Fiona Kendall-Lane

[Supe]

Norma,

but when Fiona explained to some of us afterwards about how McCarthy's shop window looked out on Mary's alley and reminded us his shop was open until the early hours,and had seen her customers come and go, I was captivated-though still not convinced

I was otherwise engaged when most of Fiona's postings appeared, but I think it fair to point out that I made the same observation about the back window of McCarthy's shop in an article several years before.

Understand, I am not in the least suggesting Fiona read and borrowed from the article (I'm not sure anyone read the article) but just that it was clearly a possibility all ought to have appreciated in analysing Miller's Court traffic that fateful night -- and evidently was not.

Don.

[Colin Roberts]

So, Colin Roberts, you seem to remember exactly when the the 'newbie' came onto the scene

Indeed, I do!

I certainly dont

I know!

maybe it was you

Nope!

I posted then, as 'Septic Blue', and did not participate in that particular discussion.

Fiona was called names and accused of being a liar.

I also remember quite clearly that the only comment directed toward Ms. Kendall-Lane that could have been construed as having been at all derogatory was the suggestion of a "hoax" on the part of 'The Good Michael', who posted then as 'Baron'.

She was not "called names" - any names, at all - by anybody!

[jason_c]

edited my comment there.


Your probably correct Archaic.

[Archaic]

Hey guys, let's all try to rise above this and not renew old strife. I do wish someone had saved screen-shots of the thread in question, but apparently no one did, so this argument is at risk of becoming another slinging match without resolution and with more offended feelings.

I can understand why some might feel that they are being "teased and taunted" by new posters who are maybe trying to get everyone's attention to drum up book sales, but an easy solution to that problem is to simply refuse to participate. If you think someone's being a jerk and lacks credibility, why swallow the bait?

When someone is being truly obnoxious and looking to get a rise out of others the thing that shuts them down the quickest is to ignore them.

Let the thread die, and they will end up feeling silly and have to slink away.

On the other hand, if they actually have something of substance to contribute they will realize it's time to either put up or shut up.

Peace everybody,
Archaic (I'm not really a Flower-Child, but I play one on Casebook... )

[coral]

So, Colin Roberts, you seem to remember exactly when the the 'newbie' came onto the scene - I certainly dont - maybe it was you

[Natalie Severn]

Well actually I found it a fascinating experience Colin.Its true you had to 'suspend belief' once or twice but when Fiona explained to some of us afterwards about how McCarthy's shop window looked out on Mary's alley and reminded us his shop was open until the early hours,and had seen her customers come and go, I was captivated-though still not convinced ---surely he could only have 'suspected' which one was the ripper ?
Rumours about McCarthy persisted up until 1903 -at least.He was also 'rumoured' to be 'carrying on' with some of his tenants especially some of the younger women. How true this was though is anybody's guess.

[sdreid]

I, for one, am fed up with this teasing and taunting. If you are going to say you know who the Ripper is then either give us the name or shut up - and I mean shut up before the tease. A few years ago, we had a bunch of these usually related to someones book that was about to come out. All they were doing was exploiting us for their own gain and that makes us the ones who are being bullied! To add insult to injury, they usually brought at least one shill along with them (another new member of course) who pretended to be interested in their "find".

[Colin Roberts]

She wasn't bullied by anyone!

She stated as an absolute matter of fact that she and the entire McCarthy clan knew the identity of 'Jack the Ripper'.

'The Good Michael' suggested that it was all a "hoax", and she was gone!

In the blink of an eye!

The exchange between 'coral' and the poster that had changed his username occurred after the fact, when everyone was 'up in arms' regarding her departure.

These forums should be no place for the sort of bullshit that she was trying to peddle.

[jason_c]

Hear, hear, Archaic. That has always been my Maxim. And I don't use my Maxim gun lightly.

Fair enough, but this is not the first thread where its been claimed Fiona Kendall Lane was driven away/bullied from here(the first allegation from a poster called Coral). Bullying being a fairly effing strong allegation.

The first few posts from Fiona were very interesting. Full of tidbits and family gossip. I personally did not get my hopes up too high as we had no corroboration of who she was. Then Fiona started to get into highly dubious territory - she knew who the killer was, she hinted McCarthy was a night owl (for reasons she would not divulge) etc etc.

[Natalie Severn]

Fiona told us she and her family suffered some shocking abuse from numbers of people over all this ---a man putting strange things through letter boxes / others hurling insults etc so I think she wasn't prepared to suffer anymore of it ever.
She gave a thorough and very interesting---and intriguing talk and the photo of John McCarthy was the highlight of the night.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Jason.
Agreed.. many have come forward with a load of rubbish, however Fiona was not one of them, she was simply relaying from memory,her family's opinions about this case, along with several observations.
I Agree the dangling carrot is frustrating to anyone, but we are [ the majority] serious followers of the subject, and Fiona is not so consumed as us, and had no idea that her open attitude would offend.
I wish her luck, and hope such a book does get published, as the McCarthy insight is something I would personally consider a '' Golden Nugget''
Regards Richard.

[jason_c]

Is she one of those who said she knew who the Ripper was but refused to reveal the name after taunting us with that? If so, then I understand why that would anger some people. To me, that sort of thing looks more like a power trip than anything related to useful information.

There have been a few of these over the years. And Fiona Kendall whatshername was one of them.

[Archaic]

"Horlicks" is a popular malted milk drink that also substitutes for an expletive???

OK, now I'm really confused.

Archaic

[Archaic]

Hi Coral, happy belated birthday!

Hi Suzi. I'm off to go look up the meaning of the word "Horlicks".

Cheers,
Archaic

[Archaic]

Some Personal Thoughts For Your Consideration

Hello everyone.

The incident with Fiona Kendall Lane happened before I became a member of Casebook. The threads in question seem to have been lost in the crash, so what we have left are individual memories of being offended for various reasons and a he said/she said situation. I wish the threads could be recovered so that whatever historical information they contained could be gleaned from them, though I suspect thread recovery might also reignite old arguments which are better left floating somewhere in cyberspace.

As has been mentioned, non-members reading Casebook do make certain judgments about the atmosphere here and about individual members whose posts they read. That’s just a simple fact. It behooves us to consider the impression we give to others, both for reasons of common courtesy and for reasons directly relating to the project of our individual and collective research.

I read the message boards for 2 whole years before joining because I was put off by the rudeness I observed among a very small minority of posters. I had never participated in any kind of online forum before, even My Space or Facebook, so I was extremely cautious- I had absolutely no idea what kind of people might frequent a website based upon a Victorian serial killer! I'm very glad that I did finally join Casebook, because I've learned a great deal and made many wonderful friends all over the world. But I have to admit that with my first few tentative posts I half-expected to be torn to pieces by some over-zealous, hyper-critical member. I’m happy to say that didn't happen; people were actually quite kind and welcoming, for which I am grateful.

I suspect that the fact that I observed, read and educated myself as to the facts and the atmosphere or potential atmosphere of the boards before trying to participate made a difference. I can see how someone new to Ripperology and new to the message boards might be completely unprepared for the confrontational atmosphere that flares up from time to time, where members seek to shoot each other down. I think it's hard for many of us who are so interested in Jack the Ripper to remember that most of the world doesn't share our degree of enthusiasm. We are passionate about history, we care very much about discovering who the Ripper really was, we want to understand the lives of the victims, and we're eager to analyze any idea, theory, suspect, document, etc. that comes along. But others don't necessarily possess that mindset, and we shouldn't expect them to.

There must be many families out there who have a "Great-Grandpa/Grandma/Auntie knew Mary Kelly/George Hutchinson/ Polly Nichols/a neighbor/a policeman/heard or saw something interesting, etc." story. But if they spend even a few hours looking at Casebook before posting, they are liable to realize that they aren't prepared to play Jack-the-Ripper-hardball and it might be wiser to keep a low profile. Some may continue to observe in silence, but most will probably decide it isn’t worth subjecting themselves to the third degree and will just give up on the topic. I think that's a very unfortunate state of affairs, and I’m sure everyone can see that the end result will be that we all lose out on potentially useful formation.

Try to put yourself in the shoes of a well-intentioned newcomer simply wanting to share an old family story, or to get more information regarding it, who suddenly discovers they have naively stepped right into a hornet’s nest! Do we expect them to stand still while being stung? It’s not really reasonable to expect a newcomer to immediately present official “credentials” or personal i.d. just because they decided to post something on Casebook. How many Casebook members have ever done anything to "prove their identity" before participating? How many operate under aliases? I have no idea, but I choose to give people the benefit of the doubt in order to facilitate discussion. I understand that time-wasters, sock-puppets and fantasists do come along every so often, and that must be very tedious for long-term members in particular. Those individuals are usually given the bum's rush.

But I hope members will consider the fact that by running off a newcomer there's a risk that we will forfeit our only chance to hear some interesting and potentially important bit of information.

Even if for the sake of argument we assume that 90% of a newcomer’s family story is garbled through no fault of their own, simply from being passed down for 120 years... what if the remaining 10% is accurate? What if it contains a nugget of truth that might have led us to other nuggets of truth?

Wouldn't you gladly forgive the 90% honestly mistaken information for the sake of the 10% accurate information? (I certainly would.)

Thank you for taking the time to read this, I truly appreciate it. I didn't intend for it to be so long, but this is a topic I feel strongly about.
Best regards,
Archaic