CoL Police find photo of graffito? - NOT Goulston St!

[Trevor Marriott]

LOL....seriously, I love the arrogance. Really. When someone else has something, then it's a hideous conspiracy when it isn't published to your demands, but when it's you sitting on research, suddenly it will be published at a time convenient to you, never mind a 12 month delay.

Seriously, how do you not choke on your hypocrisy?

I took a leaf out of your book !

[Trevor Marriott]

Hutch,

Rob and I agreed not to post on this thread simply because we were aware of speculation and we have had experience of what speculation does.

However it is important that we make this very clear, here, on this thread.

You are by no means whatsoever to blame and should hold no guilt on this matter.

You acted in good faith and honestly, and did what was only natural.

Rob and I, along with many experienced researchers here, are not naïve. We know that a risk is run with such finds. The problem is do we rush it out half verified? Or do we work on it? Its difficult.

Again, to clarify, the request to hold was the City of London Polices, not ours. We are aware of their reasons and complied.

These reasons, along with everything, will be revealed in due course and as soon as possible.

Again we ask for patience. Just judge it once its wholly out there.

Many thanks

Neil & Rob

There is nothing wrong with disclosing what it is without posting the actual document or photo you are seeking to post the document or photo. The question is whether the police wil allow the orginal to be posted.

As I said before 12 months seems a very long time for someone to say yes or no

[Monty]

Trevor,

Rob and my posts explain the course of events and reasons.

That is that.

Monty

[Hunter]

Some folks are literally un-freakin' believable.

But be unperturbed... Rob, Neil, good luck in your endeavors and I hope everything works out in due course for the benefit of everyone concerned.

[Robert]

If the Government close all the country's museums, they will have to open a new museum where people can see all the old museums.

[spyglass]

I think some of us remember mr Marriott's attitude when the photo of Dutfield Yard was found. I always sense sour grapes with him.

Regards.

[Trevor Marriott]

I think some of us remember mr Marriott's attitude when the photo of Dutfield Yard was found. I always sense sour grapes with him.

Regards.

No sour grapes at all I wait with baited breath but remain un enthusiastically sceptical.

[spyglass]

Whilst the rest of us remain enthusiastic.

[The Good Michael]

Enthusiastic? I guess I'm curious more than anything. I believe it won't be a big deal to us because we didn't find it and I don't think it will have any answers. I think it will be interesting.

Mike

[Monty]

Hunter, Spyglass,

Thank you.

Trevors unethusiasim is clear, judging by the number of posts, comments and questions, he is positively non plussed.

And that's fine.

One thing is clear, this isn't about individuals and kudos. Its about presenting new information properly.

And that's is what we intend to do despite others obvious attempts to derail.

Monty

[Archaic]

Facts of Life

If the Government close all the country's museums, they will have to open a new museum where people can see all the old museums.

The Museum of Defunct Museums?

When I was a university student I worked for the Director of the Seattle Art Museum, and a good friend of mine is the Head Curator of another large museum. I can attest to the fact that issues of funding, coping with negatively-minded bureaucrats & their drastic budget cuts, planning fund-raising efforts, etc., are constant worries to those working for and running museums both large and small- and it's gotten even worse in this crummy economy, where funding has become a nightmare.

It's only natural that a museum in danger of being axed should want to present an exciting new find at the moment best calculated to aid their continued existence. That's quite sensible when you think about it. Just like other organizations, museums have to continually prove their "relevance" and justify their existence to those in power over them. We here at Casebook may see History and museums as being of crucial importance, but oftentimes those who hold the bureaucratic purse-strings do not. It's sad, but it's true.

I can only wish the City of London Police well with their efforts to save their museum, and again thank Rob and Neil for their efforts to share the properly researched photo with us.

Thanks and best regards,
Archaic

[Archaic]

City of London Police Museum

Here's a link to the City of London Police Museum: http://www.visitthecity.co.uk/index....ions/view/262/

It says admission is free, but donations are welcome.

Best regards,
Archaic

[Rob Clack]

There is nothing wrong with disclosing what it is without posting the actual document or photo you are seeking to post the document or photo. The question is whether the police wil allow the orginal to be posted.

The problem is, that if we post what the photo is, you will only have our word for what it is/says. And there are probably a few people out there who will not except what we say without any evidence to back up what we say. And to a degree this is fair enough. People who know me and Neil would I hope take our word for it is, but there are people who don't know us from Adam, so why should they believe what we say? I have heard many a time people say I have this and I have that but in the end it is just hot air, so we believe the best course is to publish the photo and our findings about it all in one go.

As I said before 12 months seems a very long time for someone to say yes or no

Well, I have explained why, it's just as frustrating for us, everything is just about ready to go. The article to accompany the photos is almost ready and just needs fine tuning.

Rob

[Fleetwood Mac]

Well, I have explained why, it's just as frustrating for us, everything is just about ready to go. The article to accompany the photos is almost ready and just needs fine tuning.

Rob

Rob, Monty:

I know you don't want to discuss this, and I know that the importance of the find will boil down to individual intrepretation.

But, I'll ask anyway: in your opinion/s, does this change anything? is the find something that may change hitherto steadfast opinions? is it really going to up discussion, or will the general consensus be that it's importance is diminished because it doesn't seem to add anything nad is a nice novelty but doesn't lead anywhere, e.g. the GSG?

[Ally]

The problem is, that if we post what the photo is, you will only have our word for what it is/says. And there are probably a few people out there who will not except what we say without any evidence to back up what we say. And to a degree this is fair enough. People who know me and Neil would I hope take our word for it is, but there are people who don't know us from Adam, so why should they believe what we say? I have heard many a time people say I have this and I have that but in the end it is just hot air, so we believe the best course is to publish the photo and our findings about it all in one go.



Well, I have explained why, it's just as frustrating for us, everything is just about ready to go. The article to accompany the photos is almost ready and just needs fine tuning.

Rob

Hi Rob. You don't need to keep explaining yourself. I have long said that the wisest course of action is to shut up til you can put up, something you and Monty did til you were outed by a third party, entirely not of your doing.

But there is absolutely no need to continue trying to explain things to the likes of Marriott. He is currently sitting on research of his own that he refuses to share, and thinks absolutely nothing of it, and brags about it. It's only when someone has something he can't get his peepers on that he gets all frothy with the outrageousness of it all.