a6 murder

[Victor]

On the contrary Victor, this quote was not taken in isolation. It was in response to a point Reg made (post 4103) regarding the make and model of the murder weapon.

Hi James,
That's an interesting twist on the phrase "in isolation", and as was quite plain from my post, I was referring to the quote being singled out from a long list of things Alphon said.

So much of what Peter Alphon had to say in his A6 murder confessions has the ring of truth and believability about it. At the same time he was ultra careful to include demonstrably proven untruths and half-truths to safeguard himself from any possible future prosecution

I was thinking exactly the same thing about the things Hanratty said whilst in the back of the car, as relayed by Storie, he carefully included things like "institutions" which he'd never normally say, and 'next time it's PD' which he wouldn't be eligible for until he was 30, &tc. Touche.

KR,
Vic.

[Limehouse]

Hi Julie,

There's nothing to definitely place Alphon near the cornfield or in the car, either.

I just don't know enough about police forensic methods, either in 1961 or now, to comment on how they checked out the Morris for clues. Yes, they did find 12 finger-prints, but presumably these checked with VS's, MG's or any other people possibly identified by VS who had been in the car recently, friends or work-colleagues perhaps.

It just seems to me that, for an individual to spend, what, 6+ hours on the small back-seat of a car and not leave any tangible or even microscopic trace of his presence, is extremely odd. It could possibly suggest that the forensic people weren't particularly thorough, and if not, why not? Or JH used gloves and blankets, etc., to place between himself and the car's upholstery and got rid of them afterwards?

Cheers,

Graham

Quite right Graham, at the time of the incident, there is nothing physical to place Hanratty, Alphon or A N Other at the scene of the murder. This slightly suggests (to me) that the killer, or someone, did a thorough wipe of the vehicle or the forensic team did a less than thorough job. As there WAS external evidence to link Hanratty to the scene (the gun, his hanky, France's statement that Hanratty told him the back seat of a bus was a good place to hide loot and the cartridges found in Hanartty's room, I am half inclined to believe a person or person's did not want evidence of someone else to be found at the scene but [B]did[B] want evidence that would lead back to JH.

Even if JH or the killer did use gloves, (as I described before) immediately following the rape it is hard to believe some residue from the rape was not deposited onto the gloves and thus distributed somewhere else in the car.
I don't want to be indelicate in describing exactly what I mean but I am sure most readers can work it out.

I really think that the lack of forensic evidence in the car, but the existence of physical evidence external to the scene, coupled with some dubious statements by ex-friends and associates of Hanratty's, for me, casts a great deal of doubt on Hanratty's guilt in the sense that he randomly committed this act on a whim. It does not, however, help me decide who in fact was guilty.

[Victor]

Quite right Graham, at the time of the incident, there is nothing physical to place Hanratty, Alphon or A N Other at the scene of the murder.

Hi Julie,
Well the blood type O secretor semen eliminates 2/3rds of the male population and all the female population, so that's a start.

This slightly suggests (to me) that the killer, or someone, did a thorough wipe of the vehicle or the forensic team did a less than thorough job.

Or someone interfered with the scene before the Forensic Team got a chance to start looking.

Even if JH or the killer did use gloves, (as I described before) immediately following the rape it is hard to believe some residue from the rape was not deposited onto the gloves and thus distributed somewhere else in the car.
I don't want to be indelicate in describing exactly what I mean but I am sure most readers can work it out.

That makes sense, but most of the residue (with the exception of the semen that may all be contained within their underwear) would derive from Storie and therefore be eliminated from further investigation.

KR,
Vic.

[Andrew]

The Ammunition

Hello All

Just to add to the confusion it seems that the .38 bullet doesn't actually measure .38 but .359 ; this from Wikipedia -

'Ammunition
The Enfield No.2 Mk I was designed for use with the .38 S&W cartridge, now officially termed the 380/200, Revolver Mk I, but also known as the .38/200. It had a 200 gr (13 g). unjacketed round-nose, lead bullet of .359" diameter that developed a muzzle velocity of 620 - 650 ft/s (200 m/s).'

On youtube you can see guns of the type that we are interested in being fired;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2oRsF-rrHw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hep-unzpPmg

Regards
Andrew

[jimarilyn]

Many thanks for those Youtube links Andrew. I was fascinated by the first one and watched it over and over again. There is considerable recoil upon firing even when steadied with both hands. If the gunman only used one hand to fire the Enfield.38 at Deadman's Hill I can imagine the recoil to have been even greater. Each time he fired he would have had to re-aim which makes it all the more surprising that he could create a neat pattern of bullet holes (all in a line according to Keith Simpson) on Miss Storie's neck and shoulder. Confused ?....you soon will be....

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Everyone loves a mystery, but in the case of Hanratty, who was convicted of murder, attempted murder , and rape, there is really no mystery.
For reasons known only to himself he decided to try out his new vocation, ie a stick up man, on a couple sitting in a car somewhat isolated in a cornfield.
Lets say he had seen too many American B-movies.
There was no sense to this new approach to crime, and i would have assumed the longer he remained in the car the more the tension grew, amongst all parties present, finally resulting in the firing of the gun, which took Gregsons life.
One can understand why panic set in amongst the two remaining occupants,and mayby like some child that has done wrong, needed the comfort, which in this case hinted to sex.
I would suggest that his first intention was to just leave the scene, but self presevation set in , and he turned and fired at Valerie.
The weapon found on the bus, was the murder weapon, the spent cases at the scene of the crime confirmed this, and so did the spent bullets.
Alphon was a hoaxer, he was no more the A6 murderer then I was, and i feel one should never treat his involvemrnt in this case with any credibility.
I have always taken Hanratty as guilty, we are all inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to those in the condemed cell who protest their innocence.
In the case of Hanratty, all the 'Please clear my name' letters, and 'I am innocent' do not wash with me.
Valerie was there , and she knew Hanratty was the man, and that plus recent developments with DNA, should put this case to bed.
But as I said 'Everyone loves a mystery' so it will no doubt continue to be debated.
Regards Richard.

[jimarilyn]

Hi,
Everyone loves a mystery, but in the case of Hanratty, who was convicted of murder, attempted murder , and rape, there is really no mystery.
For reasons known only to himself he decided to try out his new vocation, ie a stick up man, on a couple sitting in a car somewhat isolated in a cornfield.
Lets say he had seen too many American B-movies.
There was no sense to this new approach to crime, and i would have assumed the longer he remained in the car the more the tension grew, amongst all parties present, finally resulting in the firing of the gun, which took Gregsons life.
One can understand why panic set in amongst the two remaining occupants,and mayby like some child that has done wrong, needed the comfort, which in this case hinted to sex.
I would suggest that his first intention was to just leave the scene, but self presevation set in , and he turned and fired at Valerie.
The weapon found on the bus, was the murder weapon, the spent cases at the scene of the crime confirmed this, and so did the spent bullets.
Alphon was a hoaxer, he was no more the A6 murderer then I was, and i feel one should never treat his involvemrnt in this case with any credibility.
I have always taken Hanratty as guilty, we are all inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to those in the condemed cell who protest their innocence.
In the case of Hanratty, all the 'Please clear my name' letters, and 'I am innocent' do not wash with me.
Valerie was there , and she knew Hanratty was the man, and that plus recent developments with DNA, should put this case to bed.
But as I said 'Everyone loves a mystery' so it will no doubt continue to be debated.
Regards Richard.

I think you need to change the record Richard. You keep repeating yourself (perhaps you're eating too many kippers). You don't convince me one iota. I've read your posts on the subject and you often contradict yourself.

[Graham]

I think you need to change the record Richard. You keep repeating yourself (perhaps you're eating too many kippers). You don't convince me one iota. I've read your posts on the subject and you often contradict yourself.

Jim,

But he's entitled to his opinion the same as you are, isn't he?

Graham

[jimarilyn]

Jim,

But he's entitled to his opinion the same as you are, isn't he?

Graham

That's true Graham but when you sway too and fro all the time you tend to lose some credibility. In my opinion at any rate.

[richardnunweek]

Hello Jimarilyn,
I guess I touched a nerve, the reason I 'keep on repeating myself' is simple.
Hanratty was guilty, I have never contridicted myself over that opinion.
And its just my opinion, not Gods....
So no need to be a tad sarcastic.
Regards Richard.

[jimarilyn]

Hanratty was guilty, I have never contridicted myself over that opinion.
.

But what about posts 793, 1247, and 1267 to name just three examples Richard ? They are there for anyone to read and refresh their memories with.

[Limehouse]

Hi,
Everyone loves a mystery, but in the case of Hanratty, who was convicted of murder, attempted murder , and rape, there is really no mystery.
For reasons known only to himself he decided to try out his new vocation, ie a stick up man, on a couple sitting in a car somewhat isolated in a cornfield.
Lets say he had seen too many American B-movies.
There was no sense to this new approach to crime, and i would have assumed the longer he remained in the car the more the tension grew, amongst all parties present, finally resulting in the firing of the gun, which took Gregsons life.
One can understand why panic set in amongst the two remaining occupants,and mayby like some child that has done wrong, needed the comfort, which in this case hinted to sex.
I would suggest that his first intention was to just leave the scene, but self presevation set in , and he turned and fired at Valerie.
The weapon found on the bus, was the murder weapon, the spent cases at the scene of the crime confirmed this, and so did the spent bullets.
Alphon was a hoaxer, he was no more the A6 murderer then I was, and i feel one should never treat his involvemrnt in this case with any credibility.
I have always taken Hanratty as guilty, we are all inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to those in the condemed cell who protest their innocence.
In the case of Hanratty, all the 'Please clear my name' letters, and 'I am innocent' do not wash with me.
Valerie was there , and she knew Hanratty was the man, and that plus recent developments with DNA, should put this case to bed.
But as I said 'Everyone loves a mystery' so it will no doubt continue to be debated.
Regards Richard.

I would accept your argument entirely Richard, if there was not far more to this case than your reasoning outlines. I don't know how much of this thread you have read, but there are many more aspects to this case than just a couple being shot by a known criminal. Also, don't assume that those of us who doubt Hanratty's guilt automatically conclude Alphon was the killer. For me, it is not as simple as that.

[Victor]

Hi Richard,

Don't worry too much about James and his bizarre proclamations, I've not been as steadfast as yourself in believing in Hanratty's guilt, but the DNA sealed the case for me.

It's easy to show James's hypocrisy, all you need do is check out his opinion of the outlandish "confessions" of Alphon and how he thinks they have the ring of 'believeability' with deliberate 'ultra careful mistakes' and then Hanratty can't do the same in the car.

The way he questions and over-analyses every word Storie has said, such as her OPINION that Jim wasn't Hanratty's real name, and the various minor discrepancies in her statements are because she's lying and not because she's confused due to the horrific injuries she sustained. One would almost think she's the one who has committed a crime.

And how about Hanratty's normal sex life, I wonder how normal it is to visit prostitutes multiple times every week?

It gets quite boring reading his sycophantic brown-nosing of people with the same opinion as himself, despite the glaring errors in the posts he's praising.

This just speaks for itself...

Any non-conspiratorial crime dies a quick death and is soon forgotten.

...therefore every disputed sentence must be a conspiracy and it's not possible for a challenged ruling to be justly upheld.

KR,
Vic.

[jimarilyn]

Par for the course from a man who boasts about his sexual activities, name drops and understands next to nothing about the A6 murder. The one and only "sick Vic".

Incidentally the quote he mentions of mine relates not to this thread but to the "JFK Assassination " thread, which I noticed Vic was on for quite some time about an hour or so ago. Has he suddenly become interested in the JFK assassination ??

[Victor]

Par for the course from a man who boasts about his sexual activities, name drops and understands next to nothing about the A6 murder. The one and only "sick Vic".

Here you go Richard, more hypocrisy from the sycophant who repeatedly insists Storie first thought her rapist had "brown eyes".

Incidentally the quote he mentions of mine relates not to this thread but to the "JFK Assassination " thread, which I noticed Vic was on for quite some time about an hour or so ago. Has he suddenly become interested in the JFK assassination ??

Incidentally the above quote is rubbish, the quote in question comes from the JFK thread, but is quoted in it's entirity and quite clearly states "Any non-conspiratorial crime", but I expect nothing better from James.