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 Batman 3 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by harry 3 hours ago.
Tumblety, Francis: Patterns of behavior and Tumblety - by Hercule Poirot 3 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by MrBarnett 3 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - by Trevor Marriott 4 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by MrBarnett 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (95 posts)
Non-Fiction: Jack and the Thames Torso Murders: A New Ripper? - (22 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - (13 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: The Bucks Row Project Summary Report. - (6 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Patterns of behavior and Tumblety - (2 posts)
Letters and Communications: I'm not a butcher, I'm not a Yid...... - (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
  #5121  
Old 11-08-2018, 06:55 AM
Alfie Alfie is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
When he was in confession mode in the TV interview, it was put to Alphon that the murderer said he was called Jim. Alphon replied that he would have been crazy to give his real name – and this sounded very reasonable.

But he was looking at it from Hanratty’s point of view. Indeed it would have been wise for Hanratty to say he was called anything other than Jim. (Although there is a precedent for blurting out his real name under stress; when the Liverpool jeweller asked him to sign for what he had sold.)

But looking at it from Alphon’s point of view, he would only have said Jim in order to frame Hanratty. If he was choosing at random a false name, what are the chances that - of all the names in the world - he would have come up with Jim?
If the gunman had already decided to murder Valerie (most likely), he'd have believed he could say anything with impunity.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5122  
Old 11-08-2018, 07:08 AM
NickB NickB is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 927
Default

He would have been worried that she could have identified him - by sight and sound - but I am not sure at what point he decided to shoot her. Perhaps having let slip his real name was the clincher.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5123  
Old 11-08-2018, 07:47 AM
Alfie Alfie is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 238
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NickB View Post
He would have been worried that she could have identified him - by sight and sound - but I am not sure at what point he decided to shoot her. Perhaps having let slip his real name was the clincher.
My guess is, when he worked out that killing Valerie was the only sure way he had of avoiding the noose. He wasn't the quickest of wits, but it was likely to be soon after he shot Gregsten.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5124  
Old 11-08-2018, 03:51 PM
cobalt cobalt is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 298
Default

It’s an interesting question about why Alphon was not called as a witness at the trial, and intriguing to think how he might have performed if he had been.

I assume Sherrard had decided against calling Alphon since his line of questioning would likely have been to suggest Alphon was the murderer. This is understandably seen by juries as a desperate kind of defence, one that also indicates the police force is spectacularly incompetent. It certainly did Timothy Evans no good in 1949.

However given the significance of the rooms in the Vienna Hotel you would have expected the prosecution to call Alphon to substantiate the prosecution case, as Alfie said. Alphon’s evidence could hardly have carried less weight than Nudds’ who was a self-confessed liar. From what we know, there seems little doubt that Alphon would have been only too happy to bask in the limelight by appearing as a witness in a major murder trial. He did attend the trial every day, I think.

Perhaps the prosecution were aware of his general unreliability and judged he might do their case more harm than good, especially under cross-examination. Alphon seems to have been a persuasive speaker but under duress might have veered off into Paris hotel mode and started banging on about immorality and the incompetence of British justice.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5125  
Old 11-11-2018, 10:46 AM
Derrick Derrick is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 591
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
...I thought of the same possibility, cobalt - that semen might have survived the most recent washing process in those days...

Hi Caz

Leaving out the fact that no AB group anything was found by Dr Nickolls in his examinations, heat is the enemy of DNA persistence.

Why do you think that DNA samples have to be frozen for ultimate preservation?

Del
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5126  
Old Yesterday, 08:08 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 507
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
Trying to catch up with this thread...

When I read the related posts I thought of the same possibility, cobalt - that semen might have survived the most recent washing process in those days. If so that would mean Valerie chose to wear the same pair of undies on each occasion - which would make sense if they were perhaps a favourite pair she kept for romantic evenings with her lover.

But it's equally plausible that the couple did have sex shortly before the gunman surprised them, which would not be hushed up if it happened these days, but might well have been in the early 1960s, for fear of prejudicing the public and the jury against the victim in the case, and possibly creating false sympathy for the man she was effectively accusing of rape.

One point that may or may not yet have been addressed is that in 1961, with no DNA to match semen conclusively to a specific male, it was arguably considered enough [or the best they could do?] to attribute the minor AB staining to Gregsten and the major O group staining to the rapist. By the time of the 2002 appeal, I agree with OneRound's point, that the surviving AB semen should ideally have been tested again for a DNA match to Gregsten, but would that have been possible or practicable? How would they have done this and what permissions would they have needed? Was there a body to exhume in Gregsten's case, or would they have had to use the DNA of a close relative?

The other problem, of course, is that if people strongly believe there was a deliberate cover up over the DNA results, so they would indicate Hanratty's guilt no matter what, you have to wonder what good it would have done to go the extra mile to tie up Gregsten's loose end [if you'll pardon the expression] even assuming it could have been done.

Love,

Caz
X
Hi Caz,

As usual, good and practical points there.

I suppose my main gripe is not that the surviving AB semen* went untested but that the Court of Appeal were so ready to regard the DNA evidence as conclusive without such testing.

I do not subscribe at all to there having been a deliberate cover up over the DNA results. Just unease as to the short shrift given to there being any doubt as to the findings.

* I note Del's post but need to see a copy of Dr Nickolls' notes before I can consider the absence of AB semen.

Best regards,
OneRound
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 08:56 PM.


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