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

[Graham]

DNA samples were indeed taken from Alphon, and no match was found. I find it strange that he insisted he'd never confessed to the murder - his TV footage of his Paris 'Press Conference' contradicted this, as did his various verbal statements and writings. Encouraged, one suspects, by Messrs Justice and Fox. Alphon confessed verbally to, amongst others, Jeremy Fox, Paul Foot and, at the 'Press Conference', to a bunch of journalists at the Hotel du Louvre. Of course, as he genuinely didn't commit the A6 Crime, all these confessions must I think be put down to Alphon's weird personality - any 'normal' person would have put himself as far away as possible from the aftermath of the case. Definitely a suitable case for treatment.

Graham

[NickB]

Directly after issuing his media appeal for Alphon, Acott visited Valerie Storie. Woffinden suggests: “It is hard to believe he conveyed anything other than the message that the hunt for the A6 murderer was nearing its conclusion.” So on the one side she was told by the officer in charge of the id parade that she was under no obligation to pick anyone, and on the other Acott having said words to the effect: “We’ve got him!”

It is a matter of debate when Acott realised that Alphon was not his man. I believe by the end of Alphon’s interview he had come to this conclusion. He then hurriedly arranged an id parade, now expecting Alphon to be cleared. As mentioned recently, I believe that had Alphon been picked his solicitor would have cried foul saying he should have been there. I also believe that Valerie would have realised her mistake. Alphon would have fought hard for his innocence and so I think a there would still have been a re-interview with Nudds/Snell producing the same retractions.

Alphon only played his ‘confession’ games when he was not at risk.

In March 1998 when Alphon was faced with the prospect that the DNA tests might show that Hanratty was not the murderer he declared:
''If they say the murderer can't have been Hanratty, I may well insist that they take my DNA sample. I don't want to do that, but if they tested me they would find that my DNA doesn't match either.''

[Graham]

Hi OneRound,

thanks for your unsolicited testimonial!

The thing is, Valerie couldn't have picked out Hanratty on that first ID parade for the simple reason he wasn't there. This might sound facile, but at that time Hanratty wasn't even in the frame - but Alphon was, and Acott & Co genuinely thought that they had their man. I think Valerie herself said that she felt obliged to pick someone out. Had she picked Alphon, then it's likely that any supporters of his would, even now, be trying to clear his name, had he been found guilty and hanged.

It was obviously not against the law at the time that another ID parade, this time including Hanratty, was organised, at which Valerie was in no doubt at all. The rest is history.

I can't answer your other questions, OR, except to comment that once he was in the clear Alphon 'confessed' to the murder and enjoyed (and profited by) his figurative 'three minutes of fame'.

Graham

[Graham]

Hi Ed,

On 30th December 2008 , poster Blue Moon , who perhaps unconvincing in some ways and claimed to be a relation to Carol France, implicated John Russell , Charlotte France's brother in a plot to scare off Valerie Storie. If the abduction was a family affair (with or without Hanratty's involvement, the wider underworld would not have been able to offer information. Though somehow, not satisfactorily explained, France did come to the police attention but was treated quite leniently.

1] I re-read Blue Moon's posts and the replies she (I assume Blue Moon was 'she') received, and I agree she was not that convincing. But I do agree that if such a plot existed it would, one hopes, have been kept a very tight secret. In the aftermath of the A6 Case, I believe that neither Charlotte nor Carole France discussed the case, neither did they give an interview. However. one of Carole's younger sisters (sorry, can't recall her name) was interviewed for one of the TV documentaries concerning the A6, and as I remember she was extremely hostile towards Hanratty.

2] Ever since I became interested in the A6 I have always felt that had there been any 'secrets' concerning it, then they would have been known by Dixie France. He attempted suicide twice, the second time successfully, and left behind some hand-written notes and letters, nearly all of which were taken by the police never to be seen again. The one letter that was published, however, was a plea to his wife to believe that he was innocent of any involvement in the actual crime. However, and I've suggested this before, I couldn't rule out France's supplying Hanratty with the gun: France as manager of the hard-nut Harmony Cafe was known to keep a small armoury of weapons there, in case of trouble. He also had plenty of criminal connections, and I wouldn't have thought that getting hold of a gun in those days was any problem for him. As Hanratty himself said, he wanted to be a 'stick-up man' to increase his profits from crime. Woffinden, as expected, strongly suggests that the reason for France's suicide was that he had framed Hanratty. I would suggest that there was at the time a genuine fear on France's part that he could be tried as an accessory in the A6 murder, and if found guilty would have gone down for a long time.

Graham

PS: incidentally, the first suspect hauled in by the police with regard to the A6, was grilled by Acott for sixteen hours, a long time. Who he was we'll never know, but Acott must have had a pretty good reason to hold him for so long.

[OneRound]

...
For my part, I believe that on the occasion of the first ID parade, Valerie felt she had to pick someone out, and decided on Clark. At the second parade, she was in no doubt at all and picked JH.
...

Graham

Hi Graham,

If your belief is correct (and in my humble opinion you're right much more than you're ever wrong on these threads), that was an utterly dreadful situation that had been allowed to develop on the occasion of the first ID parade. It may have even resulted in no second parade taking place.

I don't know or forget exactly how many were on the first parade but, in line with your belief, there was always then around a one in twelve or even a one in ten chance that Alphon would have been picked. If he had, what would have happened next?

Would Acott still have come up with his list of reasons as to why the A6 murderer wasn't Alphon? I rather doubt it.

Would a Roy Langdale type have come forward with claims of a 'confession' from Alphon? I wouldn't have bet against it.

Would Valerie Storie have backtracked and said she picked the wrong man? I'll leave that answer to you all individually.

The list of questions and possible answers go on. So do the consequences ....

Best regards,

OneRound

[NickB]

Regardless of the value of the suggestion of France's brother - in - law's involvement , it would be interesting if anything more was known about John Russell.

The Sunday Times interviewed James Russell, described as Dixie France’s brother-in-law, who ran a trucking business. I don't know if he was also known as John. All he said was that Hanratty was an appalling driver, and Mrs Russell said she would never let him drive her.

[Ed James]

Who else might have done it?

One small but I feel significant question arises.....if those who consider Hanratty innocent, and that Alphon had nothing to do with the A6 Case, then can one of them perhaps suggest who they think actually did it? I've asked this same question quite a few times over the years I've been on these boards, and answer there has been none.


Graham

First , where I come from. I believe that there a number of factors that can give rise to the firm belief that Hanratty was guilty, but equally that there are other ones that suggest his innocence(eg the absence of a compelling motive provided by the Crown for the bizarre events). Being open minded may seem indecisive after so much debate but it does allow a constant shifting of known evidence and a desire for more .

I am not surprised that other names have not convincingly come forward, as Dixie France , most likely the supplier of the murder gun and knowing much more than he revealed to the police , committed suicide.

On 30th December 2008 , poster Blue Moon , who perhaps unconvincing in some ways and claimed to be a relation to Carol France, implicated John Russell , Charlotte France's brother in a plot to scare off Valerie Storie. If the abduction was a family affair (with or without Hanratty's involvement, the wider underworld would not have been able to offer information. Though somehow, not satisfactorily explained, France did come to the police attention but was treated quite leniently.

Regardless of the value of the suggestion of France's brother - in - law's involvement , it would be interesting if anything more was known about John Russell. Was he the butcher brother who supplied meat to the France family? And is it the case as posted some time ago by Natalie Severn on the other mysteries thread that the murder gun was found to have blood residue which was actually determined as animal blood?

regards

Ed

[Graham]

Good posts both, Julie and Cobalt. Couple of comments:

For me, the location of the crime and its obscure motivation make me lean towards a planned abduction with MG and VS in mind - for what purpose seems unclear but various scenarios have been chewed over on these boards many times before.

I believe it was Lewis Hawser who first suggested that JH might have been 'sent' to the cornfield. I have never believed in any form of pre-crime conspiracy in the A6 Case. I don't believe there was a motive for the crime; it was a chance encounter of a criminally-inclined man with a new toy - a gun - and an innocent courting couple in a car.

Looked like Michael Clark on the first identity parade but James Hanratty on the second.

For my part, I believe that on the occasion of the first ID parade, Valerie felt she had to pick someone out, and decided on Clark. At the second parade, she was in no doubt at all and picked JH.

In addition, once Hanratty was in the dock for a capital crime, might he not have been tempted to offer a few names to the police as to where they should actually be looking? If ‘fitted up’ he must have had a fair idea who the players were. Honour among thieves does not stretch as far as the gallows.

Excellent point, Cobalt. If JH did pass on any names to the police, then they haven't come down to us.

With regard to Alphon, it seems to me that the bloke was basically an eccentric and somewhat unstable nut-case, who swanned aimlessly around London and the South-East, picking up bits of work as and when, and sponging off his mother and doubtless others too. I don't doubt that he had his fair share of brains and cunning - his filmed interview in the Paris hotel room was an almost-masterly performance in which he tied the rather clueless interviewer into knots. He also took Jean Justice for all he was worth, and it's sometimes difficult to figure out who was leading whom in this oddball relationship. He was, though, without a doubt, involved in the A6 through simple coincidence.

Alphon did have a (minor) criminal record, and was described as a weird and eccentric individual by people who had encountered him, but I don't know if his performance at The Alexandra Court was unique - somehow I doubt it.

Graham

[cobalt]

I’m not sure if point number 1 is absolutely correct. There may have been forensic material collected which could not be attributed to any significant party, but which belonged to the perpetrator.

If Hanratty was subsequently ‘fitted up’ by members of the criminal fraternity, this possibility must have been one that experienced detectives would have considered; especially when evidence began falling into their laps. Maybe they were happy to be led down this path, but if they had suspicions, then there might have been a danger that the whole case would unravel at the trial.
In addition, once Hanratty was in the dock for a capital crime, might he not have been tempted to offer a few names to the police as to where they should actually be looking? If ‘fitted up’ he must have had a fair idea who the players were. Honour among thieves does not stretch as far as the gallows.

Regarding Alphon, he first came to police attention due to his odd behavior in a hotel was reported to police in the days following the crime. This was, admittedly, in response to a specific request put out by police to hotel owners and the like, I think. However, do we know if his behavior was ever so unsettling at any time prior to the crime that he was ever asked to leave a hotel; or if indeed the police were previously contacted concerning his behaviour? In short, was Alphon’s behaviour in the days following the A6 crime out of character even for him, or just par for the course.

[Limehouse]

It is a very good question Graham, but one that I cannot answer. When I very first studied the case forty or more years ago I would have said that Alphon was guilty and Hanratty was innocent but I have not believed that scenario for very many years.

I think there are so many worrying aspects to this case, almost certainly evidence that has been supressed and/or tampered with and witnesses leaned on, that it is very difficult to draw any conclusions categorically.

For me, the location of the crime and its obscure motivation make me lean towards a planned abduction with MG and VS in mind - for what purpose seems unclear but various scenarios have been chewed over on these boards many times before.

Who could have carried out that abduction? Someone who:

1. Wore gloves, removed them when he raped VS but left no DNA trace of himself in the car.
2. Seemed to be an incompetent driver.
3. Looked like Michael Clark on the first identity parade but James Hanratty on the second.
4. Had aspects of a cockney dialect in his speech.

If this person was not Hanratty we can also conclude that:

5. This person either had direct access to, or knew someone who had direct access to Hanratty's dirty laundry (i.e. the hanky)
6. Knew that Hanratty deposited unwanted loot from robberies under the back seat of London buses - or knew that this was a popular place to deposit unwanted loot.
7. Knew that Hanratty was out of London and knew why he was out of London and knew he would therefore be unlikely to be able to provide a credible alibi.

Given the circles he mixed in, any of his peers might have been willing to frame him for a price, especially to settle old scores.

[Graham]

One small but I feel significant question arises.....if those who consider Hanratty innocent, and that Alphon had nothing to do with the A6 Case, then can one of them perhaps suggest who they think actually did it? I've asked this same question quite a few times over the years I've been on these boards, and answer there has been none.

Someone, and I'm sorry but I can't remember who, said on this forum years ago that there have been no death-bed confessions, no anonymous letters to newspapers, no darkened-out televised interviews, no nothing. Not a single whisper from some dying East End lowlife who croaked that 'he knew Jim didn't do it, because', etc., etc.

I know for a fact that at least one Hanratty supporter expected there to be a last letter from Alphon confessing to the crime - but even if there was, who would have believed the lying sod? Now, there are probably those who await publication of a final letter from Valerie Storie admitting that her evidence was fabricated....

I am certain that Acott & Co very seriously and studiously interviewed known members of the criminal fraternity and also non-criminals who might have 'helped in their inquiries', but if they actually learned anything from such interviews, then nothing so far as I know has been made public. We do know, though, that Alphon was not the first person to have been interviewed regarding the A6, but I doubt if we will ever know the identities of other interviewees, 55 years later.

Graham

[Spitfire]

And Spitfire, having decided to desist from attacking Moste’s strawman argument, made a very good point I had overlooked; namely that there would surely have been fibre transfer between the murderer and Valerie Storie. I cannot say for sure, but it is inconceivable that it was not standard police procedure to take fibre evidence from a rape victim in 1961; particularly in a case such as this.

I am keen to establish whether it is part of the theory that the rapist/gunman wore a plastic suit with rubber buttons during the act of rape. I have asked the question and I await the reply.

[cobalt]

Thanks for your considered response Graham; I know that we are on different sides of the fence in the Hanratty case, but you have always been up front and acknowledged that the lack of forensic evidence is hard to explain.

And Spitfire, having decided to desist from attacking Moste’s strawman argument, made a very good point I had overlooked; namely that there would surely have been fibre transfer between the murderer and Valerie Storie. I cannot say for sure, but it is inconceivable that it was not standard police procedure to take fibre evidence from a rape victim in 1961; particularly in a case such as this.

None of this makes Hanratty innocent. He may have hoovered the car effectively, although this suggests third party involvement. He may just have been very lucky. However, there remains the doubt about the unattributed forensic material, which clearly could not have belonged to either Hanratty or Alphon. Does it still exist? Will it turn up in a police storeroom some time after my death?

[Graham]

I obviously don't know what kind of shoes Hanratty was wearing on that fatal night, but whatever they were, I think there was a reasonable chance that they picked up some kind of detritus from the cornfield. Which, one assumes, would be earth - I don't know if it had rained at some time prior to the abduction, but if it had, then the ground would be damp thus making it easier for his shoes to collect at least something from the cornfield, and depositing it into the car. With regard to the lay-by, I'd guess this was tarmac or hard-core, and much less likely to deposit traces on shoes.

As for fibre transfer, I really can't say. In such cases in 1961, was it standard forensic practise to check a rape victim's clothing for traces of fibre from an attacker? I simply have no idea.

Graham

[Spitfire]

Still, if Hanratty was wearing gloves most of the time, then that would surely reduce the risk of leaving his prints behind. As far as the absence of incriminating fibre traces and soil samples from shoes are concerned, I can't offer any explanation other than he gave the inside of the car a damn good hoovering.

I am not sure how much use soil traces would have been. The gunman walked into the cornfield (if we accept Val's evidence) and walked a bit in the lay-by, so any soil attached to the gunman's shoes would most likely be from those places.

As to hair and clothing fibres, it should be remembered that Valerie Storie was raped by the gunman and one assumes that there was contact between the two and their respective sets of clothing in which transfer of hair and clothing fibres could have taken place. One would therefore expect that if fibres were shed by the gunman's clothes they would be as likely to end up on the clothes of Valerie as on the seats of the Morris Minor. Whilst the gunman had the opportunity of giving the car a hoovering, that did not apply to the unfortunate Valerie Storie.