The new Wall Writing photo discovery – a joint statement

[The Good Michael]

I missed something. What I read is that Toynbee was wondering if the information possessed has anything to do with an 1892 photo that he owns, and that, to his knowledge, hasn't been posted before.

Unless I missed a PM, I don't see anything wrong here... aside from the posting of a PM which seems awkward rather than something spiteful.

Maybe I'm missing something?

Mike

[Monty]

James,

If we are going to out a Private Message then lets do it properly.

Originally Posted by Monty
Hi Toynbee,

I note on the new wall writing thread that you mention an 1892 photo.

As Rob and I are investigating all avenues I must confess this is new to me.

I'd be grateful if you can nudge me in the right direction. However, I will understand if you do not wish to, and that's fine.

Just that it would help.

Kind regards
Neil

Hello Neil,

Nice to meet you on hear!

I realise that we are talking about two totally different photos.

The coincidence with the timings mentioned just struck me but these strange coincidences happen quite often with these studies.

I can confirm that I own the photo I mentioned and it is part of a collection.

Kind regards
T.

Hi Toynbee,

Thanks for getting back to me.

I'm confused, which happens often.

I'd like to explore all avenues, to or from, and this photo you mention does interest me.

Can you point me in the direction of the article you mention?

Many thanks
Neil

Obviously Ive annoyed you.

To out a private message, without the consent of the other party concerned is poor form Im afraid. It just goes to show the measure of you as a researcher and a person.

I have never ignored everthing you have ever posted and, in fact, have tried to help where I can. As I have done with everyone if I can.

It is obvious that we are talking of differing photos, so your paranoia is unfounded.

I wish you well with whatever you have, if anything, and note that you are not worthy of my trust.....as Im sure others will also note after reading this.

Best wishes
Monty

[toynbee]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty
Hi Toynbee,

I note on the new wall writing thread that you mention an 1892 photo.

As Rob and I are investigating all avenues I must confess this is new to me.

I'd be grateful if you can nudge me in the right direction. However, I will understand if you do not wish to, and that's fine.

Just that it would help.

Kind regards
Neil

Answered by PM.

Regards
Toynbee.

And I find it amazing that you ignore everything I have ever posted on here yet you send me a private message asking for my help!

[toynbee]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty
Hi Toynbee,

I note on the new wall writing thread that you mention an 1892 photo.

As Rob and I are investigating all avenues I must confess this is new to me.

I'd be grateful if you can nudge me in the right direction. However, I will understand if you do not wish to, and that's fine.

Just that it would help.

Kind regards
Neil

Answered by PM.

Regards
Toynbee.

[toynbee]

Hi

Thanks for that. So there is at least one other very interesting photo out there not on general view to the public. I wonder how many more there are ?

Regards

Observer

Observer

Hi Observer,

There is an interior shot of the buildings too!

Regards.

[Monty]

Don't mention it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Yep, on the whole.

Monty

[toynbee]

And if you look back, you will observe that it was this photo, not the newly disclosed one, that I was interested in...

Dave

Hi Dave,

Its not my fault you're not interested in the Victorian photo of the GYB murder location, I didn't ask you to.

I like it, i'm not really concerned with the lack of interest on here.

Regards.

[Tom_Wescott]

I must say that on the whole everyone has been excellent, and we are grateful for that.

Don't mention it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Observer]

And if you look back, you will observe that it was this photo, not the newly disclosed one, that I was interested in...

Dave

Hi Dave

I likewise. And, at this moment in time, considering Toynbee's latest post, this one is also out of bounds.

Regards

Observer

[Bridewell]

Hi All,

I think speculation was inevitable but, in the circumstances, unhelpful. We have no choice but to wait and see. Rob and Neil, good luck!

Regards, Bridewell.

[Monty]

Thank you Bun,

I must say that on the whole everyone has been excellent, and we are grateful for that.

It enables us to focus on the task at hand, which is the most important thing.

Monty

[Rob Clack]

Thanks Bun.

Rob

[Archaic]

We can do this one of numerous ways.

1) Release without the consent of the City of London Police. This may result in a lack of co-operation, out of wariness, from the said force for future generations of researchers. Believe me, our collective reputation, thanks to the actions of others, isnt too great as it stands today.

2) Demand the City of London Police give their consent and now. Again, this will result in the above and damage any possible future research,

or

3) We talk, arrange and come to a mutual agreement of release which pleases all concerned and enables us (and those that will follow us) to progress this case if we can.

We have a responsibility to the field. Impatient demanding, unreasonable expectation or unbased speculation will only damage.

If this happens then I will tell you this, it wont be Rob and I who is responsible.

So again, lets please keep our heads and quit the speculating till all is out.

And ALL will be out.

Cheers
Monty

Hi Monty.

I just wanted to say that I feel you and Rob are going about this in an entirely correct, responsible, and honorable way.

You have my respect as well as my full support.

Apparently the one way I can really help you two in your effort to properly research and then publish the new find
is to wait patiently without speculating or pestering you, and this I promise to do.

Thanks for all your hard work.

Best regards,
Archaic

[Cogidubnus]

There is a photo exist of the murder location of Martha Tabram at George Yard Buildings believed to date from 1892.

It has nothing to do with this new wall writing photo as you say.

Perhaps I should start a new discussion about it.

And if you look back, you will observe that it was this photo, not the newly disclosed one, that I was interested in...

Dave

[toynbee]

The photo, which I suspect Toynebee refers to, is the 1890s shot of George yard (Gunthorpe St) which appears is Richard Jones Uncovering Jack the Ripper and on his website.

Its not hush hush.

Also it has nothing to do with the new wall writing photo.

And its not about ownership, again, its about doing things properly.

Monty

Hi,

Monty,

The photo I was referring to is not this one you mention above.

There is a photo exist of the murder location of Martha Tabram at George Yard Buildings believed to date from 1892.

It has nothing to do with this new wall writing photo as you say.

Perhaps I should start a new discussion about it.

Kind regards.