![]() |
||
![]() |
7 January | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
Search ON THIS DAY by date | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
1965: Krays in custody over menace charge
Identical twin brothers Ronald and Reginald Kray have been remanded in custody charged in connection with running a protection racket in London.
The brothers, described in court as company directors of the Glenrae Hotel, in Seven Sisters Road, North London, have been charged with demanding money with menaces in the County of London between 1 October 1964 and 6 January 1965. The twins, who are 31, were distinguishable in court only by their clothes. Ronald wore a dark suit and Reginald a light one. They have been remanded in custody for a week to give police time to make more arrests in connection with the case. Officers arrested the brothers at the Glenrae Hotel last night.
They found the brothers in the basement bar of the hotel, where they were cautioned, before being taken to Highbury Vale police station and later to City Road police station. When they were told they would be charged, Ronald Kray said: "It's taken you long enough. You have been after us long enough." Superintendent Gerrard said he objected to bail because there were two other men involved who had not yet been arrested. He continued: "If they are granted bail I feel sure that we would be impeded in our endeavours to trace these men, and that essential witnesses will be intimidated by these men or friends acting for them." Victor Durand QC, who is defending the brothers, said they did not know from whom they were supposed to have demanded money - nor how much money was involved. "One does not know whether the amount is 5s, £5 or £50," he said. On the direction of magistrate Neil MacElliot, Superintendent Gerrard wrote the name of the person at the centre of the case on a piece of paper and passed it to him. But Mr MacElliot ruled the sums involved did not need to be disclosed at this stage of proceedings. Agreeing to the police request to keep the brothers in custody, Mr MacElliot said: "I am satisfied, as far as I can be at this stage, that there are other persons at large who are in a position to, and will perhaps be in a better position to, interfere with witnesses and to impede the investigation were you at large."
|
![]() |
![]()
|
![]() |
![]() |
Stories From 7 Jan
|
![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
Search ON THIS DAY by date | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||||||
![]() |
![]() |
^^ back to top |
Front Page | Years | Themes | Witness | |
©MMVIII | News Sources | Privacy & Cookies Policy |