Fred Dinenage Murder casebook

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Did any one watch the new A6 case, last night?
For those of you expecting new evidence ..forget it.
Apart from some interesting conversation with Kerr, the man who came across the bodies, and his apparent dictation from Valerie , mentioning the killer had used a .38, and a interview with Hanratty's brother, stating that he was 100 per cent certain of his innocence in 1961, now he is 200 per cent...[Without enlightening a reason]..very little else happened, apart from going over events portrayed by actors.
Personally I agree with Professor David Wilson, who states that he believed the evidence in 1961 was not damming enough to convict, but the DNA, was conclusive.
From personal knowledge I am not a fan of 1960's identification parades, in some cases there were not lawful, and only Valarie knows in her heart she was right, and she has stated that she has not the slightest doubt whatsoever.
Much uncertainty comes from the ''I am not guilty dad, please clear my name'' response , but J H knew very well, that there was a public response to the case, and not only would he spare his families feelings by denial,but also gave himself a chance of escaping his fate.
Regards Richard.

[pinkmoon]

Hi,
Did any one watch the new A6 case, last night?
For those of you expecting new evidence ..forget it.
Apart from some interesting conversation with Kerr, the man who came across the bodies, and his apparent dictation from Valerie , mentioning the killer had used a .38, and a interview with Hanratty's brother, stating that he was 100 per cent certain of his innocence in 1961, now he is 200 per cent...[Without enlightening a reason]..very little else happened, apart from going over events portrayed by actors.
Personally I agree with Professor David Wilson, who states that he believed the evidence in 1961 was not damming enough to convict, but the DNA, was conclusive.
From personal knowledge I am not a fan of 1960's identification parades, in some cases there were not lawful, and only Valarie knows in her heart she was right, and she has stated that she has not the slightest doubt whatsoever.
Much uncertainty comes from the ''I am not guilty dad, please clear my name'' response , but J H knew very well, that there was a public response to the case, and not only would he spare his families feelings by denial,but also gave himself a chance of escaping his fate.
Regards Richard.

From what I have watched and read over the years about this case I think hanrattys family owe a huge apology to the police involved in this case.Even when the DNA proved his guilt beyond any doubt they still slagged the police off to accuse the police of fabricating a case with a view to having an innocent man hung is an appalling thing to do.

[Limehouse]

Quite a lot of people do not agree that the DNA 'proved his guilt beyond any doubt'. A number of those doubters are actually scientists. The DNA issue has been debated at length over on the A6 Threads under the 'Other Mysteries' banner.

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Julia

I agree that the DNA evidence in this test is very much open to accusations of being tainted...I also agree it's been argued to a standstill elsewhere (often under the most venemous and divisive circumstances). As such, perhaps this thread really belongs in the special A6 Murders directory?

All the best

Dave