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:
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by Spitfire 15 minutes ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Harry D 1 hour and 22 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - by harry 1 hour and 24 minutes ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Jon Guy 2 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Varqm 4 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Sam Flynn 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (40 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - (12 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (8 posts)
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - (4 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (3 posts)
Non-Fiction: The Whitechapel Murders of 1888: Another Dead End? - (2 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
  #3601  
Old 11-07-2016, 03:59 AM
Sherlock Houses Sherlock Houses is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 444
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
For me, the following factors particularly apply:

1. You overstate the case about Hanratty being a 'doppelganger'. I think it's fair to say that Mrs Dinwoodie's evidence was more along the lines that Hanratty looked like the man in the shop rather than he was identical to the man, let alone confirming that they were one and the same. As previously discussed here, the ways in which she was separately asked by the police and Sherrard if Hanratty was the man concerned were far from satisfactory and convincing. Also, I don't know where you get your 'sound-alike' comment from. Mrs Dinwoodie said she struggled to understand the man in the sweetshop due to whatever accent he had whilst Hanratty seemed to do just fine in making himself understood at trial.
O.R. or OneRound if you prefer, I most certainly do not overstate the "doppelganger" angle. Initially Mrs Dinwoodie was shown just the one photograph of Hanratty by Det-Constable Pugh of the Liverpool police force who were inquiring into aspects of Hanratty's alibi on behalf of the A6 murder investigating team. As has been often repeated on this forum the showing of one photo for identification purposes was contrary to good practice. Nevertheless Mrs Dinwoodie made a positive identification of Hanratty as being the man who called into the sweetshop. She confirmed her positive identification of Hanratty when picking him out from a series of photographs shown to her a little later on. Mrs Dinwoodie told Pugh..."The photograph you have shown me is one of the man who came in on Monday, 21 August, asking for Tarleton Road." [Woffinden p125].

The "sound-alike " comment is a reference to the fact that the 'doppelganger's accent was difficult for Mrs Dinwoodie to understand. He was a stranger to the shop, an out-of-towner and to Mrs Dinwoodie's ear he sounded Scottish or Welsh. It was an accent she was unfamiliar with which is probably why she was able to recall the incident of 8 weeks earlier. He definitely didn't have a 'Scouse' accent, that much is for sure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
2. You do want to pick and choose here as to where to place emphasis. You write, 'It is .. obvious to anyone with half a brain or any common sense that the sweetshop incident could only have happened on [the] Tuesday'. Meanwhile, Mrs Dinwoodie, who was in and running the sweet shop at the time of the incident and upon whom you want to rely when it suits you, asserted at trial that it was the Monday. Rather than being someone 'with half a brain' or devoid of 'any common sense', you state she is 'simply mistaken'.
Now this is pretty rich coming as it does from an obvious "Hanratty did it" poster. You need to put your own house in order, methinks. Everyone on this forum including most definitely yourself chooses what aspects of another person's post to respond to, what to highlight and where to place emphasis. There is one "Hanratty did it" poster on here [not a Lancaster incidentally] who screams occasionally in unnecessarily large size text to try and get his point across, lol.
__________________
*************************************
"A body of men, HOLDING THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO NOBODY, ought not to be trusted by anybody." --Thomas Paine ["Rights of Man"]

"Justice is an ideal which transcends the expedience of the State, or the sensitivities of Government officials, or private individuals. IT HAS TO BE PURSUED WHATEVER THE COST IN PEACE OF MIND TO THOSE CONCERNED." --'Justice of the Peace' [July 12th 1975]

Last edited by Sherlock Houses : 11-07-2016 at 04:07 AM. Reason: missed a word out
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3602  
Old 11-07-2016, 05:23 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherlock Houses View Post
O.R. or OneRound if you prefer, I most certainly do not overstate the "doppelganger" angle. Initially Mrs Dinwoodie was shown just the one photograph of Hanratty by Det-Constable Pugh of the Liverpool police force who were inquiring into aspects of Hanratty's alibi on behalf of the A6 murder investigating team. As has been often repeated on this forum the showing of one photo for identification purposes was contrary to good practice. Nevertheless Mrs Dinwoodie made a positive identification of Hanratty as being the man who called into the sweetshop. She confirmed her positive identification of Hanratty when picking him out from a series of photographs shown to her a little later on. Mrs Dinwoodie told Pugh..."The photograph you have shown me is one of the man who came in on Monday, 21 August, asking for Tarleton Road." [Woffinden p125].

The "sound-alike " comment is a reference to the fact that the 'doppelganger's accent was difficult for Mrs Dinwoodie to understand. He was a stranger to the shop, an out-of-towner and to Mrs Dinwoodie's ear he sounded Scottish or Welsh. It was an accent she was unfamiliar with which is probably why she was able to recall the incident of 8 weeks earlier. He definitely didn't have a 'Scouse' accent, that much is for sure.



Now this is pretty rich coming as it does from an obvious "Hanratty did it" poster. You need to put your own house in order, methinks. Everyone on this forum including most definitely yourself chooses what aspects of another person's post to respond to, what to highlight and where to place emphasis. There is one "Hanratty did it" poster on here [not a Lancaster incidentally] who screams occasionally in unnecessarily large size text to try and get his point across, lol.
Hi again Sherlock - well, I'll try and cover all your points in the post above.

O.R. or OneRound or even Mester Round are all just fine.

Picking someone out from a series of photos when you've a little earlier been shown him in a photo on its own (and confirmed him at that time as the man concerned) is a long way from being convincing. That said, I fully accept this was down to the fault of the police and Pugh especially (Graham has often forcefully made similar comments). It's partly due to the police being at fault here that I'm willing to take the sweet shop alibi into the mix a lot more than the Court of Appeal were in 2002 even though I still have large doubts about it.

You do seem to have now sizably watered down your 'sound-alike' comment. All you are saying now is that it was an accent Mrs Dinwoodie didn't recognise and it definitely wasn't 'Scouse'. Fair enough but that hardly proves it was Hanratty's voice she heard.

With regard to your final para, it's fully down to you as to how you choose to judge me a poster. I would though comment that I would be more than a little concerned if I was accused of a crime where you were on the jury. You appear to judge my post on what I am - or, rather, what you think I am - rather than what I have said.

Whilst I am of the view that 'Hanratty did it' as you state, I am also on record as saying that Hanratty got an unfair deal at his trial and in the appeal upon his behalf forty years later. I tried to make that clear and bring out concerns (as far as the sweet shop incident goes - there are certainly other factors) as to upholding his guilt in the closing paras of my last post. I didn't do that to tickle your tum but because I thought those comments were worthy of debate and valid. Equally, I thought my four points doubting the veracity of Hanratty's involvement in the incident were legitimate and worthy of exploration and answers.

We do not have to agree but it's a shame if that means those with different viewpoints cannot debate.

Now that's me done. Any views on my queries about Harding and the (limited) time Hanratty had available to him in Liverpool before going to Rhyl?

Regards,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3603  
Old 11-07-2016, 05:27 AM
ansonman ansonman is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 144
Default Harding was not a clock watcher

"3. I no longer have the main books but I believe Mrs Dinwoodie was supported by Albert Harding, a lorry driver and customer of the shop, as to the incident occurring on the Monday. I would be grateful if you or any other poster could remind me about Harding's evidence - it tends to get overlooked."

Hi OR.

Hardings evidence appears in pages 271/8 of Woffindon. He toild the court that it couldn't have happened on the Tuesday as on that day he hadn't reached the sweet shop until about 7.00pm. The prosecution appended Harding's time sheets as documentary support for this statement. Woffindon states "The time sheets didn't support the statement at all. Harding maintained that he always called at the sweet shop directly after clocking off; Sherrard pointed out that he had clocked off at 6.00 on the Monday, and 5.45 on the Tuesday, but reached the sweetshop at 5.30-5.40 on the former day, and 7.00 on the latter. When this was put to him, Harding became vague: I am not a clockwatcher".
Ansonman
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3604  
Old 11-07-2016, 05:45 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ansonman View Post
"3. I no longer have the main books but I believe Mrs Dinwoodie was supported by Albert Harding, a lorry driver and customer of the shop, as to the incident occurring on the Monday. I would be grateful if you or any other poster could remind me about Harding's evidence - it tends to get overlooked."

Hi OR.

Hardings evidence appears in pages 271/8 of Woffindon. He toild the court that it couldn't have happened on the Tuesday as on that day he hadn't reached the sweet shop until about 7.00pm. The prosecution appended Harding's time sheets as documentary support for this statement. Woffindon states "The time sheets didn't support the statement at all. Harding maintained that he always called at the sweet shop directly after clocking off; Sherrard pointed out that he had clocked off at 6.00 on the Monday, and 5.45 on the Tuesday, but reached the sweetshop at 5.30-5.40 on the former day, and 7.00 on the latter. When this was put to him, Harding became vague: I am not a clockwatcher".
Ansonman
Thanks, Anson.

On that basis then, Harding appears an unreliable witness and doesn't discredit Hanratty's claim that it was him on the Tuesday.

Best regards,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3605  
Old 11-07-2016, 07:11 AM
Derrick Derrick is online now
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRound View Post
...I'm willing to take the sweet shop alibi into the mix a lot more than the Court of Appeal were in 2002 even though I still have large doubts about it...
The Court of Appeal didn't spend any time over the sweetshop alibi as it wasn't a ground of appeal because it wasn't new evidence. It was fully discussed at trial in 1962.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3606  
Old 11-07-2016, 07:29 AM
j.kettle1 j.kettle1 is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 65
Default Rhyl alibi.

Just seen the comment reproduced below in a daily newspaper. Obviously I can't vouch for the veracity of the claim, but has anyone heard of 'Snowy'?


James hanratty knocked on the door of my mothers house in Rhyl asking if my brother snowy could take him to see terry star real name terry evens.He was dressed in a suit very smart with fairish hair and not that tall.He was wearing a suit in the early afternoon that was something you didn't see in Rhyl.I said if he came back later around tea time snowy might be home.he said he wasnt going to be in Rhyl long.I am ninety nine percent sure it was James I can't understand how the Dna proved otherwise to think he was in rhyl
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3607  
Old 11-07-2016, 08:21 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ansonman View Post
"3. I no longer have the main books but I believe Mrs Dinwoodie was supported by Albert Harding, a lorry driver and customer of the shop, as to the incident occurring on the Monday. I would be grateful if you or any other poster could remind me about Harding's evidence - it tends to get overlooked."

Hi OR.

Hardings evidence appears in pages 271/8 of Woffindon. He toild the court that it couldn't have happened on the Tuesday as on that day he hadn't reached the sweet shop until about 7.00pm. The prosecution appended Harding's time sheets as documentary support for this statement. Woffindon states "The time sheets didn't support the statement at all. Harding maintained that he always called at the sweet shop directly after clocking off; Sherrard pointed out that he had clocked off at 6.00 on the Monday, and 5.45 on the Tuesday, but reached the sweetshop at 5.30-5.40 on the former day, and 7.00 on the latter. When this was put to him, Harding became vague: I am not a clockwatcher".
Ansonman

Hi again Anson and all,

Credit to Sherrard and the defence team for analysing Harding's time sheets and spotting the discrepancies.

Different point now but stemming indirectly from the above.

I'll start by flagging that several alleged sightings of the so called murder car were not disclosed to the defence as they probably should have been. Nor was the log in which Gregsten made recordings of the car's mileage. The Court of Appeal took the view - charitably of Acott in my opinion - that Acott probably considered that the sightings were flawed as they were not consistent with Gregsten's records. Thus, Acott felt neither needed to be disclosed.

I feel it was wrong that the defence were denied these details and particularly the opportunity to have a good stab at checking the thoroughness of Gregsten's earlier recordings. Admittedly, this may not have advanced matters for the defence at all. However, if it could have been shown that Gregsten had previously been inaccurate, it would have created doubt as to the reliability of Gregsten's final recording and given more credibility to some of the alleged sightings, probably most of all to that of William Lee in Matlock. This in turn would have lessened the impact of the two men who swore they saw Hanratty driving the car near to where it was abandoned (an impossibility at the time if the car had been driven to Matlock following the murder).

Yet again, none of this would have proved Hanratty's innocence. However, it just might have provided further doubt as to his guilt. As I say, I feel it was wrong that non-disclosure prevented the opportunity.

Best regards,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3608  
Old 11-07-2016, 08:55 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick View Post
The Court of Appeal didn't spend any time over the sweetshop alibi as it wasn't a ground of appeal because it wasn't new evidence. It was fully discussed at trial in 1962.
Hi Del,

Yes, I certainly accept that. I was probably more just getting at some personal unease with the appeal process. Purely speculative and my own opinion but I reckon Hanratty came within a whisker or two of getting a 'not guilty' verdict at trial. Whilst his harshest critics praise the jury now for seeing through him, even they appear to accept that the verdict could have gone either way at the time.

Given that together with the Court of Appeal in 2002 stressing the importance of 'justice' itself and the need to see things 'in the round', it seems tough to leave plus points for Hanratty from his original trial on one side and not be able to add them to new evidence which helps his cause.

Had Hanratty not been executed and had not the passage of time probably made it unfeasible, I would have quashed his conviction but ordered a retrial. My hope being to get all matters fairly in the mix for the first time - in my land of make believe, anyway.

Best regards,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3609  
Old 11-07-2016, 09:11 AM
OneRound OneRound is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 504
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by j.kettle1 View Post
Just seen the comment reproduced below in a daily newspaper. Obviously I can't vouch for the veracity of the claim, but has anyone heard of 'Snowy'?


James hanratty knocked on the door of my mothers house in Rhyl asking if my brother snowy could take him to see terry star real name terry evens.He was dressed in a suit very smart with fairish hair and not that tall.He was wearing a suit in the early afternoon that was something you didn't see in Rhyl.I said if he came back later around tea time snowy might be home.he said he wasnt going to be in Rhyl long.I am ninety nine percent sure it was James I can't understand how the Dna proved otherwise to think he was in rhyl
Hi j.kettle - sorry, unable to answer your question about 'Snowy'. However, as regards veracity, would Hanratty have known the person he was looking for by any name other than 'John' at this time? Others should be able to confirm that at least.

Best regards,

OneRound
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3610  
Old 11-07-2016, 10:25 AM
ansonman ansonman is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 144
Default

[quote=OneRound;399335]Hi again Anson and all,

Credit to Sherrard and the defence team for analysing Harding's time sheets and spotting the discrepancies.

Hi OneRound,

Yes indeed, and discredit to the prosecution for failing to do same. As you haven't got the books to hand it's worth quoting a bit more from Woffinden as regards Harding:

"On Tuesday, 6 February, at virtually the close of its case, the Crown passed to the defence yet another notice of additional evidence. This concerned the testimony of Albert Harding. Ideally, Swanwick would have wished to call Harding after the defence had called Mrs. Dinwoodie. He applied to the judge in these terms, asking, in effect, that if Mrs. Dinwoodie were to say such and such, would he then be allowed to bring forward this evidence to counter it?
The judge felt his patience was being tried a little too far. He informed Swanwick that "I am not prepared to say now how I might be prepared to exercise my discretion on some future occasion". Accordingly, the prosecution had no option but to call Harding straightaway".
"The sense of the absurd- with Harding being called to rebut evidence which hadn't been heard - was heightened by the fact that Sherrard was able to ensure that all reference to the vital conversation in the sweetshop was excluded; it was, quite blatantly, hearsay evidence. Swanwick was in the position of trying to combat evidence which the jury had not yet heard and regarding which he was unable to enlighten them.

Regards,
Ansonman
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 03:31 AM.


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