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

[Monty]

Hi Carol,

Many thanks for the clarification.

Whilst I understood what you meant, I'm afraid there are some who will read your post and jump to the wrong conclusion.

Keep your fingers crossed.

Monty

[Robert]

Carol, you simply meant that he was an informant, not an informer.

[Trevor Marriott]

Yawn. It's a pathetic man who attempts to justify his overbearing hypocrisy. But don't feel bad, I mean it only took you, what ..18 months to share your info?

Totally justifies you browbeating everyone else for theirs.

For your information there was no brow beating the questions I asked were reasonable questions to be asked given the facts and circumstances decsribed by those who are in possession of whatever it is.

[PaulB]

For you information Miss Goodytwoshoes I was going to publish some of my new material in the June edition of Ripperologist but the magazine content was full so it will now hopefully be pubished in the August edition. Likewise other new stuff wil be disclosed in York. So I am not keeping it back.

I think that's news to Ripperologist. In the sense that it hasn't been submitted for consideration yet.

[Fleetwood Mac]

For your information there was no brow beating the questions I asked were reasonable questions to be asked given the facts and circumstances decsribed by those who are in possession of whatever it is.

Trev,

I do recall you advertising your find to all and sundry.

When asked to open shop, you stated, without a modicum of humour, that you were playing poker. I suppose that's the abbreviated version, but that's what it amounted to all the same, with 'poker' being your choice of diction.

Gotta to say, Trev, you're not in a position to shout the odds.

[AdamNeilWood]

What Paul means, Trevor, is that there's no guarantee of publication until we have sight of an article.

I think what you meant to say is that you were 'hoping to publish' in the June edition rather than 'was going to'.

We'll be very happy to receive your research as outlined in emails to Rip and discuss publication with you from that point.

Best wishes
Adam

[Monty]

For your information there was no brow beating the questions I asked were reasonable questions to be asked given the facts and circumstances decsribed by those who are in possession of whatever it is.

Trevor,

We have answered your questions because we are being open about this, and the time delay has to be explained. Its probably one of the biggest questions the community would like answering. We undertand that and we are being as open as possible.

However, to get the desired result (and that is everything out in the open), some question will not be answered. No matter how often you ask.

We are not obliged to answer everything at this stage, nor are you to any questions we have of your 'finds'. No matter how reasonable you deem them.

Most of the posters here have the good sense to understand that the situation is now delicate. Any further release of information could scupper the whole thing.

So I ask you, for the sake of the community as a whole, to consider your actions before undertaking anything which may place this whole situation beyond the realms of recovery.

Regards
Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor,

We have answered your questions because we are being open about this, and the time delay has to be explained. Its probably one of the biggest questions the community would like answering. We undertand that and we are being as open as possible.

However, to get the desired result (and that is everything out in the open), some question will not be answered. No matter how often you ask.

We are not obliged to answer everything at this stage, nor are you to any questions we have of your 'finds'. No matter how reasonable you deem them.

Most of the posters here have the good sense to understand that the situation is now delicate. Any further release of information could scupper the whole thing.

So I ask you, for the sake of the community as a whole, to consider your actions before undertaking anything which may place this whole situation beyond the realms of recovery.

Regards
Monty

I dont know why some are making a big issue about such simple questions which were asked.

I asked them replies, were given end of story.

All this rubbish about what i am going to undertake

If I didnt ask the questions to the satisfaction of some tough !

[Trevor Marriott]

I think that's news to Ripperologist. In the sense that it hasn't been submitted for consideration yet.

No it hasnt been submitted for consideration I had a converastion with Eduardo about the article he is aware of the content of the article.

There was never a mention made of submitting it for "consideration"

[Monty]

I can imagine that you didn't Trevor.

Just clarifying the position.

Monty


PS watching you on the TV as I type. For those who are interested, Trevor is on the National Geographic channel....whispering for some reason.

[PaulB]

No it hasnt been submitted for consideration I had a converastion with Eduardo about the article he is aware of the content of the article.

There was never a mention made of submitting it for "consideration"

Trevor,
It is probably fair to say that generally speaking no magazine guarantees to publish articles sight unseen, so it is a bit of a presumption to assume that it will be published. However, in this case perhaps it isn't a presumption at all because it says a great deal for the content of your article if Eduardo and Adam, both truly top-notch editors, plan publication after no more than receiving a rough outline with you. That they believe you have something worth publishing means that it not only has a place in the pages of Ripperologist, but, dammit, that we all champ at the bit until September to read it. Suddenly September seems a long way off!

I will just add, though, that it appears that the decision to hold back on the material was made by the City of London Police, not by Rob and Neil, who by the sound of it are as anxious to publish their discovery as we are to find out what it is. Pushing them to reveal more than they are able to therefore seems wrong.

But let's get that article published, Trevor. Let's get that injection of fresh material into the subject. It needs it.

[Carol]

Hi Carol,

Many thanks for the clarification.

Whilst I understood what you meant, I'm afraid there are some who will read your post and jump to the wrong conclusion.

Keep your fingers crossed.

Monty

Hi Monty,

Thank you yourself for pointing out my mistake thingy. I certainly wouldn't have wanted to upset Hutch and Alf.

My husband says I speak 'Svengelska' (a mixture of Swedish and English) and that after all these years (37 years next month) he can normally get the gist of things! Actually, between you and me, my father used to have the same problem not only with myself but with my mother. Bless him. And Mum could only speak English! At least I have an excuse - says me whilst clinging to a straw. The strange thing was that Mum and I ALWAYS knew what the other meant! Could it be the Irish in us? After all, Grandma kissed the Blarney stone before she left Ireland.

I'm going on again, aren't I?

Seriously, though - thanks again for pointing it out!

I am crossing my fingers and holding my thumbs (double Svengelska good luck - no worries then).

Carol

[Carol]

Carol, you simply meant that he was an informant, not an informer.

Hi Robert,

Yes, I did. Thanks!

Perhaps if you and Monty don't mind you can continue to 'look after' me and keep a check on my Svengelska. I know it's almost a full-time job in itself but I would really appreciate it. (I'm not joking!).

Carol (for you) and (for Monty).

[Monty]

Carol

I apologise.

You have done nothing wrong. I'm just aware that certain people read what they wish to read into certain words and phrases.

I'm experienced enough with the word twisters to realise they will take you innocent use of the word 'informer' and twist it into what it is not.

That's not your fault, so please don't take it as that.

My post was more for their benefit, a clarification.

Monty

[Robert]

Hi Carol

No worries, your English is good.

Now let me polish up my Swedish with the Swedish dictionary :

'A' is for ABBA