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:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by rjpalmer 14 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by rjpalmer 16 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by harry 2 hours ago.
Torso Killings: torso maps - by RockySullivan 2 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: If Mrs. Maxwell Didn't See Mary Who Did She See? - by Wickerman 2 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by Ben 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (38 posts)
Torso Killings: torso maps - (13 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (4 posts)
Non-Fiction: Walter Dew's account...... - (4 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: If Mrs. Maxwell Didn't See Mary Who Did She See? - (3 posts)
Research Related: Henry Kelly - (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
  #4931  
Old 07-09-2018, 03:22 PM
cobalt cobalt is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 278
Default

Moste,

You are often viewed on this site as man with not enough respect for Valerie Storie. I will take a different approach and suggest that you are actually giving her too much respect.

I do not do this because I have any ill-feeling towards Valerie Storie, in fact after being tested to a degree that few of us could imagine, she emerges as a woman to be respected. She led, after the events, a very good life. I also believe she gave an honest identification of James Hanratty in the ID parade. I think most of us, whatever our position, can agree on that at least.

However, her testimony is a different matter, given under duress in a hospital bed when her health was in question. I think John Kerr got the real story: ‘We picked up a man near Slough,’ when not her health but her very life was in question. It is significant, I think, that Kerr corrects himself in the interview (available on youtube) to establish that the murderer was picked up voluntarily, and that the couple were not kidnapped. Check for yourselves.

If this was an arranged meeting, as Moste suspects, then it may have been that Valerie Storie was the prime mover in it taking place. She wanted Gregsten to leave his wife and live with her, as was being planned as I understand. Whether the meeting was for financial gain, or part of a whistle blowing operation to reveal corruption, is open to debate. No matter, after it all went disastrously wrong, Valerie Storie could hardly claim responsibility for setting the meeting up. She had, in effect, lost not just a lover but been responsible for the death of husband and father. Who would want to admit to that catalogue of crimes? Who phoned her in the hospital? Why did Mrs. Gregsten pay a visit? Was she being warned off?

Easier for her to run with the mad gunman theory, which in itself produced absolutely no police progress for at least a month. That is, I suspect, because the whole narrative she supplied was massively incomplete. The police were on a wild goose chase. There are chunks of information missing from her own work at the RRL, Gregsten’s, the car club they belonged to, their relationship itself which seemed to blow hot and cold, the ill-feeling towards them apparently existed from within the workforce at RRL.

I don’t think Paul Foot was quite the investigative journalist he thought he was. I share his politics for the most part: I live in a country where every Tuesday the head of parliament (representing the people) has to reassure the Queen (representing the aristocracy) that s/he has no intention of taking their land from them. That has been the case since 1660 and helps create an underclass where the likes of James Hanratty try to make some sort of illegal living. The option is to be a window cleaner.

But Foot was wandering around Liverpool and Rhyl when he should, in hindsight admittedly, have been skewering statements from work colleagues of Gregsten, his bosses, the Storie family, investigating William Ewer’s war record, checking the contracts for motorways signed off by Ernie Marples. Did he close in on Taplow, the railway staff, even the Taplow Inn where at least Justice made some headway. Justice maybe had a better nose for the case than Foot did.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4932  
Old 07-09-2018, 03:55 PM
cobalt cobalt is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 278
Default

The armchair psychology that says Hanratty wanted to achieve power with a gun is probably best left in the armchair. Hanratty was a thief. Not a robber. A thief. He wanted money, not power.

In the same way a ‘flasher’ is not a rapist. Although that did not stop some poor sod being hauled in for the appalling Rachel Nickell murder (1992) and deemed responsible for many years even after acquittal until the eventual culprit was caught. Eventually, after about 15 years, the police apologised. Not so difficult really, since Napper, I think his name was, had already given a full confession.

Why would Hanratty need to bandy words with a couple he had never met before? His conversation might have been sharp, but was certainly limited, so the whole enterprise is ridiculous. In theory, he just needed the car, according to the prosecution, to get his way back to London. Moste explains how this could have been done in a matter of minutes.

One overwhelming problem with the ‘Hanratty in the cornfield’ scenario is the quantity of ammunition. Whether the spare ammo was in a bag, as sometimes reported, or in his pockets, as I think Valerie Storie testified, the question has to be asked why he needed so much? He was not doing a James Cagney ‘You Dirty Cops’ shoot out so why did he need more than six shots? For a robbery in Taplow? It makes no sense. As little sense as him carrying this ammo on public transport.

Whoever the killer was, he was surely driven close to the point of engagement, be that a cornfield or Deadman’s Hill.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4933  
Old 07-09-2018, 09:37 PM
moste moste is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Vancouver Island British Columbia.
Posts: 473
Default

582 6th October 2007, 09:29 PM
Graham
Superintendent Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 1,799




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Limehouse.

Until the DNA results were published, I'd have bet my sweet bippy that Hanratty had been stitched up for the A6 murder. And I think that goes for 99% of the people taking an interest in this crime.

Hi Graham found this from 2007. Quick question for you.

If , as is my belief, the D N A. turns out to be totally unreliable, due to

Corruption , contamination ,etc. Would this clear the way for you to return to

Your original belief, that Hanratty was entirely innocent?

(PS . Although your post is part of a longer entry, It is not taken out of context)

I am genuinely interested to know if you have changed your mind over time.

(Please ,always feel free to hang on any of my words.)

Last edited by moste : 07-09-2018 at 09:42 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4934  
Old 07-09-2018, 10:42 PM
moste moste is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Vancouver Island British Columbia.
Posts: 473
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cobalt View Post
The armchair psychology that says Hanratty wanted to achieve power with a gun is probably best left in the armchair. Hanratty was a thief. Not a robber. A thief. He wanted money, not power.

In the same way a ‘flasher’ is not a rapist. Although that did not stop some poor sod being hauled in for the appalling Rachel Nickell murder (1992) and deemed responsible for many years even after acquittal until the eventual culprit was caught. Eventually, after about 15 years, the police apologised. Not so difficult really, since Napper, I think his name was, had already given a full confession.


Why would Hanratty need to bandy words with a couple he had never met before? His conversation might have been sharp, but was certainly limited, so the whole enterprise is ridiculous. In theory, he just needed the car, according to the prosecution, to get his way back to London. Moste explains how this could have been done in a matter of minutes.

One overwhelming problem with the ‘Hanratty in the cornfield’ scenario is the quantity of ammunition. Whether the spare ammo was in a bag, as sometimes reported, or in his pockets, as I think Valerie Storie testified, the question has to be asked why he needed so much? He was not doing a James Cagney ‘You Dirty Cops’ shoot out so why did he need more than six shots? For a robbery in Taplow? It makes no sense. As little sense as him carrying this ammo on public transport.

Whoever the killer was, he was surely driven close to the point of engagement, be that a cornfield or Deadman’s Hill.
Did the amount of ammo not come from the bus findings ?
I thought Storie only alluded to , ' he tapped his pocket, indicating bullets hidden in there.'
What Im trying to say is, if the 60 rounds and the alleged .38 revolver were a plant, as part of the stitch up, ( which I lean towards) then perhaps the guy alleged to have been in the back of the car only had 6 rounds in the gun and enough to reload once.
Regardless though ,one thing that's certain, the assailant took on a seriously different persona from the two apparently calculated shots through Gregstens face, ( I won't accept the accident claim) and the mindless gunning down of Storie. That person who did that,
had clearly 'lost it' using modern parlance. WHY?
The other thing from your post , I would just comment on, Storie helping us with the gunman in the field scenario , I agree he would need to have been dropped off. However , the statement to Kerr ' picked up a man near Slough,'makes much more sense . While not convinced on the Alphon theory, Its interesting that the 'Dolphin greyhound stadium was just across the A4 from Slough railway station, Alphon was known to frequent this racing venue on numerous occasions, which gives credence to Mary Lantz claim that Alphon had been in her pub.
Alphon being the chap who people seemed to continually cater to, possibly made the arrangement whereby, Gregsten pulled over with little or no inconvenience to Pete, right outside the stadium .

Last edited by moste : 07-09-2018 at 10:49 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4935  
Old 07-10-2018, 12:00 AM
Spitfire Spitfire is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 613
Default

Once we discount the evidence of the only witness (excluding the murderer) then the solution to this case is only limited by our imagination.

So we undoubtedly have Ernie Marples, Dick Beeching and Jimmy Cagney involved in some way or other with the A6 Murder but what about Malenkov, Nasser, Prokofiev, Rockefeller, the Rosenbergs, Marciano and Brando, all names to conjure with and none of whom seem to have been interviewed by Acott and Oxford. Rum eh?

They all can't have cast iron alibis, like Jim Hanratty, the most famous former guest of Ingledene's Room 4 which he must have shared with the communist agitator Joe Sayle. Strange eh?

Was the frame up of Hanratty orchestrated by the communist bloc. Was Gregsten murdered on the orders of the CIA? So many questions, so few answers.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4936  
Old 07-10-2018, 02:18 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,329
Default

Nice one, Spitfire, but as this all happened in 1961, perhaps you should have included:

President Kennedy Nikita Khrushchev J Edgar Hoover Kim Philby Private Eye Mrs Mills Elvis Presley Harold Macmillan Peter Sellers Malcolm Muggeridge Sooty

Just try proving that none of these were involved.....

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
  #4937  
Old 07-10-2018, 04:01 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 3,329
Default

Quote:
The armchair psychology that says Hanratty wanted to achieve power with a gun is probably best left in the armchair. Hanratty was a thief. Not a robber. A thief. He wanted money, not power.
Acott advised Hanratty that he had been to see Donald Slack, who told him that Hanratty had visited him and discussed the possibility of obtaining a gun. Hanratty himself confirmed in an interview with Kleinmann that he had been to see Donald Slack, whom he had known for some time, about obtaining a gun. He told Kleinmann that Slack asked him why he needed a gun, and he replied that 'screwing was all played out. If you want to get rich these days you've got to have a shooter and go after cash'.

Of course, he later denied that his conversation with Slack was nothing but bravado, and that he could have got a gun at any time from The Rehearsal Club. So why, then, did he go and ask Slack about a gun? As might be expected, Slack later denied that he had ever discussed guns with Hanratty, but he would, wouldn't he?

So are you suggesting that Hanratty just wanted a gun so he could discuss with his planned victims the finer points of firearms manufacture and use? He wanted a gun for the same reason any other villain ever wanted one: to scare the **** out of his victims.

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
  #4938  
Old 07-10-2018, 06:39 AM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 900
Default

Corroboration of him wanting to get a gun is provided by Lanigan, who said he had discussed with Hanratty getting guns to do a hold up in Wembley.

Another possible conspiracy partner is the IRA, given the Republican connections with the Scotland Road area.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4939  
Old 07-11-2018, 09:45 AM
cobalt cobalt is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 278
Default

Irony requires wit and leaves the recipient with a rueful smile on his lips; sarcasm is the weapon of the second rate schoolmaster trying to retain some authority.

As Moste has pointed out, a number of people on this site have changed their opinion since the DNA evidence was presented, evidence which they regard as definitive. There is nothing wrong with changing your mind in light of new evidence, the problem lies in expecting everyone else to follow suit. If Hanratty’s guilt is as secure as they believe, why do they wish to avoid serious debate? Do they fear being on the wrong side of the argument a second time?

NickB's sarcastic allusion to the IRA in Scotland Road was rather ill-chosen since it is a matter of legal record that at least four groups of innocent persons were convicted for IRA bombings in the 1970s. In each case the police conspired against them to submit false evidence. Even when doubts were raised about these convictions, a second conspiracy took place within the legal establishment to conceal the truth until this was no longer sustainable. A double conspiracy. In the case of the Guildford Four it’s not necessary to name check the Rosenbergs, Marlon Brando or Ernie Marples for we know the name of the man involved: Attorney General Sir Michael Havers who had led for the prosecution at their trial, so no conflict of interest there then when he dismissed the appeal. Two cheers for our independent judiciary.

All of the victims were as insignificant as James Hanratty until they stood in the dock. In their case these nonentities, some middle-aged labourers, others junkies, were presented to the jury as ruthless members of Europe’s most dangerous terrorist group. In Hanratty’s case a housebreaker and car thief was presented to the jury as a deranged killer and rapist.
For me this remains the most likely conspiracy in the A6 Case, the type that wrongfully hanged George Kelly, Timothy Evans, Mattan and would have done the same to Stefan Kiszko had Home Secretary David Waddington had his way.

Detective Chief Superintendent Roger Matthews was another excitable conspiracy theorist, who took it one stage further than the conventional police ‘fit up.’ He is reported as believing there were probably three guilty parties involved in the A6 Case, none of whom was Hanratty, who were never brought to justice. His report has never been published and is now either played down by those convinced of Hanratty’s guilty or considered obsolete. Those in power have decided the public should not to see his report, so we are to trust their better judgment and anyone suggesting Matthews’ evidence might undermine the later DNA results can therefore be dubbed a conspiracist.

So Moste, we have some history and a senior detective on our side. I can’t really buy into your political conspiracy for reasons I’ve earlier outlined but nor would I completely discount it either. I have yet to discover exactly what Michael Gregsten was working on at the RRL; does the term ‘research physicist’ equate to minor civil servant? I’m not sure, but I recall weapons inspector David Kelly being described as a ‘middle-ranking civil servant’ by the MOD in the immediate aftermath of his death. He was a lot more than that, it transpired. Ditto William Ewer the umbrella salesman and perhaps Mr. Alphon senior, the records clerk at Scotland Yard. Remember too that, if one fine day, clear evidence came to light supporting a political conspiracy in the A6 Case it would not be accepted by those who maintain that the Birmingham Six were freed on a technicality, that the police at Orgreave charged pickets after being stoned, that the soldiers in Derry 1972 were shot at by Martin McGuiness and that Liverpool supporters broke down a gate at Hillsborough. The Parsons Tendency will always be with us, Parsons being the character in Orwell’s 1984 who declares: ‘Of course I’m guilty! Do you think The Party would arrest an innocent man?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4940  
Old 07-11-2018, 04:56 PM
Spitfire Spitfire is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 613
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
Corroboration of him wanting to get a gun is provided by Lanigan, who said he had discussed with Hanratty getting guns to do a hold up in Wembley.

Another possible conspiracy partner is the IRA, given the Republican connections with the Scotland Road area.
I believe the songstress Priscilla White, who suspiciously changed her name to Cilla Black, was also resident in the Scottie Road area and would have been able to shed considerable light on the A6 Murder if only she had been asked, which she does not seem to have been.

I believe that Black, or White if you prefer, had been married to the former England and Warwickshire quick bowler, Bob Willis, who also does not seem to have been interviewed by either Acott or Oxford.

Cilla was great chums with a popular music combo going under the style of "The Beatles". If you believe Wikipedia (which I don't ) then the Beatles were performing in Liverpool during the month of August 1961. Yet they do not seem to have had an engagement for 22nd August 1961. As they were later to sing in the little ditty Penny Lane, "Very strange."

So did Acott and/or Oxford question the Fab Three (the Fab Four minus Ringo who did not join the combo until 1962) and Stu Sutcliffe and Pete Best about their involvement in the A6 job?

Apropos the Stefan Kiszko case, it was my understanding that David Waddington was Kiszko's defence counsel and therefore on his side. A chap called Roy Jenkins (Welsh by birth and considering the A6 Murder's historic connections with the Principality, a person who should have been questioned by Acott and Oxford) was the Home Secretary when Kiszko was convicted.
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 09:10 PM.


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