Originally Posted by Michael W Richards
I am all for questioning "certainties" within these cases that are anything but certain, but when you waste everyones time...like another poster here...questioning what has been adequately addressed in the historical records, I can onloy ask that you provide proof of your statements or please stop making them.
From Dr Brown...."My attention was called to the apron, particularly the corner of the apron with a string attached. The blood spots were of recent origin. I have seen the portion of an apron produced by Dr. Phillips and stated to have been found in Goulston Street. It is impossible to say that it is human blood on the apron. I fitted the piece of apron, which had a new piece of material on it (which had evidently been sewn on to the piece I have), the seams of the borders of the two actually corresponding. Some blood and apparently faecal matter was found on the portion that was found in Goulston Street."
What is unclear here is why you consistently make up scenarios...like no missing organs onsite...and expect the people who, many of which, are far more informed in the facts as they exist than you are.
These forums have become a place to discuss ideas coming from the lunatic fringe.
Who are the lunatic fringe ?
I presume the far more informed ones you refer to are those that think they know it all ?
The fact is that you and a small minority on here cant handle the fact that the old accepted theories that you sleep with under your pillow each night to protect them, do not now stand up to close scrutiny.
And the worrying factor amongst you is that the likes or myself and others who question these are not going to be bullied or intimated into rolling over and accpeting defeat.