Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Michael W Richards 20 minutes ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - by Michael W Richards 28 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Jon Guy 52 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Fisherman 58 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Fisherman 1 hour and 3 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Batman 1 hour and 14 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (103 posts)
Non-Fiction: Jack and the Thames Torso Murders: A New Ripper? - (22 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - (10 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: The Bucks Row Project Summary Report. - (6 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Patterns of behavior and Tumblety - (4 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Jack the Ripper learned don't eviscerate before you exsanguinate - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Social Chat > Other Mysteries > A6 Murders

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #4901  
Old 06-19-2018, 02:59 AM
gallicrow gallicrow is online now
Cadet
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Oxford
Posts: 45
Default

There was a J.A. Lofthouse who was the principal author of a report entitled "Efficiency in Road Construction" which was published in 1966 but I can't find any evidence of a Ron / Ronnie / Ronald Lofthouse in this area.

Graham - in 2016 you posted:
"I've just had a scoot around the net, and found a Ronald Lofthouse who was in some way associated with road research, but I don 't think the chronology matches up."

I don't suppose you can remember the details of this can you?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4902  
Old 06-21-2018, 04:08 AM
Alfie Alfie is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 238
Default Albert Harding settles the day of the Tarlton Rd incident.

Doesn't the following settle once and for all that the man asking about Tarlton Road could only have called into the shop on the Monday, when numerous witnesses placed Hanratty in London?

Hawser (pp. 42-3): “There was, however, further evidence as to the date. Mr Albert Cecil Harding was a friend of the Cowleys. He regularly went to the shop, morning and evening. Sometimes in the evening he helped to sell. He was called by the Prosecution. His evidence was that he had driven Mrs Cowley to her place of holiday on the Saturday 19th August and that when he went into the shop on the Monday and saw Mrs Dinwoodie, he saw: ‘the little girl putting up pop bottles on the shelf. I said ‘Aye, Aye do you not want me tonight’’. (42) He said that he was there both on the Monday and the Tuesday afternoons: in the former case at an earlier time than on the Tuesday. He saw Mrs Dinwoodie on the Monday and had a conversation with her – which was not admissible in evidence at that stage. He did not see her or the girl when he arrived at the shop on the Tuesday – Mr David Cowley was there then. Mrs Dinwoodie was asked about the conversation with Mr Harding. She agreed that there was a conversation and was definite that it took place on the same day the man called. She said this: Q. ‘Did you have a conversation with Mr Harding that day?’ A. ‘I asked him if he had ever heard of Tarlton Road’. Q. ‘Do you remember what he said?’ A. ‘He just said ‘the only Tarlton road I know is off Southport Rd – not in Liverpool’.’ Q. ‘Did he ask you why you wanted to know about Tarlton Road?’ A. ‘He just said ‘yes where are you going?’ Q. ‘What did you say?’ A. ‘I said, ‘there is someone enquiring for it’ and I would have liked to have known in case anybody else might ask’. As has already been stated, Mrs Dinwoodie became ill on the Tuesday but remained in the shop until Mr David Cowley arrived at about 6.0-6.30 pm. Mr Harding who made no mention of Mrs Dinwoodie’s feeling ill when he came to the shop, said he arrived at about 7.0 pm on the Tuesday. Apparently the Prosecution did not consider it necessary to recall Mr Harding as to the conversation he had with Mrs Dinwoodie.”

Foot and Woffinden try to discredit Harding's testimony with blather about his time sheets and knock-off times, but the fact remains that the only day that his conversation with Mrs Dinwoodie could have taken place was the Monday. Both he and Mrs D were adamant about that. Interestingly, neither Foot nor Woffinden mention Mrs D's trial testimony given above. I wonder why not?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4903  
Old 06-21-2018, 04:39 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,388
Default

Gallicrow,

I said originally that the link between Lofthouse and the RRL was tenuous, and so it has proved to be....I regret to say that I think I linked the wrong Lofthouse with the RRL.......

Which leaves us still with the question of who this myserious Ronnie Lofthouse was, and why Sherrard asked Valerie in open court if the recognised the name.

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4904  
Old 06-21-2018, 09:05 AM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 927
Default

As explained on the ‘Mrs Dinwoodie’ thread, I am as certain as she was that the incident occurred on the Monday. But I’m doubtful that Harding adds much.

If he saw Olive Dinwoodie there on one day and David Cowley on the other, the two days must have been Monday and Tuesday respectively. But how do we know that he saw them each on the two days? If his log book had shown him knocking off about 7pm on the Tuesday it would have been strong supporting evidence - but it said 5.45.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4905  
Old 06-21-2018, 09:07 AM
Alfie Alfie is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 238
Default the lunchtime meeting between Evans and Mrs Jones at Bedford

Re-reading reports of the trial I'm reminded that Mrs Jones did enough unaided to discredit herself as a witness, but I'd forgotten that she was helped along this path by Terry Evans.

The Glasgow Herald recounts the events of Friday, Feb 9:

"When the court reassembled after lunch, a member of the 11-man jury told Mr Justice Gorman that the jury had seen Mrs Jones talking to an earlier witness, Mr Terence Michael Evans ... and would like to know if anything was said about the case. The judge recalled Mrs Jones to the witness-box. She said she and Mr Evans had discussed how they were going to get to the hotel for lunch. When Mr Evans re-entered the box, Mr Justice Gorman asked him about his conversation with Mrs Jones. He replied: ‘Yes, sir, I asked her if she recognised Mr Hanratty.’ Mrs Jones, recalled to the witness-box, agreed with Mr Justice Gorman that Mr Evans had asked ‘if I knew the gentleman and I said I am almost sure of him.’ The Judge: ‘I told you you must not let anyone talk to you and if they did you were to let me know.’ Mrs Jones: ‘Yes, well he was the only one there.’ The Judge ordered that Mrs Jones should continue with her evidence."

Innocuous enough, you'd think.

That afternoon Mrs Jones was recalled to the box to be cross-examined by Swanwick. The QC didn't make many mis-steps during the trial, so when he seemed to during this examination Foot was ready to pounce on him:

"Once, Mr Swanwick went too far:
‘Q. It would not be quite right, would it, to say that when you were shown the photograph, you recognized it?
A. Well, no.’
Mr Swanwick should have left it there, but he was too eager for overkill:
‘Q. It would not. Then why did you say it in answer to my learned friend when you were asked.
A. Well, he had different colour hair to begin with.
Q. What?
A. If he had had dark brown hair, I would have known him straightaway.’
Still Mr Swanwick could not leave the point:
‘Q. Why did you say this morning in court, when you were first asked about being shown the photograph and asked about when you were first shown the photograph – why did you say: ‘I recognize him’ when in fact what happened was that you said you could not remember whether you had seen the person or not.
A. No, I got muddled – the hair. He had not got that coloured hair when he was in our house.’ (Vol XV, p 46)
Thanks to Mr Swanwick’s enthusiasm the jury now knew that the man who had been in Mrs Jones’s house looked like the accused with dark hair – or, in other words, looked exactly like Hanratty looked at the time of the A6 murder." (pp. 228-9)

But on the following Monday ... the Daily Telegraph takes up the story:

"A fairground worker, Terry Evans, returned to the witness box. He gave more details of the conversation he had with Mrs Grace Jones … during the lunch adjournment on Friday. Mr Graham Swanwick … said he had been told Evans had made several efforts to get in touch with police at Rhyl over the weekend. 'They rebuffed those efforts until he actually waylaid a senior police officer outside the police station and he then informed him there was something he must communicate to somebody.' At this point the jury left the court and Evans was brought in. Eight minutes later Mr Justice Gorman ordered the jury to return and Evans then told them of the lunch-time conversation. He said: “When Mrs Jones came back into the room I asked her if she recognised Mr Hanratty and she said ‘I am almost sure.’ I said ‘Well, I suppose the reason why you might not have recognised him straight away was the colour of his hair.’ ‘I asked Mrs Jones what was the colour of his hair when she was supposed to have known him. She said it was dark brown. I said it was probably right because his hair was dark brown.’ Mr Justice Gorman told Evans that he appreciated his reasons for getting in contact with the police."

So the jury now knew that Mrs Jones's testimony about the changing colour of Hanratty's hair was a regurgitation of her conversation with Evans, about which she'd first lied, then been less than forthcoming.

What I'm left wondering is: what prompted Evans to decide the court should hear the full story and to travel from Rhyl to Bedford to make sure it did? Surely he must have realized that by doing so he'd be damaging Mrs Jones's credibility and thus Hanratty's chances of an acquittal?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4906  
Old 06-21-2018, 09:27 AM
Alfie Alfie is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
As explained on the ‘Mrs Dinwoodie’ thread, I am as certain as she was that the incident occurred on the Monday. But I’m doubtful that Harding adds much.

If he saw Olive Dinwoodie there on one day and David Cowley on the other, the two days must have been Monday and Tuesday respectively. But how do we know that he saw them each on the two days? If his log book had shown him knocking off about 7pm on the Tuesday it would have been strong supporting evidence - but it said 5.45.
The fact that he made no mention of Mrs Dinwoodie being ill suggests it was the Monday. If it was the Tuesday, surely Mrs D's illness would have become a topic of conversation?

The questioned could have been answered one way or another by the police asking him this, but whether they did or not I don't know.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4907  
Old 06-21-2018, 10:43 AM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 927
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfie View Post
The fact that he made no mention of Mrs Dinwoodie being ill suggests it was the Monday. If it was the Tuesday, surely Mrs D's illness would have become a topic of conversation?

The questioned could have been answered one way or another by the police asking him this, but whether they did or not I don't know.
According to Woffinden she began to feel unwell on the Monday. Seeing the girl stocking the shelves was probably a stronger point.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4908  
Old 06-21-2018, 10:56 AM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 927
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfie View Post
What I'm left wondering is: what prompted Evans to decide the court should hear the full story and to travel from Rhyl to Bedford to make sure it did? Surely he must have realized that by doing so he'd be damaging Mrs Jones's credibility and thus Hanratty's chances of an acquittal?
I think Evans may have been due to return on Monday to give further evidence anyway.

As far as I can discern, he contacted the police about another matter - but I do not know what it was.

Last edited by NickB : 06-21-2018 at 11:17 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4909  
Old 06-21-2018, 11:39 AM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 927
Default

On second thoughts I think you are right and he must have contacted the police about this issue and made a return appearance especially for it. So had he heard Grace Jones talk about the brown hair and wanted to point out that it was because that is what he told her?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4910  
Old 07-03-2018, 12:54 AM
Alfie Alfie is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 238
Default Did Justice pay Alphon £25,000?

Neil Clark, in a Nov 5, 2002 article in The Spectator that aimed to debunk the work of the A6 Committee, wrote: "In the end, it cost Justice £25,000 to wring a ‘confession’ out of Alphon in 1967." And a little further on: "Having pocketed the £25,000, Peter Alphon rather predictably recanted his confession and disappeared from the scene."

This is news to me. Any truth in it?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.