You are the David Attenborough of crime reporting and analysis. You make these episodes captivating. Thanks.

Thx for new episodes 🙇🏻‍♂️👀‼️

It's nice to the right honorable, his holiness professor David Wilson in this programme.

Good morning, and Thank You for the video! Always excellent!

Brain injuries are fascinating. They can seem fairly benign at the time, but can fundamentally change a persons personality and long term life trajectory.

How can they argue with DNA evidence?

I remember them saying on the radio in the UK, that after many years of debate, it was finally proven that he did it.

In Criminological theory-Corrections 101 they call this the Hierarchy Rule. They often do this here in the US. There will be tacked on charges to one crime and the most punishable was the one charged:)

Even though the DNA evidence proved him guilty, a lot of very good hearted people with hearts in the right place should be proud of themselves for doing so much to abolish the death penalty.

If DNA evidence matches the crime scene than case over. Guilty.

Sorry, that would be Barrow in Furness in Lancashire.

The family is bending over backwards in denial. "But he doesn't't rape women around us, he's not evil to his mum." Compelling.

Justice was done.

What a waste of lives. Bizarre.

i finded her dead body in gta 5 game

I was at school at the time and remember the A6 murder for the effect it had on hitchhiking, we used to hitch around often and it was safe then but drivers stopped picking up hitchers, even kids. I followed the trial, seem to remember that another witness came out later and agreed he was in Rhyl but they were selling stolen goods together and didn't want to get caught. There was always a lot of doubt about whether Hanratty was guilty.

I don’t understand why anyone would still want to investigate this!? The DNA matched! They never met before this encounter. At this point it doesn’t matter what the witnesses have said.

Did they ask if Peter could drive?

DNA doesn't lie. People do. I understand James' brother not wanting to believe his brother guilty, but the DNA proves he left his semen on her knickers, and on his handkerchief.

why is thi s site so fucked up

You don't "rob" houses, you burglarize them.

Valerie Story & the person at the traffic lights identified James Hanratty, Guilty

Very well done! I was unaware of this case but no matter I would have never been comfortable sending a man to his death on the evidence presented. Although I am a US citizen I am wholeheartedly against capital punishment. Love & prayers to all of the victims in this case 💕🙏💕

Of course he did it.

DNA was a familial match. Guilty. There’s no way the DNA on the knickers and handkerchief (or gun) could’ve been tampered with to make it match the Hanratty family.

hello

My heart goes out to the Innocent Victims, and their Families.🥀🥀🥀🥀🙏🙏🙏🙏🕊️🕊️🕊️🕊️

Incredible how people will rally behind the criminal.

Is David Wilson the only criminologist in the UK? He's in every possible documentary ever made.

The Hanratty family was known to my grandfather. James was a known bullshitter and always trouble

Crikey, the chap in the reconstruction is a dead-ringer for Hanratty.

Hanratty, ok was a rough diamond but not a murderer. FACT he'd stole a car and was drinking with my ex's uncle on that night in Rhyl,imperial hotel/bar.he stayed in elwy st

This case is a prime example of why I'm against the death penalty as a matter of law. Eyewitness testimony has been shown over and again to be fallible. We're also well aware that police are not infallible and certainly not above corruption so the evidence in police custody over four decades could have been tampered with before it was given over to the DNA specialist. While I do believe the ultimate punishment should be applied in a case of wonton rape and murder, its rare when a murder case can be proven with absolute certainty and so life in prison is the only recourse so at least if new evidence is found there's a chance to rectify any mistakes. A far greater crime is committed when an innocent person is put to death and we are all made guilty.

Sometimes the law is toooo nice, even they know the real killers, by investigating un necessary, they promote crimes.

If he drove there where was his car? Is it more likely the person lived near by that area? Has the blood been DNA tested with today's technology now? This would go a long ways to answer any doubts people may have. Especially in light of all the witness testimony that he was else where at the time. Thank you for this video story. God bless

❤

In 1961 all that was needed was identification by witness and the fact that his stay at the small hotel could be verified and wasn't showed poor police work. He probably would have been found innocent if it was presented

He did it. The DNA matched. And why would he dye his hair prior to appearing in a lineup?

I don’t know how the fact of the war being prevalent as a cause for murder. Also I’ve heard so many murders being pinned on people with intellectual disability. Pick a victim

Am i the only one that prefers not so much explanation and analysis?

Here's the thing and the thing is. If someone takes ap

40 years is a _very long_ time between the collection and processing of evidence for DNA. What is more, DNA "matches" are always expressed as statistical probabilities, and have to be weighed against the other evidence. If someone has a strong enough alibi, it doesn't matter the DNA "match" is one in a million, or one in a billion... one in a billion multiplied by zero, is zero. Absurdly, some judges have ruled that juries should not be enlightened on how mathematical probability applies to DNA evidence, and should rather use "common sense" (we're all doomed, then!). The identi-kit resembled Peter Alphon. The eyes, eyebrows and jawline in particular look nothing like Hanratty; and those are the features witnesses are most likely to get right, because they are what our eyes are most drawn to when we scan a face.

They did set him up if there was questionable facts and they killed him any way. I call it a set up

The gun business is a little flimsy. Because there are others who know about stashing in the back of the buss under the seat. Framing comes to mind.

No wonder the family believe in his innocence. but what family wouldn't? he was guilty. One cannot argue with DNA.

So many issues from childhood. Why did no one step in to help. To understand what he wanted. For example maybe he’d have been happy at a special needs school instead of having the pressure of trying to do what he couldn’t

DNA match. End of argument.

DNA matches case closed

Was there a car found?

I dislike eyewitness accounts, they are unreliable. However, I can’t dispute the DNA evidence. Had I heard this case without the DNA back in 1961 I would not have thought there was enough to convict. The inability to drive the car, his alibi give me reasonable doubt. If the DNA from her underwear is accurate, then we can console our conscience that an innocent man was not wrongly convicted, but I consider that a very risky form of justice. Had the DNA not match….An apology for the error doesn’t bring the condemned man back to life. Very final form of justice. I don’t consider the the handkerchief found with the gun as concrete proof of guilt as there could have be a valid reason for it being there. Unless there was contamination of the DNA from the underwear, that satisfies any reasonable doubt of guilt for me.

He's guilty af brih DNA doesn't lie

Pretty sure the woman who was raped is more reputable to know what was what than an ex Beatle and his 'artist' wife.

I've sat on several juries, and I can assure you all of the people I've encountered take their role in this task extremely seriously. I doubt many people have been falsely convicted because someone on the jury made a mistake. (Of course we know cops, prosecutors and judges can all be corrupt at times.)

Seeing John and Yoko there made me cringe. It's obvious they only took up the case to promote their political beliefs. I highly doubt they even looked into the case. In my opinion, the DNA proves his guilt. There are 3 separate samples they tested and all came back to be his, twice. I mean cmon.

@ABIOLA:my grand mother's told me a lot by saying: a day will come when many people will just waste their time reading my comment😎

It’s incredible how thoroughly people can delude themselves. His family is pathetic. Valerie Storie was a brave woman

in 1961 the jury made a mistake , because the evidence was too thin by far. but DNA evidence 40 years later seems to prove it was Hanratty ...so i go with that ...

I don't think he did it I thinkI don't think he did it I think Girl I think her name is story I think it was I think she made all that up I think she got to a fight with her lover She shot killed him I think someone might have heard it was trying to go and help she had a gun and the other person shot herself to fend I don't think it was a sky I don't think he did it I think hes innocent

Yes, James Hanratty was a monster!

He didn’t protect his girlfriend.

I'm not convinced one way or the other in terms of whether James is truly guilty or innocent. However, I'm 100% certain that, based on the evidence available during his trial, he should not have been found guilty. The surviving victim had proven herself to be an entirely unreliable witness the moment she picked a random guy during the first lineup who had absolutely nothing to do with the crime. Clearly, she had no clue who the actual perpetrator was and good investigators would have opted not to use her as a witness as a result of the first lineup. Considering the testimony of someone who'd proven themselves to be entirely unreliable was really the only evidence presented against James at his trial, he should NOT have been convicted. It's obvious that the jury voted according to their emotions, with no concern for evidence or upholding justice. Regarding the DNA... anyone who's familiar with DNA testing, especially with DNA testing from 20 plus years ago, knows that it's finicky and delicate. That's why modern CSI teams are so incredibly careful when collecting evidence that potentially includes DNA samples. In this case, not only was the crime scene evidence not collected in a careful, DNA conscious manner, it was likewise not stored and processed in the correct manner. The testing process and corresponding capabilities for DNA in the 2000s was incredibly basic and subpar when compared to DNA testing in 2023. In other words, there are many reasons why the later DNA "evidence" found in this case does not deserve the same significance and importance that we give DNA evidence collected and processed in recent or current cases.

He could have lied just for family sake? It’s possible if he didn’t believe God.

She was in me DMs!

Anyone talking about DNA, even at 99.99% match, that makes it 1 in 10,000, and their are 70,000,000 people in the UK... So, it could have been 7000 people based on DNA

When celebrities take up a cause, you automatically know what side to be on. Celebrity wisdom is infallible.

Just another oh my baby wouldn't do that. Doesn't matter the evidence right?

So there is a small chance the dna was contaminated. And in it’s contaminated state it just happened to match his family dna, as well as his own from his tooth. What are the chances his possibly contaminated dna would be a match to his and his family’s? He did it. They got the right man. I feel for his brother and the whole family. But he was a crook and they know that. Deep down they have to know he was guilty.

One of the biggest cases full of flaws and loopholes,,, my opinion is that back then the guy was just set up and the guilty verdict was wrong but now everything looks convenient when the true offender was set up

This was a great case but he was not the one who did it so the police told that lady to point him out. So everyone is dead 🤬 I would have liked to see the liar woman be charged with lying 🤬🤬😱

I don’t understand why anyone would still want to investigate this!? The DNA matched! They never met before this encounter. At this point it doesn’t matter what the witnesses have said.