'it was nice' Observation

[John Bennett]

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?

This is not a dig at Maria, but when theories start suggesting that Ripper letters in obviously different handwriting are by the same person, having disguised it, it opens a right can of worms. Patricia Cornwell/Sickert springs to mind. Suddenly, the theorist is in a potential win/win situation and anything goes.

[Nemo]

If the kidney was prasarved in "spirits of ginger beer" then it might indeed imply a connection between the letters

Also, Mary Kelly, who was known as Ginger and not because of the colour of her hair

She brewed ginger beer in her tin bath - Blotchy was bringing a new culture of yeast in his pot

...As related by AP Wolf, but I think he was taking the p

[tji]

Hi Chris

Not only that, but I have it on good authority that you're not going to be invited to the wedding now.

Damn It's Kate and Wills all over again and i've got a new dress....


Tj

[caz]

Originally Posted by mariab:
Or did anyone really think that I was picturing the Ripper mixing blood with ginger beer...

Originally Posted by mariab:
I just asked because the “Dear Boss“ letter mentions having kept the “good red stuff in ginger beer“.

I was referring to the Lusk kidney, Caz...

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...

Oh it was concise enough, Maria, as anyone can see from your own words, quoted again above.

What is unfortunate and silly is your total inability to simply admit it when you have made the kind of mistakes we all make occasionally. You always have to turn it round and make out that your readers are stupid for not realising you meant something else, or that it was "iddle" speculation and not a mistake at all.

When talking about what the "Dear Boss" letter mentions (and getting it wrong), you were not - couldn't possibly have been - 'referring to the Lusk kidney' as you claimed above - unless you were confusing the two communications.

Love,

Caz
X

[Steven Russell]

Well put, Caz.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[mariab]

In all fairness to Maria, Caz usually IS right, which makes debating with her very frustrating.

What is unfortunate and silly is your total inability to simply admit it when you have made the kind of mistakes we all make occasionally. You always have to turn it round and make out that your readers are stupid for not realising you meant something else, or that it was "iddle" speculation and not a mistake at all.

I'm fully admitting to Caz and to all that it was really unfortunate and silly to have written the following:
Originally Posted by mariab:
I just asked because the “Dear Boss“ letter mentions having kept the “good red stuff in ginger beer“.
Clearly I left out the word “bottle“, which was very stupid of me. From this silly lapsus to conclude that I considered the author of “Dear Boss“ to have been considering mixing blood/ginger cocktails is a long distance. Still, I apologize. Again. :-)

The “iddle speculation“ 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, is an additional offense! And no, I'm not officially considering this possibility. Again, it was just iddle speculation, which, after all, is permitted on an internet board (vs. in an article). I completely agree with John Bennett below:

This is not a dig at Maria, but when theories start suggesting that Ripper letters in obviously different handwriting are by the same person, having disguised it, it opens a right can of worms. Patricia Cornwell/Sickert springs to mind.

I'm tempted to mention that there is evidence that Charles Le Grand used to change his handwriting, but I don't consider it a good idea to start a discussion about this here. And yes, the first time I heard about that (documented) practice by Le Grand I laughed out loud and was reminded of Cornwell her “omnipresent“ Sickert.

Incidentally, Nemo totally got what I was talking about, (as did Abby Normal).

If the kidney was prasarved in "spirits of ginger beer" then it might indeed imply a connection between the letters

This doesn't make me less faulty of having made a lapsus AND engaged in iddle speculation, in addition to having expressed myself not concisely enough.
In addition to this, I wouldn't advise anyone starting spelling “prerogative“, “glutton“, “quatre“ (in French) like I did in my previous posts. As it happens, and meant NOT as an excuse, I'm at the hills with infrequent/malfunctioning internet access, this place where I'm at (the back room of a bar) is an exercise in censory overload, with loud music playing, boarders conversing in all kinds of different tongues, people talking me up every couple seconds, etc.. Thus I should probably apologize for any future misspellings/lapsi as well.

Not only that, but I have it on good authority that you're not going to be invited to the wedding now.

Or to Jeff Leahy's “bi-daily“ b-day celebrations on his boat with the rest of the ménage à quatre.

[mariab]

Damn It's Kate and Wills all over again and i've got a new dress....Tj

I have to admit that this one cracked me up.
And I was expecting commentaries more on the terms with the Clintons, the Macbeths...

[Steven Russell]

Maria:
I do apologise most sincerely for basing my understanding of what you meant on what you actually wrote. My good friends, Elvis and Winston Churchill, are always warning me about this propensity to assign the common accepted meaning of words to those same words. This is a naive approach.

I'm sorry that I can't give this matter my full consideration at the moment as I am going to be very busy for the next two months. After that period has elapsed, I may be able to focus my mind on the matter and produce some clarity.

Unfortunately, until then, my time will be occupied with my attempt to roller-skate down the north face of K2. The Dalai Lama has agreed to schedule our meeting to fit in with my arrival.

Lighten up, Maria for God's sake!

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Tom_Wescott]

Who let the cats out?

Man alive, the chicks are getting meaner by the day. I think us guys should be on our best behavior for a while. If they finish with each other, and start spilling male blood, it might attract Queen Mean, and then we're all goners!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Adam Went]

Chris:

Yes but the key difference here is that if we believe a quote from Mortimer's own mouth, published in numerous places and always stating the same thing, then it's not just a matter of X saying one thing and Y saying another, it's a matter of Q,R,S,T,U,V,W,Y and Z saying one thing with X being the odd one out.

The very nature of Mortimer's testimony when compared to that of the remaining witnesses just makes little sense to me.

But, as we are continually off topic on this thread and you've already stated your intentions, or lack of, to debate this in a more thorough fashion, there's little more that can be said.

Tracy:

Seriously though I think I am missing something, because the twice a day comment doesn't make much sense in answer to your quote does it? so if it isn't in answer to your quote but does answer my comment about the twice yearly post then she hasn't blocked me.....if she is answering my post why quote you...see my confusion?

My god, you've confused me now as well!

Cheers,
Adam.

[mariab]

Steven Russell's post totally cracked me up.
Steven, if you really decide to go to K2 though, can I please join your team? Anyone going to K2, I'll kiss the bottom of their shoes to be allowed to go along.
The North face of K2 is incidentally the Chinese side, and it's safe to say you're bound to bump into camels on your way down. (This will probably confuse even more people.)

Man alive, the chicks are getting meaner by the day.

What? I only apologized about my silly typos, concerned that impressionable newbies might start imitating my spelling.

Now about to run to the ice rink (sorry, no roller skates).

[tji]

Hi Adam

Tracy:
My god, you've confused me now as well!


Should try writing it lol!

Tj

[Chris]

Adam

On jtrforums, you have posted this:
"I am in the very early stages of planning a new article for Ripperologist on the subject, which will be a major expansion of the theories I expounded in the article "A Matter Of Time" in Ripperologist last April, the short of which being that Mortimer was at her door for half an hour, as opposed to "gaps" around 10 minutes that others have suggested, and that her testimony is not to be trusted."

Did you mean "the short of which being that Mortimer claimed she was at her door for half an hour"?

[Steven Russell]

Maria: I'm glad you were able to see the funny side as I was beginning to regret that post as being a little mean spirited as well as sarcastic. Thanks for the camel warning - do you think I should try to skate through their legs or jump over?

Best wishes,
Steve.

[Adam Went]

Chris:

SPE has already pulled me up on a technicality in that post, and you're probably right with yours as well, however as you can see from earlier in that paragraph, I was referring more to my own theories about Mortimer than anything else - more a combination of my theories meet Mortimer's statements to the press (and I wonder why a JTR Forums topic is being brought up on Casebook anyway?).

For those who aren't aware yet.....look what you've reduced me to!!!

http://jtrforums.com/showthread.php?p=144688#post144688

Cheers,
Adam.