Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by caz 31 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by caz 45 minutes ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - by Fisherman 1 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by caz 1 hour and 18 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by caz 1 hour and 22 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by ChrisGeorge 1 hour and 24 minutes ago.

Most Popular Threads:
General Suspect Discussion: Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson - (40 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: What if Lechmere wasn't Cross - (20 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Hutchinson The Sailor Man - (15 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (11 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Conference 2016 - (1 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Musing on Muti Killings... - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Social Chat > Other Mysteries > A6 Murders

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #3791  
Old 11-25-2016, 01:52 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,974
Default

Since the inception of the A6 Forum, a fair few years ago now, it has nearly always been the case that when the Hanrattyistas resort to the kind of sneering sarcasm, and veiled (and not-so-veiled) personal insults seen recently on this thread, and seem unable to offer any real evidence to back up their contention that 'he didn't do it', they are rattled.

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3792  
Old 11-25-2016, 03:18 AM
Derrick Derrick is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 537
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
Since the inception of the A6 Forum, a fair few years ago now, it has nearly always been the case that when the Hanrattyistas resort to the kind of sneering sarcasm, and veiled (and not-so-veiled) personal insults seen recently on this thread, and seem unable to offer any real evidence to back up their contention that 'he didn't do it', they are rattled.

Graham
Let he who is without sin cast.......
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3793  
Old 11-25-2016, 03:49 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,974
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Derrick View Post
Let he who is without sin cast.......
Indeed, sir, but I generally only retaliate, not initiate.

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3794  
Old 11-25-2016, 04:04 AM
Sherlock Houses Sherlock Houses is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 406
Default

I think Natalie Severn would very strongly disagree as she, to name just one, has been on the receiving end of blatantly sarcastic comments from anti-Hanratty posters.
Not veiled comments either.

The hypocrisy is truly astounding.
__________________
*************************************
"A body of men, HOLDING THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO NOBODY, ought not to be trusted by anybody." --Thomas Paine ["Rights of Man"]
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3795  
Old 11-25-2016, 05:15 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,974
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherlock Houses View Post
I think Natalie Severn would very strongly disagree as she, to name just one, has been on the receiving end of blatantly sarcastic comments from anti-Hanratty posters.
Not veiled comments either.

The hypocrisy is truly astounding.
Are you seriously suggesting that Natalie couldn't dish it out herself? Let me tell you that I've been on the receiving end of her 'rhetoric' on more than one occasion. I will own up for the benefit of newcomers and admit that I was once banned by Admin, but it was not for insulting behaviour or verbal threats. And on one memorable occasion I was actually threatened with physical violence by a Hanrattyista, although how he intended to inflict it was never made clear. I've had a couple of PM's from Hanratty supporters that were frankly appalling and a little scary, and had they been placed on the open forum the writers would have been instantly banned. Then there was the legendary "reg1965", one of the most verbally insulting and aggressive posters I've ever seen on any forum, and yes, he too was a Hanratty supporter.

Take those blinkers off, my friend, and look at your own side of the fence as well as mine. Get real. The whole A6 Forum was closed down by Admin at one time when things got really hairy, and I don't think any of us would wish for a repeat. Let's see if we can continue to discuss this case in a reasonable and gentlemanly manner - those of us who believe in Hanratty's guilt also bleed when we are pricked.

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3796  
Old 11-25-2016, 05:26 AM
Alfie Alfie is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 90
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham View Post
Well, yes....and why indeed should he (McNally, that is)? McNally had a sub-poena served against him, and Gillbanks, when he met him, said he was extremely angry. He also said he hadn't seen Hanratty for four years, which is why I find his question puzzling. But the upshot was that Hanratty's alibi was blown out of the water.

Woffinden says that McNally's house was searched on the night of Hanratty's arrest, which suggests that very early on Hanratty named McNally. Foot, however, doesn't refer to this at all.

I'm still puzzled.....

Graham
To expand a little ...

Hanratty doesn't appear to have had a wide circle of male friends/acquaintances (partly a result of his personality, I'd guess, partly a product of spending so much time inside.) So if he had a few criminal associates in Liverpool, there's a good chance McNally, a former lag, would have known who at least some of them were. And in true 'honour among thieves' fashion, he wasn't going to grass them up if Hanratty wasn't prepared to name them.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3797  
Old 11-25-2016, 06:42 AM
Graham Graham is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,974
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alfie View Post
To expand a little ...

Hanratty doesn't appear to have had a wide circle of male friends/acquaintances (partly a result of his personality, I'd guess, partly a product of spending so much time inside.) So if he had a few criminal associates in Liverpool, there's a good chance McNally, a former lag, would have known who at least some of them were. And in true 'honour among thieves' fashion, he wasn't going to grass them up if Hanratty wasn't prepared to name them.
I think you could well be correct here, Alfie. It's occurred to me that at least part of the reason why McNally was so incensed (and probably why he had a subpoena served against him) was that Hanratty named him as being one of the men he met when he claimed he was in Liverpool, when in fact McNally hadn't seen him for 4 years and was apparently going straight. Hence his refusal to play ball. I'm a bit less puzzled than I was!

Graham
__________________
We are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver Blaze
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3798  
Old 11-25-2016, 08:59 AM
Observer Observer is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,253
Default

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3799  
Old 11-25-2016, 03:34 PM
Sherlock Houses Sherlock Houses is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Observer View Post
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
No such word Mr Spectator.
__________________
*************************************
"A body of men, HOLDING THEMSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO NOBODY, ought not to be trusted by anybody." --Thomas Paine ["Rights of Man"]
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3800  
Old 11-26-2016, 05:54 AM
ansonman ansonman is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 107
Default Just how just was the jury?

We know that the other side regard the jury as a fine band of fellows whose verdict was right and proper but just how wise was the jury?

After five hours out, the jury requested further guidance from Judge Gorman:

"Must we be certain and sure of the prisoner's guilt to return a verdict?"

I am not kidding. This is what the jury actually asked, after five hours diliberations. The judge had already told the jury that they had to be certain of their verdict and pointed to the inconsistencies in the prosecution case before they retired. Five hours later they ask the judge, who five hours earlier had told them they have to be certain, if they have to be certain.

Dumb and dumber x 6 or what? Gorman must have been tempted to say "are you lot xxxxing deaf or what?

Anyway, he didn't and instead told them:

"If you have reasonable doubt, then you are not sure. You understand that, do you not?"

I'm not a gambling man and so I wouldn't like to bet on whether they understood what they had by now been told twice. Anyway, the jury toddled off and after another five hours they found Hanratty guilty.

Don't think I'd put them forward as a particularly fine body of persons. More like a collection of dimwits. Sorry to offend.

Ansonman
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.