Valerie Storie's 3 part story as published in 'Today' magazine, June 1962

[Rosella]

Would Valerie have felt the same about this affair with Michael if she had been in Janet Gregsten's shoes, I wonder. And how nice for her that her parents were so tolerant after 'someone tittle-tattled'.

[moste]

Thankyou Sherlock fascinating.
Valerie Storie comes across in these pages you have posted as somebody keen to establish her ordinariness yet at the time Valerie represented a layer of young women that comprised less than 2% of the female population studying Maths A Level! Clearly an intelligent woman and straightforward about her affair with Michael Gregsten though admitting to having no conscience about the fact that he was a married man.I am not wanting to criticise her for this but I believe the way she writes about it shows a particular strong-mindedness and a great trust in her own judgment [this was 1961 after all ] and a corresponding disinterest in what others may have thought about it.
Two other points: Valerie states they used to go out at 10 pm on rallies ,driving all over the place and returning at dawn. This immediately made me think of their curious car journey that night at gunpoint , which Valerie said began late into the evening -around 11.30 and ended not that long before dawn, putting me in mind of a possibly pre-conceived plan based on prior knowledge of the couple's movements from dusk to dawn .Was it perhaps intended to shake them up ,reflecting back to Michael Gregsten in particular a slightly distorted mirror image as they passed through Watford of when ,only a few hours earlier in the afternoon, Gregsten had acted as a loving father to his two children when he took them from their home in Abbots Langley a couple of miles away to a Watford Park .
The other point I wish to make is that Valerie appears not to know that the great majority of young working class Londoners both then and now say fink for think!

Well done S.H. Agree with all of Natalie's answer. Although he didn't take both the Gregsten boys, actually it was his oldest lad Simon and the good friend and neighbours boy, who was about his sons age.(point taken though on the coincidence of the two journey's) The all night rallies they had been on in the past are eyebrow raisers in light of the facts of the abduction etc. I picked up on her regarding the queer impediment in his speech thing, odd I thought. Also, even more odd. the statement 'I looked into the mirror to see Mikes worried eyes' this could not have been the rear view mirror I'm afraid, unless she was sitting in the back seat with the assailant!
Something that occurred to me when reading of Valerie's parents not knowing Mike was a married man, and then later their acceptance of the fact, I wondered if any of the journalists had looked into whether any attempt was made by Janet or her family, to contact Valerie's parents to convey their very serious concerns about this illicit relationship, at some time earlier in the affair.
It is apparent that the newspaper articles have been flavoured somewhat by a journalist, during Valerie's mini memoir, but its not difficult to see a certain level of arrogance shining through, to give a reader a glimpse of this ladies personality. Finally I found it interesting that only a couple of months of cooling down period were required, after the hanging, before the trilogy hit the press. I suppose the pay out from this scoop would be very gratefully accepted by the battered women and rape victims institute, eh?

[Natalie Severn]

Thankyou Sherlock fascinating.
Valerie Storie comes across in these pages you have posted as somebody keen to establish her ordinariness yet at the time Valerie represented a layer of young women that comprised less than 2% of the female population studying Maths A Level! Clearly an intelligent woman and straightforward about her affair with Michael Gregsten though admitting to having no conscience about the fact that he was a married man.I am not wanting to criticise her for this but I believe the way she writes about it shows a particular strong-mindedness and a great trust in her own judgment [this was 1961 after all ] and a corresponding disinterest in what others may have thought about it.
Two other points: Valerie states they used to go out at 10 pm on rallies ,driving all over the place and returning at dawn. This immediately made me think of their curious car journey that night at gunpoint , which Valerie said began late into the evening -around 11.30 and ended not that long before dawn, putting me in mind of a possibly pre-conceived plan based on prior knowledge of the couple's movements from dusk to dawn .Was it perhaps intended to shake them up ,reflecting back to Michael Gregsten in particular a slightly distorted mirror image as they passed through Watford of when ,only a few hours earlier in the afternoon, Gregsten had acted as a loving father to his two children when he took them from their home in Abbots Langley a couple of miles away to a Watford Park .
The other point I wish to make is that Valerie appears not to know that the great majority of young working class Londoners both then and now say fink for think!

[curious4]

Fascinating Sherlock. Many thanks!

C4

[Graham]

Yes indeed, SH, an excellent find. When I first got interested in the A6 Case, years back in pre-computer days, someone gave me photocopies of those articles plus an original copy of Jean Justice's book Murder Vs Murder. Some time afterwards I lent the photocopies (which I never in turn copied) together with the book (and some other A6 stuff) to someone else, never saw him or my stuff again! (I wonder if that Jean Justice book is actually worth anything - most of the contents weren't!).

Anyway, it's very interesting to see that Today article once more, and like you and Nick I thought that Valerie was being rather sketchy, and always wondered if there was more to come in a later article. However, I do not doubt that her identification of JH was correct.

Graham

[Sherlock Houses]

Sherlock - I congratulate you again on your sleuthing, and presenting the complete set of these articles. Does this mean that you have been to the British Library and there are more cuttings to come?

I am particularly interested to see the middle article which has hitherto been so elusive. However I have to admit to being somewhat disappointed that she does not give a full recount of events, saying ‘everyone knows the rest of the story.’ In particular I would have liked to read her account of the first id parade.

No, I've never been to the British Library, Nick. I haven't been to London for about 8 years in fact.
It was just a case of patience paying off that I was able to finally acquire all three "Today" magazine articles via eBay.

Like yourself I was very disappointed overall with the content of the articles. I was expecting to read a lot more, especially considering the fact that the three occupants were in the confines of that small car for approximately 6 hours. That's a long time to be cooped up together and there must have been loads more conversation and interaction between the three of them than has so far been revealed. It is left to our imaginations to speculate for instance about what really went on and what was said during the alleged 2 hour period that the car was stationary in the Dorney cornfield.

When the Morris Minor finally exited that cornfield it's almost as if it then proceeded on an inexplicable midnight car rally before finally ending up at the ironically named Deadman's Hill. Who knows, perhaps that was, in the seemingly twisted logic of the gunman, the intended final destination for the two lovers.

[NickB]

Sherlock - I congratulate you again on your sleuthing, and presenting the complete set of these articles. Does this mean that you have been to the British Library and there are more cuttings to come?

I am particularly interested to see the middle article which has hitherto been so elusive. However I have to admit to being somewhat disappointed that she does not give a full recount of events, saying ‘everyone knows the rest of the story.’ In particular I would have liked to read her account of the first id parade.

A few other observations ...

- If she received letters saying that she had got what she deserved by having an affair with a married man, this confirms that the affair was widely known about before these articles and even the court case. Yet her very final comment appears to concede that the murder could be seen as a ‘price’ for the affair.

- I wonder when the gunman stopped covering his face. Presumably he did not have his face covered when he got out of the car with Gregsten to look at the rear lights. Nor when they stopped for petrol. And if he was sitting in the back maskless Mike would have been able to see him in the rear view mirror. Knowing that Mike had got a good look at him may have led to the gunman feeling that it would be dangerous to leave him alive.

- It appears that Valerie was unable to submit a photograph of Mike for publication. The only photo of Mike seems to have been taken at the same time as the one in the Woffinden documentary where he is sitting next to Janet - therefore I assume that Janet provided it.

[Sherlock Houses]

June 16th 1962.

Attached is the third and final instalment of her story.....[on pages 8,9 and 10 of magazine]

[Sherlock Houses]

June 9th 1962.

Attached is the 2nd instalment of her story....[on pages 6.7 and 8 of magazine]

[Sherlock Houses]

June 2nd 1962.

Attached is the first instalment of her story.....[pages 3,4 and 5 of magazine]

[Sherlock Houses]

I thought some folk might be interested in reading the whole of Valerie Storie's story which was published in the 'Today' magazine between June 2nd and June 16th 1962............................