What are they (still) hiding

[Trevor Marriott]

To be fair the freedom of information office has to a certain degree been helpful to me in my appeal.

However in addittion to taking on the police I also had to take them on as well. They turned from poacher to gamekeeper. When Butterworth lodged his appeal they took it up on his behalf having directed the police to allow him full and un restricetd access. But when it came to my appeal they then sided with the police and were supporting their grounds for not giving me access.

[Phil H]

Glad you put the PS in there you got it spot on no offence intended.

If tyou really think that, you have got the UK Civil Service VERY wrong indeed. I can understand your frustrations - and I have tried in successive posts in this and other threads to present the other side of the coin - but I am certain my colleagues in other departments of state are by and large hard-working, seek to be as helpful as possible often in dealing with difficult and complex issues.

Phil

[Trevor Marriott]

Glad you put the PS in there you got it spot on no offence intended.

It would be a dull world if everyone agreed with everyone

[Phil H]

Trevor

I think you must have perhaps you have been to busy writing your book about the life and times of a modern day civil servant to keep up.

I'm afraid, a book about my life and times as a civil servent would be FAR too racey for publication - all the collusion, conspiracy, apart from the paranoia, the sex and the violence. I hardly have time to fill in forms in triplicate, I'm so bust withholding information, except when bribed to "leak" it, of course.

Apart from that, I do TRY to keep up with Ripperology, as I have for around 40 years - I even have a copy of your book on my shelves (next to "Uncle Jack" quite naturally!!). Seriously, I enjoyed reading your work, but am as yet unconvinved by your proposed solution.

I do by the way wish you well with your efforts on the Special Branch material - I'm as intrigued as anyone could be to see what it contains.

Phil

P.S. For those without any sense of humour, belonging to nationalities where it appears to have been bred-out, or self-mockery, the first part of the above post is not intended to be taken seriously, it is a mixture of sarcasm, irony and sheer silliness. Just in case anyone thought otherwise.

[Phil H]

Phil C

Thanks

If the position is, as you state it,

"It has been accepted by very many (but not all) for many years now that Stride may well have been the victim of a different killer. It has also been questioned, that Kelly has possibly been the victim of a different killer too, again, by many (but not all)...There is enough evidence here therefore to state both of these can well be true.

then I have been arguing that as a possibility for some years, (since AP Wolf's tome came out, I think). So I am very comfortable with that. I am also open to the idea that MJK was not a victuim of "Jack" (my name for the killer of Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes at least).

I thought that the mention of more than one killer might have been a reference to new evidence for a double-act (i.e. two men working together or killer and accomplice.

Thanks very much for enlightening me.

Phil

[Phil Carter]

Hello Phil H,

It has been accepted by very many (but not all) for many years now that Stride may well have been the victim of a different killer. It has also been questioned, that Kelly has possibly been the victim of a different killer too, again, by many (but not all).
There is enough evidence here therefore to state both of these can well be true.

best wishes

Phil

[Trevor Marriott]

Phil
I think you must have perhaps you have been to busy writing your book about the life and times of a modern day civil servant to keep up.

No just my theory many others on here concur on that same beleif.

[Phil H]

Thats before new evidence came to light to point to more than "one" killer.

Precisely what evidence is that? Something that relates to Mr Marriott's own rather maverick theory, or something more general?

Have I missed something?

Phil

[chudmuskett]

Thats before new evidence came to light to point to more than "one" killer.

Website needs updating just not enough days in the week.

Yep, It sure does

[Trevor Marriott]

Thats before new evidence came to light to point to more than "one" killer.

Website needs updating just not enough days in the week.

[chudmuskett]

Mr Marriott, it says here that you have solved the case:

http://www.trevormarriott.co.uk/

But here your quoted halfway down the page as saying the case will never be solved:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4042087.stm

I dont understand

[chudmuskett]

Wasn't that rumage through the Broadmoor files recently supposed to unmask JTR? I just hope this new research (if allowed) gives us at least one fresh clue because lets be honest the case is pretty stagnent at the moment.

Good luck Mr Marriott

[Trevor Marriott]

Only the good die young !

[jason_c]

I would like nothing more than to disclose the full facts at this stage however as the case has not been decided, and even when it has there could be appeals by any of the 3 parties so It is wrong to publicly disclose details of evidence which the tribunal were asked to consider are still deliberating upon.

Fair enough. I disagree with you about everything to do with JtR but you deserve respect for what your doing.

Credit where credit is due - I hope you win the case. However I shall fully support MI5 shooting you if you win this.

[Trevor Marriott]

I look forward to these full facts being posted.

Without being allowed to wildly speculate on the events surrounding JtR we'd hardly have a messageboard worthy of the name. And you'd have about 6 posts at best, Trevor.


Good luck with the case btw.

I would like nothing more than to disclose the full facts at this stage however as the case has not been decided, and even when it has there could be appeals by any of the 3 parties so It is wrong to publicly disclose details of evidence which the tribunal were asked to consider are still deliberating upon.