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

[Limehouse]

Your protestations on behalf of Alphon may be having an effect, if not exactly the desired effect. If you look on the "Valerie Storie's 3 part story as published in 'Today' magazine, June 1962" thread on this forum, you will see that the Hanratty supporters are turning their attention to a work colleague (as yet unnamed) of Miss Storie at the Road Research Laboratory as being the murderer of Gregsten and the raper of Miss Storie.

Those that make these allegations seem blissfully unaware of the enormity of the libel which they commit with the suggestion that Miss Storie all along knew the identity of Gregsten's killer.

Nobody has suggested Vs knew her attacker. It has only been suggested that the attack might have been as a result of her friendship with another colleague.

[Ed James]

Your protestations on behalf of Alphon may be having an effect, if not exactly the desired effect. If you look on the "Valerie Storie's 3 part story as published in 'Today' magazine, June 1962" thread on this forum, you will see that the Hanratty supporters are turning their attention to a work colleague (as yet unnamed) of Miss Storie at the Road Research Laboratory as being the murderer of Gregsten and the raper of Miss Storie.

Those that make these allegations seem blissfully unaware of the enormity of the libel which they commit with the suggestion that Miss Storie all along knew the identity of Gregsten's killer.

Hi Spitfire

Personally I don't hold with the 'colleague theory' and consider it a blind alley.
On a careful reading of Limehouse's post , I don't think she explicitly states that Valerie knew the abductor was an angry colleague (after all she only had a brief glimpse of him and the voice could have been put on - Valerie did mix with the amateur dramatics group). But your reminder about libel is timely.

Regarding the more interesting suggestion that Valerie hadother 'relationship(s)' during the 4 year affair with Gregsten, that is not unreasonable for a young woman of any times and not libellous. Nor would it be something that should have been disclosed. However, the debate on the A6 threads about the semen is worthy of fresh consideration.

It will come back on Alphon , but it might be helpful if I make clear that I am not a 'Hanratty supporter', simply someone who doesn't hold with the random ,opportunistic , sex attacker or control freak motive. For all I know Hanratty could have been contracted to do a job.

regards

Ed

[Natalie Severn]

For all I know Hanratty could have been contracted to do a job.

regards

Ed

By whom?

[Ed James]

By whom?

Hi Nats

I have been away and busy with other things.

In the interests of debate, I have wanted to explore any possible motive for Hanratty. I have previously posited as a devil's advocate that France (although really commissioned by Ewer) could have engaged Hanratty to 'scare' the couple , telling a gullible Hanratty falsely that an unnamed gangster had been crossed by Gregsten . And if Hanratty did a good job, then the gangster would look favourably on Hanratty. I suggested this could explain the bizarre nature of the hijacking.

I wanted to initiate a discussion (but didn't succeed!) - though it strikes me that most posters have firmly held views ; and this suggestion would not get support from either camp! Especially , from those who completely rejected Ewer's involvement , while for those regarding Hanratty as fitted up by Ewer/France would consider Ewer and France were both at risk by pointing the finger at Hanratty.

Or is it too far fetched to imagine that they calculated that Hanratty would not grass on France ,especially as he would have to own up for his part?

Hanratty being contracted by France is not a suggestion I have seen before - and not one I am wedded to particularly. But it might explain the tremendous tension that France ( and indeed his wife) was under , and why he bent over backwards in court to be positive about Hanratty's character (even though he pointed the police to Hanratty in circumstances that have remained unclear).

regards

Steve

[cobalt]

More likely to me, is that Alphon was putting himself around as the Sam Spade of Slough. Everything we know of the man would lend itself to this interpretation. His desire to be in the demi monde, leading a twilight existence amongst those he considered his inferiors, yet longing to be recognised as a man beyond others. No wonder he was reading Mein Kampf.

The fact that he was a dud Private Eye is neither here nor there. He would have been glib enough to convince the likes of Ewer (possibly through France) he was the man for the job, and have seen enough film noir to think he could handle the situation. Once he was exposed, so were France and Ewer.

Did Alphon and Hantratty know each other? The question is probably beyond answer now. Did Hanratty pass on the weapon? Did he recommend Alphon to France? Too may questions I am afraid.

[Semper_Eadem]

I wonder if P. Alphon might of attacked Mrs Dalal. He, the attacker did claim to be the A6 killer. Mr Alphon also claimed to be the Killer. Given Alphon's eccentric behavior I could see him pulling a stunt like that for giggles.

[Alfie]

Disposing of the gun

If he stopped somewhere secluded on his journey south after the murder, then why didn't he dispose of the gun? Odd.

Graham

Catching up after a long absence from the forum so apologies if Graham's question has already been answered, but I would observe:
(1) He liked his gun; it made him feel like a cowboy.
(2) He thought VS was dead and therefore imagined his chances of being caught as vanishingly small.
(3) When he heard she was alive (imagine his shock) he panicked and disposed of the gun as soon as he could - using a hiding place he'd used successfully before.
(4) These are the actions of a dim-witted killer, and we all know our Jim wasn't the sharpest of tools.

[caz]

I tend to agree, Alfie.

There is another possibility. In addition to getting rid of the gun, he would have been desperate to arm himself with a credible alibi. Leaving the gun on a London bus, to be found at some point later that day, when he would be safely a couple of hundred miles away in Liverpool, sending a telegram as proof, might have seemed like a good way to distance himself from the murder weapon and therefore the crime itself. I wonder if he panicked and let on to Dixie France that he had done something stupid with his new "toy" and didn't know what the hell to do. France may have advised him to dump it and run - the further away the better. He may well have had the telegram brainwave if Hanratty wasn't sharp enough to think of it himself.

Love,

Caz
X

[Alfie]

The language about 'picking a man up at Slough' is quite precise in both cases so if we take Valerie at her word here ,as quoted in these early reports and bearing in mind her words were uttered before being interviewed properly by police -,then the gunman could indeed have had an pre-arranged lift with Michael Gregsten -and one which Valerie Storie knew nothing about.

I don't think there's much doubt Valerie told Kerr that Gregsten and she had picked up a man at Slough, but nor do I think there's anything sinister in this. What was she going to tell this stranger: that she was having a park-up in a field with a married man when accosted by the gunman? I think it's simply a case of her chosing to tell a white lie for propriety's sake. This was the early 1960s remember.

The police were soon given the correct account and the "hitch-hiker story" was dropped.

Edit: I see Graham made pretty much the same point in post 298. Great minds and all that ...

[moste]

Catching up after a long absence from the forum so apologies if Graham's question has already been answered, but I would observe:
(1) He liked his gun; it made him feel like a cowboy.
(2) He thought VS was dead and therefore imagined his chances of being caught as vanishingly small.
(3) When he heard she was alive (imagine his shock) he panicked and disposed of the gun as soon as he could - using a hiding place he'd used successfully before.
(4) These are the actions of a dim-witted killer, and we all know our Jim wasn't the sharpest of tools.

Yes that's fine Alf. listen, Charles France almost certainly placed that weapon in that location and niftily slipped the noose around his ex- friends neck. Nothing more than that.

[moste]

Further more , when you consider the fact that Ewer and Gregsten would almost certainly not have been friends , and Ewer and Anderson (where Hanratty sometimes hung his hat,)were at the very least, business associates, if not a collaborating twosome in the crime of dealing in and receiving stolen goods ,quite possibly on some occasions by Hanraty, then I put it to anyone interested in listening to reason, that the suffocating coincidence of a strong connection between these people,and therefor an undeniable probability of an innocently framed co worker exists Our Sherlock in Baker Street ,would Iam convinced have been on to this obvious deduction in a heart beat!

[moste]

On an earlier point, the plastic boiler suit possibly worn by the car disposal associate, to greatly diminish the prospects of leaving a clue of his presence,from Bedfordshire to Redbridge,may well have had the latest Velcro as a fastening method, rather than the afor mentioned rubber buttons. I do remember my Dad being issued with this style of protective uniform,rather than the old Denim coveralls, in the early sixties, and Velcro was just making its appearance .Of course with this theory, and following the opinion of Chief Superintendent Mathews, (3 people involved)I believe a 'drop off 'driver was used, and a vehicle removal person,as well as an assassinator. I can't help pondering on the possibility that the assassinator was just that ,and was only at the predetermined location of dead mans hill very briefly, VS I believe was a complete surprise to all concerned and wasn't supposed to be part of the equation. Hence the **** up with disposing of her as a witness, Gregsten was supposed to have left her at home, and now presented the problem of not leaving a witness.
I am convinced ,mostly because of the massive amount of anomalies in this case,that Stories account of things , is a fabrication from beginning to end, concocted by Det. Acott and Oxford. Storie with her experience in amateur dramatics made a wonderful ally ,in the convincing the world of a single gunman nutcase. Much to the glee of the Home secretary,I have no doubt. Trouble is Home Secretaries have been dogged with the blasted thing for decades, and it never went away, even when they rigged a ridiculous dna test . Of course as the years roll by and more and more people who simply just wanted true justice die off, then and only then will the injustice of Hanrattys death be buried forever.

[Alfie]

... I am really talking about the effect on Mrs Dunwoody's ears having heard some very strong scouse during her two days in Scotland Road and noticing Hanratty's sing song intonation may well have reminded her of Welsh or Scottish voices ...

Anybody know if one of Hanratty's three Liverpool 'mates' was Welsh or Scottish?

[caz]

Yes that's fine Alf. listen, Charles France almost certainly placed that weapon in that location and niftily slipped the noose around his ex- friends neck. Nothing more than that.

But if the cartridges were planted in the hotel room, by someone who knew which room Hanratty had stayed in, why not the gun too, along with the dirty hankie? France took a risk by mentioning his knowledge of the hiding place if he could have been seen by anyone boarding the bus that day. The weapon had to be found first, and then connected directly to Hanratty. The fact that Hanratty was provably in Liverpool at the time the weapon was unconvered could have backfired on anyone attempting to frame an innocent man. What if Hanratty had been able to prove he was in Liverpool the whole day (if not on the actual murder night)? The police would have turned their attention to who could have planted any of the evidence pointing to him.

The only way I can see France incriminating Hanratty is if he knew - or strongly suspected - that his 'friend' was the gunman. If he was getting Hanratty to carry the can for anyone else, he'd have been better off pleading total ignorance, not saying a word about anything and letting the planted 'evidence' do all the work.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

On an earlier point, the plastic boiler suit possibly worn by the car disposal associate, to greatly diminish the prospects of leaving a clue of his presence,from Bedfordshire to Redbridge,may well have had the latest Velcro as a fastening method, rather than the afor mentioned rubber buttons. I do remember my Dad being issued with this style of protective uniform,rather than the old Denim coveralls, in the early sixties, and Velcro was just making its appearance .Of course with this theory, and following the opinion of Chief Superintendent Mathews, (3 people involved)I believe a 'drop off 'driver was used, and a vehicle removal person,as well as an assassinator. I can't help pondering on the possibility that the assassinator was just that ,and was only at the predetermined location of dead mans hill very briefly, VS I believe was a complete surprise to all concerned and wasn't supposed to be part of the equation. Hence the **** up with disposing of her as a witness, Gregsten was supposed to have left her at home, and now presented the problem of not leaving a witness.
I am convinced ,mostly because of the massive amount of anomalies in this case,that Stories account of things , is a fabrication from beginning to end, concocted by Det. Acott and Oxford. Storie with her experience in amateur dramatics made a wonderful ally ,in the convincing the world of a single gunman nutcase. Much to the glee of the Home secretary,I have no doubt. Trouble is Home Secretaries have been dogged with the blasted thing for decades, and it never went away, even when they rigged a ridiculous dna test . Of course as the years roll by and more and more people who simply just wanted true justice die off, then and only then will the injustice of Hanrattys death be buried forever.

This tosh would be deeply offensive to the family and friends of the victims - particularly in Valerie's case - if it wasn't so obviously a conspiracy fantasy dreamed up by someone with an unhealthily overactive imagination.

Nobody was 'assassinated' here and this is not something from one of the weirder 60s Avengers scripts. The gunman was a very naughty boy with a new toy and the courting couple were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. Sorry if that's not exciting enough for you, moste, but there it is. And you do the remaining genuine Hanratty supporters no favours at all. In fact, you are doing a nice little job for the opposition.

I'd urge you to think about that.

Love,

Caz
X