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:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - by curious 1 hour and 2 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Apron placement as intimidation? - by Varqm 2 hours ago.
Audio -- Visual: Exorcist and JTR - by Pcdunn 3 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - by harry 4 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Apron placement as intimidation? - by c.d. 6 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Apron placement as intimidation? - by Herlock Sholmes 7 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: The Nature of Evidence - (35 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Apron placement as intimidation? - (15 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Mary Kellys husband - (6 posts)
Mary Ann Nichols: Double throat cuts - (6 posts)
Non-Fiction: Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood - (5 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (4 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 > Ripper Discussions > Letters and Communications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #851  
Old 06-13-2016, 02:30 PM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,465
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
This is certainly possible but everyone who saw it believed it to be a variation of the word "Jews", the only point of difference being the exact spelling.

That's the evidence we are faced with Pierre. To claim it was another word entirely is to make a claim without any supporting evidence.
But there is supporting evidence to suggest another word !

Seek and ye shall find !

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #852  
Old 06-13-2016, 04:17 PM
DJA DJA is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Some Australian Mountain Range.
Posts: 1,142
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yabs View Post
Sorry if this a question with an obvious answer.

out of interest how long after the message was erased did its contents become public?
Was it many years after when investigators and authors were allowed access to files, or at a time closer to the murders?
Pretty much became official on day two of the Inquest,Thursday, October 11 1888,
__________________
My name is Dave not Deb
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #853  
Old 06-14-2016, 01:19 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,274
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
But there is supporting evidence to suggest another word !

Seek and ye shall find !
When people say things like this on the forum, Trevor, but don't reveal any information, I tend to find that they are either bluffing or mistaken.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #854  
Old 06-14-2016, 03:01 AM
Henry Flower Henry Flower is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Hackney Wick
Posts: 831
Default

Wow. 86 pages.

Pierre's latest gullibility experiment has proved to be a tremendous success. Well done everyone who took part!
__________________
What should I do at Rome? I have not learnt
The art of lying


Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis - Satire III
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #855  
Old 06-14-2016, 03:11 AM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,028
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Flower View Post
Wow. 86 pages.

Pierre's latest gullibility experiment has proved to be a tremendous success. Well done everyone who took part!
Yep he's good at hooking 'em.

Anyone else notice when he arrived he was a scientist focusing on data, but has morphed into a historian (who doesn't even know what a primary source is it seems) focusing on "Sourcses".
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #856  
Old 06-14-2016, 03:59 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,274
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Flower View Post
Wow. 86 pages.

Pierre's latest gullibility experiment has proved to be a tremendous success. Well done everyone who took part!
In fairness, this thread is entitled "An experiment" so we all knew what we were getting into.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #857  
Old 06-14-2016, 07:07 AM
Phil Carter Phil Carter is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,096
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
I can spell his first name correctly but simply couldn't be bothered.....
David,

Makes you wonder which policeman COULD be "bothered" to write down the exact spelling....



Phil
__________________
Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE AND CHAMPIONS AGAIN. 💙


Justice for the 96 = achieved
Accountability? ....
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #858  
Old 06-14-2016, 07:28 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,274
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Carter View Post
Makes you wonder which policeman COULD be "bothered" to write down the exact spelling....
It doesn't make me wonder that. No doubt they were all doing their best to record what they saw.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #859  
Old 06-14-2016, 09:59 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,109
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Wood View Post
Hi DJA,

And here is PC Long's rendition from his 6th November report.

Spot the difference.

Attachment 17622

Regards,

Simon
Another step away from the original GSG.

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #860  
Old 05-22-2017, 09:17 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,109
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
Why not just say "The judges will not be blamed for nothing"?

They could only have been men, so writing " are the men who" was superfluous wasn't it?
This is very interesting.

Firstly, the statement by detective officer Daniel Halse as recorded at the inquest was:

"The Juwes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing".

There we see the negation.

Secondly, the use of "men" is not "superfluous". It points to the gender described in the sentence. The sentence thereby contains not only a professional type but also a gender type.

This means that there are two types of human beings described in the text. These two types are also categories, i.e. groups where people belong.

One single person can of course belong to both of these categories.

But, when writing a sentence, if both categories are chosen, they are both important since they have different meanings. The meanings are very different in these two words even though the two categories can overlap and did (perfectly).

One therefore has to ask why the author pointed out the two specific categories in one sentence.

One also has to ask why the author pointed out the first category as not being a category of "men" to be blamed: Was it particular for that category?

This analysis shows that the "Ju**es" were NOT that type of men, they were not included in the category who would be blamed "for nothing".

Compare the GSG to the sentence "They died for nothing".

This means they died in vain.

But the Ju**es were NOT the men that would be blamed in vain.

Also, note the future tense: "WILL not be blamed". The act of blaming is directed towards the future. It is an act lying in the future, of which the author has knowledge at the moment of the writing of the text.

This type of man, from the group of Judges as Steve hypothesized earlier WILL not be blamed in vain. He WILL therefore act against the blame expected against him.

And naturally, the word "men" points to one category of men who are different from another category of men:

the men that will be blamed without doing anything about it.

Finally, "for nothing" also means "without having done anything to deserve it". This meaning is of course connected to "blamed".

So: they are not the type of men that will be blamed in the future without having done anything to deserve it and without doing anything about it.

Pierre

Last edited by Pierre : 05-22-2017 at 09:28 AM.
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 09:39 PM.


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