Wow... are we all supposed to have total trust in some "alleged verbal" confession??? because the police stuffed-up their investigations - lack of scientific forensic evidence, missing pieces of vital evidence and all those inconsistencies in eyewitnesses evidence? Do we just go ahead and execute people based on "alleged verbals"??? And please explain Purrums, why Grindlay didn't go directly to the authorities to make an official report of Ryan's "alleged verbal" confession? After all, Grindlay was the top-notch man at Pentridge and he surely would called a special meeting to report and discuss such an amazing verbal confession to inform government leaders, prison authorities, televison, radio and other media journalists from around Australia, prosecutors and defence laywers, Father Brosnan and et al. Why would Ryan confess to Grindlay while at the eleventh-hour Ryan wrote letters to various people protesting his innocence? Ryan had to write his letters on toilet paper and then he was also refused his right to make a "last statement" just prior to execution. Smells fishy to me! The various documentary films, based on meticulous research including archival material and interviews by living people (including Grindlay) who were directly involved in the Ryan case do not even mention such a confession taking place - because it didn't happen! Professional film-makers know better than to make false allegations, which can result in being sued for compensation of millions of dollars. Documentary films are based on facts and truth. When will Purrums provide "proof" that Ryan fired a shot??????????? 
60.224.64.166