'it was nice' Observation

[Tom_Wescott]

So, with Tom proving himself to be more mouse than man,

You'd think a kid your age would know his cartoons. Tom was the cat and JERRY was the mouse.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Chris]

Adam

What you're saying, in effect, is that if you leave out Mortimer, you can build a "solid timeline of the events," and then when you use that as a yardstick for what Mortimer is reported as saying you find that it doesn't fit, and you conclude that it's unreliable.

I'm afraid that logic is completely circular.

Thanks for your offer of a debate in article format, but I think our approaches are so radically different that it would be frustrating for both of us. Maybe one of the other members of Maria's menage a quatre would oblige?

[Adam Went]

Chris:

I was under the impression from your previous post to which I was answering that you were merely asking what exactly my theories about Mortimer were, not about that particular press report in particular, hence why I pointed you back to the article.

When it comes down to it, there is conflicting evidence about what happened in Berner Street that night. People can reconstruct different timetables to try to reconcile the differences, and they will all have their virtues and their deficiencies. But unless some new evidence emerges, no one is going to be proved right about this, and no one is going to be proved wrong. It will all remain just a matter of opinion.

In almost any other circumstance I would agree with you here, but in the case of Berner Street and, for the benefit of our debate, Fanny Mortimer, I disagree. It is difficult to conclusively "prove" anything, BUT we are lucky enough to have such a plethora of witnesses to the minutes preceding Liz Stride's murder, along with the aforementioned press reports, and other such information, that if we piece everything together in a sensible, logical fashion, then I believe we can, beyond all reasonable doubt, build a solid timeline of the events in Berner Street and therefore use that as a measuring stick for Mortimer's testimony - THAT is what i've done before and what I intend to do more thoroughly in the future, and THAT is how i've come to the conclusions I have about her testimony.

It really isn't all that complicated. Honestly.

So, with Tom proving himself to be more mouse than man, are you prepared to become my opponent debater in article format? Or do I have to debate with myself?

Maria:

Indeed we have discussed all of this on JTR Forums before, along with Chris Phillips, which is why I was more than a little perplexed by some of the comments that have been made here.

Tracy:

All I want to say is....LOL!

Cheers,
Adam.

[Tom_Wescott]

Random observations

I think I would sooner marry Maria than accuse Wolf Vanderlinden of being illogical. I could survive the marriage for AT LEAST a few years.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Bridewell]

Really the only reason that the ‘From Hell’ letter is even considered to be authentic is the inclusion of the kidney. However, given the medical evidence, supplied by the doctors who actually examined it, the kidney was not likely to have come from the body of Catharine Eddowes and was most likely a hoax. No one, besides Major Henry Smith, seems to have taken it seriously. If you are trying to figure out who hoaxed the letter then that’s one thing but if you are suggesting that it can be used as evidence to prove some suspect (presumably Tumblety) was the Ripper then you’re barking up the wrong tree since it can’t be proved to be genuine and there is evidence to prove that it was a fake.



Scotland Yard were not looking for samples of Tumblety’s handwriting. In the case of San Francisco it was Chief of Police Crowley who, after reading about Tumblety’s supposed connection with the Whitechapel Murders, contacted Sir Robert Anderson and told him that he could supply samples if Anderson wanted them. Probably just being polite Anderson asked Crowley to send them. What Anderson was going to do with them is unclear since apparently no one at Scotland Yard considered any of the letters to be genuine. As for Brooklyn, Anderson did contact Police Chief Campbell about Tumblety but there is no mention of any hand writing samples to be sent to London so I don’t know where Mike has got this from.

Wolf.

"it can’t be proved to be genuine and there is evidence to prove that it was a fake".
Sorry, Wolf, but this is illogical. It can't, at this time be proved genuine, but nor can it be "proved" to be a fake. If it had been proved that it was a fake there would no longer be debate as to its authenticity and this forum would not be running. The matter has yet to be proved one way or the other.

[tji]

Oh wow looks like Mariab is ignoring my posts, how will I ever get over the rejection?




Ok over it

[mariab]

So where is the Lusk kidney mentioned in the "Dear Boss" letter? Or are you unable to read your own words in the quote I offered you as a quick reminder?

Caz, for the 4th time already:
I was simply thinking aloud about the Lusk kidney having been possibly “praserved“ in ginger beer too, as I was (marginally) contemplating the possibility of “Dear Boss“/“Saucy Jack“ having been produced by the “From Hell“ author, in a different (as in changed) handwriting. This was just iddle speculation, not a supposition I'm willing to entertain officially. Perhaps it's clear now? And perhaps, just possibly, you've also entertained similar suspicions yourself?
But most obviously (since so many people misunderstood me) the way I expressed myself was unfortunate, and silly, and not consise enough. I'll be more careful in the future. If you wish me to, I'll even consider self-flagellating...

[tji]

Lol nice edit Maria, have to point out you edited otherwise my post wouldn't make much sense, that wouldn't be the reason at all now would it?

I personally don't think Colin's remark was silly - more funny.

Tracy

[tji]

The suggestion was issued upon the fact that Tom and I happened to agree on some things.

You and Tom agree on things, really, I thought Tom decided and you agreed!

Since in the Mortimer case Chris Phillips and Jeff Leahy happen to agree with Tom and me, quite consequently I can imagine the suggestions expressed.

Erm, no, I believe you were just trying to name drop...again, have you tried to write a post without adding someone else's name at all?

I apologize to Chris Phillips for the silly joke, and won't be aknowledging any other silly suggestions or commentaries as recently posted.[/QUOTE]

Of course you won't since Caz is right and you can't argue with her. As for silly suggestions/commentaries the only ones made are your own so that doesn't really make a lot of sense.

Tj

[caz]

What kept you?

So where is the Lusk kidney mentioned in the "Dear Boss" letter?

Or are you unable to read your own words in the quote I offered you as a quick reminder?

Unbelievable.

[mariab]

To Caz:
I was referring to the Lusk kidney, Caz, but clearly it was very unfortunate of me to refer to it as “the good stuff“, thus quoting “Dear Boss“.
I apologize again, and I'll be more careful about expressing myself more consisely in the future.

[mariab]

The suggestion was issued upon the fact that Tom and I happened to agree on some things. Since in the Mortimer case Chris Phillips and Jeff Leahy happen to agree with Tom and me, quite consequently I can imagine the suggestions expressed.
I apologize to Chris Phillips for the silly joke, and won't be aknowledging any other silly suggestions or commentaries as recently posted in the JTRForums. Just this once, I couldn't resist making a silly joke (which was even appriopriate, under the circumstances).

[caz]

Getting back (well almost) to the topic...

Or did anyone really think that I was picturing the Ripper mixing blood with ginger beer...

Well I'm not sure you can really blame anyone if they did, Maria, considering what you wrote originally in post #40:

I just asked because the “Dear Boss“ letter mentions having kept the “good red stuff in ginger beer“.

As others tried to point out, only to be put in their place by the woman who will not blame herself for nothing, this terribly famous letter mentions keeping the blood (the proper red stuff) in a ginger beer bottle.

Love,

Caz
X

[tji]

[It mihght already be a well-known fact that pertaining to the time Mortimer spent at her door I agree with Chris, Tom, and Jeff Leahy. Now, as a British poster (unwarrantedly) suggested on the JTRForums, the implications of our agreement should be that we all marry each other and move to Salt Lake City with the Mormons. Preferably living on Jeff Leahy's boat...

Now that post I thought was funny, but before poor Chris has a heart attack I will (yet again) correct Maria's post.
It was suggested that only Maria and Tom marry and share their passions lol, poor Tom.

Chris/Jeff, you have dodged a bullet this time, you may breathe easy


Tj

[mariab]

I recall pretty vividly that Chris Phillips read A matter of time around March 2011, as we were discussing it in the casebook WVC thread.
It mihght already be a well-known fact that pertaining to the time Mortimer spent at her door I agree with Chris, Tom, and Jeff Leahy. Now, as a British poster (unwarrantedly) suggested on the JTRForums, the implications of our agreement should be that we all marry each other and move to Salt Lake City with the Mormons. Preferably living on Jeff Leahy's boat...

I'll take your word for it, Maria. For god's sake let's not get sidetracked any more than we already have.

On this one I totally agree, Adam, and my most profound apologies if I haven't expressed myself clearly enough earlier.

To be fair, your logic is rather baffling.
You seem to be claiming to have proved that Fanny Mortimer didn't stand at her door for ten minutes.
Your proof appears to consist of choosing to dismiss one press report that she said she stood at her door for ten minutes, and instead to believe another press report that she said she stood there for nearly half an hour. And then you argue that she couldn't really have stood there for nearly half an hour, and so ... ?

Now THIS is exactly my stand too.

No, I wasn't taking a cheap shot at Tom, the way he worded that just struck me as funny.

Never implied that you did, Wickerman, and it's obviously your full prerogastive to do so if inclined! I was just joking, like yourself.