Originally Posted by Graham
This is utter tosh. I repeat, the fact that she failed to identify Alphon is the major result of that ID parade. Her 'identity' of an innocent man means nothing. The fact that her attacker was not on that particular ID parade means that she could not identify him. But when she did see him, she knew who he was.
This is complete crappushka. Valerie Storie knew full well that she was under no obligation to select anyone from that line-up unless she was sure in her own mind that he was infact the gunman. All she had to say to Acott was something along the lines "I'm sorry Mr Acott but I don't see the A6 murderer amongst these 10 men"
The fact that she picked out the innocent R.A.F clerk Michael Clark demonstrates that she had very little inkling as to what the gunman looked like because Michael Clark was the almost complete opposite to James Hanratty in physical appearance.
When cross-examined at the Bedford Trial by Michael Sherrard this is what Acott had to say regarding Clark's physical appearance.......
Acott :- "I can give you a full description of the man who was picked out on that parade.
Sherrard:- "Would you tell me whether he was, as Dr Rennie has told us , a fair-haired man ?"
Acott :- "No, he was not. I have his full description. I have had this man physically examined....I can tell you from my own knowledge : 5 feet 9 inches, dark short-cropped hair, about 27 years of age, and he was heavily built. Anything else, sir ? "
Sherrard :- " Is the man available, by any chance ?"
Acott :- "He was sometime ago, but I cannot say off-hand."
You will notice how deceitful and cunning Acott was in describing Michael Clark. He was ultra careful to hide from the jury and court something which he obviously regarded as vitally significant. The fact that Michael Clark had DARK EYES !! He'd even underlined it on page 174 of his notebook. Can you imagine what the reaction of the court would have been to this sensational information ?? Valerie Storie had allegedly maintained, from August 28th 1961 until her trial evidence in late January 1962, that the murderer had icy-blue, saucer like, staring eyes. So why, for Goodness sake, would she pick out a dark-eyed man on September 24th 1961 ?