E Petitions and Ripper Files and papers

[auspirograph]

E-Petitions and the Bureaucratic Mirage.

I was dissapointed to see comments on JTR forums from two respected researchers who in my opinion should have known better. Both poured water on this project, both went to great lengths to elablorate on how wonderful they were and that they had tried to get access etc, and highlighted how they had failed.

Trevor,

The two respected researchers you allude to are so because, unlike your good self, they sometimes make sense. You cannot misrepresent what was said and then claim victory in this unholy crusade mounted by no less than a retired police officer with an axe to grind. No-one "poured water on this project", which nothing will stop now after your high profile media flame war. On the contrary, past efforts were expressed on the real issues of gaining access to sensitive historical police records. You are flaming an internet message board.This is what was said:

http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=13523

That is, the researchers alluded to see quite clearly the importance of the records but with years of experience know better in the best ways of going about it. You forget that you are also not successful in this attempt and have, in my view, only managed to force the Metropolitan Police and National Archives to consider their statuary right to pulp the records.

Ease up man or you will only succeed in contributing to the destruction of any sensitive documents to the detriment of all interested researchers, not just for yourself as a new writer on heat like Butterworth did.

Take the advice of these two researchers, as most of us do, if you are really concerned with making progress in the preservation and study of these historic police documents.

In my brief discussions with Lindsey Clutterbuck and Andrew Brown historical archivist for the Metropolitan Police for research of my book, the general impression I got was that there was a concern with 'Ripperologists' making of the records something far more sinister than was warranted.

Already, your efforts as these recent socialist petition causes show, promote the average punter to ask, "but what are they hiding, I bet it has something to do with the Freemasons and Royalty". Do you get it Trevor? These misguided and extravagant press media displays are taking us back to Jack the Ripper of the 1970's. And that's why I venture to say, why the two researchers are responding and good on them for saying so because that Trevor, is not a cause you are prepared to champion.

So now these petitions may be the last chance to save these records etc. The Metropolitan Police are likley to destroy the originals of the registers and the ledgers so these petitions must be treated with urgency to try to save them.

See above:

If 100.000 signatures can be obtained there is a chance that this will force the British Government to discuss this in Parliament. So your vote would help the cause. Please feel free to pass these details onto any others who you may have on your e mail list who may wish to support this action.

This is what troubles me, these Stalinist anons who are promoting this cause do not appear to have any historical background to the Whitechapel murders, previous research or the workings of British Government. Discussion in Parliament is one thing but changing the law is another.

On 20 March 1889, Robert Anderson wrote a letter in his defense to The Times which he reprinted in his memoirs regarding the retention of sensitive police documents. It seems to me the Metropolitan Police are making the same argument still and this is a point your two researchers are also making. That there are two sides to an argument appears to be the point missed by those who crusade for a stock and blanket release of unspecified police documents, which of course will never happen like this or now. We already know the gist of what the Special Branch ledgers and associated files contained on the investigation of the Whitechapel murders due to the efforts of past reliable and effective researchers which you fail to acknowledge.

In my recent book, though there is already a thread to discuss it, a lengthy chapter is included that outlines in some detail the background and relevance of the Special Branch ledgers on the Whitechapel murders. Only Brian Porter's capable efforts in 1983 were not looked at in depth.

Anderson wrote:

"And this discussion [House of Commons] may do good if certain parties on both sides of the Atlantic should learn from it that they may give information to Her Majesty's Government, and receive remuneration for doing so, with the certainty that their secret will be kept as well as Le Caron's was..."

[Sister Hyde]

That doesn't surprise me Cam.

Monty

well at least you're lucid.....^^....for a while....

[Monty]

well now for some reasons thios is making me wet my pants

That doesn't surprise me Cam.

Monty

[Sister Hyde]

I have my own mind and do not wish your propoganda crap in my mail. Naïve others may hang off your every word, I do not.

Monty

well now for some reasons thios is making me wet my pants

[Monty]

Beat others into submission?

I see no one else ranting here, in bold, other than you Trevor.

If Cam and Mike want to either leave or follow your cause then I wish them luck. Their choice, as was mine when I asked Stephen not to mail your bollocks on to me.

I have my own mind and do not wish your propoganda crap in my mail. Naïve others may hang off your every word, I do not.

Monty

[Sister Hyde]

wait!!! I didn't tell maria what's on my heart yet and it's been tickling me for months: DON'T SAY MOTHER****ER MOTHER****ER!!!!!!!!!!!! hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm that felt gooooooooooood!

[Trevor Marriott]

Sis,

The idea of a common goal is a good one, but experience tells me that at least one party in this argument says "common" but means "me." I wish it weren't so, and maybe I'm wrong. I'll give you a hint: It isn't me and it isn't Jesus.


Mike

Well it is isnt "me" thats for sure I didnt initiate the petitions. As stated two very interested ripper entusiasts did it, but once again its an ideal opportunity for some to have a go at me yet again, but hey ho water off a ducks back to me.

Those who have beat others into submission will not do so with me. I see another valuable member in Sister Hyde has had enough and left how many more will leave as a result of the actions of a mindless few on here.

But of course they will still have JTR forums where they can still keep stirring the poison pot

[Sister Hyde]

Sis,

The idea of a common goal is a good one, but experience tells me that at least one party in this argument says "common" but means "me." I wish it weren't so, and maybe I'm wrong. I'll give you a hint: It isn't me and it isn't Jesus.


Mike

Then Michael Dear you will understand my desertion. it does make me pissed cause there are few people like you i'll be missing from the board, they know who they are, but now, it's more than enough, i want ripperology to remain something I enjoy, not something I end up feeling sick from like it happened with the extreme metal scene. so i'm out.

so long!

[Trevor Marriott]

Don,

Superficially, the idea of de-classification sounds like a good one. I haven't looked at the petition, nor have I seen Stewart and Paul's arguments against it. Is it possible to brief me on this?

Typically, I am against government control over old documents on the basis of historical value, even if release of such creates unpleasantness for some people, myself included. If there are compelling reasons not to have these items released, I would like to hear them.

Mike

The complellng reasons do not stand up to close scrutiny both from Messrs Begg and Evans nor from The Police themsleves.

[The Good Michael]

Sis,

The idea of a common goal is a good one, but experience tells me that at least one party in this argument says "common" but means "me." I wish it weren't so, and maybe I'm wrong. I'll give you a hint: It isn't me and it isn't Jesus.


Mike

[Trevor Marriott]

First of all, I quite agree with Neil that for more of Marriott's nonsense to be sent to all Casebook members (he previously PMed everyone -- supposedly with permission -- with an ad for his book) would be an unwarranted and unwelcome intrusion.

Moreover, the petition is stuff and nonsense and basically a publicity stunt.

Further, both Stewart Evans and Paul Begg were in agreement and provided quite cogent and compelling reasons why the petitition drive ought be quickly forgotten.

Finally, the UK-only petition contains a howling grammatical error.

Don.

You are so narrow minded

And where did I mention any book Mr Know it all ?

So the gods have spoken so we all ought sit up and take notice, get real.

They failed thats no slur on them. However I failed in some respects but all was not in vain so only a partial failure not a total one

[Sister Hyde]

Ok, this is the last ******* straw!!!!!!!!!!!!!! since no one here can help themselves to be so goddamned dumb and stubborn and since no one can learn to work together despite differences to help to a same goal, this is seriously making me feel to take out my crowbar and smash some inbred skulls, I won't feel any regret there for slamming the bloody door!!!!!!!! I might be the unbearable psycho bitch but i can seriously say my image of so called "serious researchers" has been very damaged here, ENOUGH MATERIAL ON THESE BOARDS TO GET YOU DISGUSTED OF YOUR FAVORITE HOBBY. seriously this won't prevent me from sleeping at night!!! CAAAAM AWAAAAAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The Good Michael]

Don,

Superficially, the idea of de-classification sounds like a good one. I haven't looked at the petition, nor have I seen Stewart and Paul's arguments against it. Is it possible to brief me on this?

Typically, I am against government control over old documents on the basis of historical value, even if release of such creates unpleasantness for some people, myself included. If there are compelling reasons not to have these items released, I would like to hear them.

Mike

[Supe]

First of all, I quite agree with Neil that for more of Marriott's nonsense to be sent to all Casebook members (he previously PMed everyone -- supposedly with permission -- with an ad for his book) would be an unwarranted and unwelcome intrusion.

Moreover, the petition is stuff and nonsense and basically a publicity stunt.

Further, both Stewart Evans and Paul Begg were in agreement and provided quite cogent and compelling reasons why the petitition drive ought be quickly forgotten.

Finally, the UK-only petition contains a howling grammatical error.

Don.

[Monty]

Firstly Trevor, my remark was addressed to Stephen Ryder and not you.

Secondly, I care not for your contempt.

Thirdly, I am a member of this site out of choice. I chose to be a member to learn and partake in debate. Not to have causes thrown down my throat and enforced into my Email in box.

Fourthly, to ask an unbiaised site such as this to mail its membership regarding an E petition is beyond galling.

Fifthly, if said unbaised site does indeed carry out your outrageous request the I shall consider my own membership. However my trust and belief in this site is such that I am extremely confident such a consideration will not happen.

Finally, same as firstly really. My request is none of your business. I shall make it when I choose, to whom I choose, why I choose and how I choose.

Your hypocrisy screams.

Monty