is copy to sell?

[Dupplin Muir]

caz wrote:

Again, what purpose would the Frances have thought was served by taking the trouble to transport Hanratty's hanky to the bus? It was not shown to be his until the DNA from his mucous matched his remains, and the Frances had no reason in 1961 to believe it ever would.

It's still unclear whether Hanratty identified the handkerchief as his, but if he did, it clearly was not just an anonymous square of fabric: there must have been something distinctive about it - and this would explain why someone would put it on the bus to incriminate JH.

[Graham]

Hi Nats,

a dark eyed, heavily built man of 5ft 9ins named Michael Clarke

Just zip on over to the "A6 Rebooted" thread regarding this.

Graham