Mass debating on the Ripper - no hard feelings

[Geddy2112]

Question
Answer
Question
Answer
Point
Response

Etc.

We should try if possible, me included, to focus on one point at a time before moving on to the next.

You maybe just need to multi-quote instead of using the plain text/bold test quote and reply. I think Newbie made a post directed at Dusty the other day and used different colours to try and distinguish who was saying what... dear me that made me lie down for half and hour.

The HTML code is simple, it's

square bracket quote=Herlock square bracket at the front of the quote then
square bracket /quote square bracket at the end of the quote

Then type your answer then move onto the next bit you wish to address...

[Herlock Sholmes]

You might be surprised . . .
If you were to look back through Hutchinson threads between say, 2010-2015 (not sure exactly), you would find myself embroiled in perpetual exchanges with one poster, Ben and his Partisans, for what seemed like a few years. Scott N. is witness to that, in fact I don't think anyone else read those threads because of the tedium of repetitive responses.
If you ever have a hard time getting to sleep one night, just open up one of those threads . . .

Hello Wick,

You mentioning Ben is a bit of a coincidence tbh. Another poster on here contacted me via pm and mentioned that Christer Holmgren had got into a bit of a spat with a poster called Ben. I recalled reading quite a few posts before I joined involving yourself and Ben which I think were largely on the topic of Hutchinson?

[Geddy2112]

"No one knows when that day or hour will come —not the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" - Matthew 24:36

"Tell John I will call him at 4pm." - Matthew 3:15

[Paddy Goose]

...
If you were to look back through Hutchinson threads between say, 2010-2015 (not sure exactly), you would find myself embroiled in perpetual exchanges with one poster, Ben and his Partisans, for what seemed like a few years. ... I don't think anyone else read those threads because of the tedium of repetitive responses. ...

Oh yes, I recall. But here's the good news: You are forgiven your transgressions. Because the new posters are completely ape-**** over the L-word. Constant, never stopping never ending threads and posts about "him" We have posters here now who that's all they are here for, the L-word. Doesn't matter if they are against it or whatever, it's a "thing." And there is another nightmare to dimension to it. They relay to us what you know- who's latest U-Tube is, or who said what on Facebook.

[Geddy2112]

And there is another nightmare to dimension to it. They relay to us what you know- who's latest U-Tube is, or who said what on Facebook.

Apologies I'm sometimes guilty of that. I did/do have a vested interest in the L word due to the book I was writing and often would use here like a sounding board of things related to L.

If it was troublesome to you it would have been possible to not read my posts by scrolling past them or even block me so you could not read my posts. It seems you did neither though which sort of negates your disgust a little, again apologies.

[Wickerman]

Hello Wick,

You mentioning Ben is a bit of a coincidence tbh. Another poster on here contacted me via pm and mentioned that Christer Holmgren had got into a bit of a spat with a poster called Ben. I recalled reading quite a few posts before I joined involving yourself and Ben which I think were largely on the topic of Hutchinson?

Thats right, I took a hiatus in 2004, came back in 2008 to find a poster, Christer going head-to-head with Ben and a few others over Hutchinson, I sided with Christer. This was before he came up with his regrettable theory.

[Wickerman]

Oh yes, I recall. But here's the good news: You are forgiven your transgressions.

You're too kind

. . Because the new posters are completely ape-**** over the L-word. Constant, never stopping never ending threads and posts about "him" We have posters here now who that's all they are here for, the L-word. Doesn't matter if they are against it or whatever, it's a "thing." And there is another nightmare to dimension to it. They relay to us what you know- who's latest U-Tube is, or who said what on Facebook.

Yes, that was long before Christer developed his 'L-word' theory.
I refuse to debate it with him, he knows how I feel and we leave it at that.

[Tom_Wescott]

The Police had the Coram knife and didn't have it analyzed at the Eddowes Inquest with respect to her wounds.

The Coram knife was blunt and could not have had anything to do with the Eddowes murder. It also had nothing to do with the Stride murder.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Thats right, I took a hiatus in 2004, came back in 2008 to find a poster, Christer going head-to-head with Ben and a few others over Hutchinson, I sided with Christer. This was before he came up with his regrettable theory.

Christer was a Joseph Fleming man back then.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Scott Nelson]

The Coram knife was blunt and could not have had anything to do with the Eddowes murder. It also had nothing to do with the Stride murder.

It wasn't blunt and wasn't entirely ruled out as the murder weapon of Stride (per Phillips and Blackwell). If the same man was thought responsible for the murder of Eddowes, the knife should have been analyzed for her wounds, but apparently it wasn't.

I think you mean the end was ground down. I mean the blade.

[Tom_Wescott]

It wasn't blunt and wasn't entirely ruled out as the murder weapon of Stride (per Phillips and Blackwell). If the same man was thought responsible for the murder of Eddowes, the knife should have been analyzed for her wounds, but apparently it wasn't.

The doctors felt it would be unlikely to have been the weapon used on Stride. As she was cut only once, and the knife may have been altered between the time of the murder and its discovery, they couldn't be expected to be certain. But as it has zero connection to the crime scene, and the doctors felt it an unlikely murder weapon, I'd say the Coram knife is no more likely than any (and perhaps less likely than many) knife in London to have committed the murders. And yes, it was blunted.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Wickerman]

Christer was a Joseph Fleming man back then.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

That sounds familiar, but the debate was about whether Hutchinson lied or not.

[Paddy Goose]

That sounds familiar, but the debate was about whether Hutchinson lied or not.

As Tom said, Christer had a brief flirtation with Fleming and wrote one article about him. That is, until

Christer found his own Hutch.

And yes Wick, i recall you were also in on those debates with Ben, who was pro-Hutch. But yes Christer spent years arguing against Ben on the George Hutchinson Suspect threads. There are 20,000 Hutch Suspect posts which rates third place in individual suspect posts here on Casebook. George Hutchinson is what I call an ingrown toenail suspect. That is, a name plucked from the casefiles and fitted up as the Ripper. And I became so incredibly bored, bored stiff with those Hutch threads.

Chew on that. Christer spent all those years arguing against an ingrown toenail suspect,

In the meantime, Ed came along with the L-word. He predated Christer, who at some point made a conversion. Christer now had his own in-grown toenail suspect. He one-upped Ben. The rest is history.

Maybrick is in second place with 29,000 post In first place, you guessed it, the L-word with 31,000 posts and counting. I suppose that is why I am beyond put out over the L-word. I already sat through donkey years of another ingrown toenail suspect, now this. And the L-word has been going awhile and shows no signs of ever stopping. it doesn't seem to matter most are against the theory like I am. THEY WILL NOT STOP TALKING ABOUT IT HERE ON CASEBOOK. And that is their right to talk about what they choose to.

[Scott Nelson]

The doctors felt it would be unlikely to have been the weapon used on Stride. Based on a single cut to her throat. As she was cut only once, and the knife may have been altered between the time of the murder and its discovery, they couldn't be expected to be certain. Altered in a 24-hour period? How? But as it has zero connection to the crime scene, (like the GSG, and not the apron piece?) and the doctors felt it an unlikely murder weapon, I'd say the Coram knife is no more likely than any (and perhaps less likely than many) knife in London to have committed the murders. As I said, neither doctor ruled it out entirely as the possible murder weapon and it was the only suspicious knife found during the C-5 murders that was reported in the press. And yes, it was blunted. Only at the end. It was a slicing knife used mainly for bread and other things like cheese, fruit and vegetables.

Look at the jagged cut from Eddowes breastbone down to her pubes with the deviation around her navel and tell me that couldn't have been done with a slicing knife.

[GBinOz]

And of course the recent Rapture prediction. If A then B. If these signs are present then the calculation of the date that follows has to be correct. And we all know how that turned out.

c.d.

Do we??
You are still here, and so am I. The Rapture prediction is that those left behind will be subject to Hell's fire. Could Hell's fire be that those who were supposed to be removed from among us via the rapture are in fact still here among us???