Sweet violets

[David Orsam]

And you are aware that some Zillahs were more popular than others and that they were not normal, right?

What do you mean by saying "some Zillahs were more popular than others" and that they were "not normal"?

[David Orsam]

Who is anyone?

Well Pierre, without being rude, I mean anyone other than you.

No-one else has ever noticed a link between Sweet Violets and Byron's play and then between Byron's play and the murder. So what was the killer hoping to achieve?

Was he, in 1888, sending you a personal message for you to read in 2016?

[Pierre]

I don't think you've quite understood. I'm saying that had the killer inserted into the press on 10 November a reference to a character in a play who said "Oh Murder" (knowing that this had been said on 9 November) that would have been impressive. But he didn't manage it.

And Hitler did not manage to win the war.

You are being unhistoric, David. You can not sit and reflect on what has not happened and suggest that the past was something it wasnīt.

And of course, you are ignoring the event that Zillah experienced.

[Pierre]

Well Pierre, without being rude, I mean anyone other than you.

No-one else has ever noticed a link between Sweet Violets and Byron's play and then between Byron's play and the murder. So what was the killer hoping to achieve?

Was he, in 1888, sending you a personal message for you to read in 2016?

Well, David. I can certainly not be held responsible for what others have not done.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;390342]

So what was the killer hoping to achieve?

Terror.

[David Orsam]

Terror.

Well he achieved that by the act of murdering and mutilating Kelly.

He did not do it by a reference to Sweet Violets in the press which terrified absolutely no-one.

[David Orsam]

And Hitler did not manage to win the war.

You are being unhistoric, David. You can not sit and reflect on what has not happened and suggest that the past was something it wasnīt.

And of course, you are ignoring the event that Zillah experienced.

What I'm trying to find Pierre is some form of objective test to confirm that your linking of Sweet Violets to Byron's play and then Byron's play to the murder is correct. A link to a play in which the words "Oh murder" were said by a character called Zillah would at least have connected to the murder of Kelly.

Are you not at all worried that the links exist only in your imagination?

[Pierre]

What do you mean by saying "some Zillahs were more popular than others" and that they were "not normal"?

Byronīs Zillah was popular, since she was in a play by Byron, who was popular. Byronīs Zillah was not "normal", since she found the worldīs first murder victim.

[Pierre]

Well he achieved that by the act of murdering and mutilating Kelly.

He did not do it by a reference to Sweet Violets in the press which terrified absolutely no-one.

How do you know what terrified who, David?

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;390347]

What I'm trying to find Pierre is some form of objective test to confirm that your linking of Sweet Violets to Byron's play and then Byron's play to the murder is correct. A link to a play in which the words "Oh murder" were said by a character called Zillah would at least have connected to the murder of Kelly.

You need more data if you want to find some type of objective test. I can not help you with this now.

Are you not at all worried that the links exist only in your imagination?

I wish they did.

And that is one of the reasons why I am discussing it with you. Perhaps you will make some point to help me realize that all the connections I have found from external data to "Sweet Violets" are spurious.

Well, at least it is worth a try.

[David Orsam]

Pierre, you haven't responded to my query about the period of reflection.

It seems to me that what has happened in this thread is that, at the start, you thought that the first appearance of the mention of Sweet Violets was in the Pall Mall Gazette during the afternoon/evening of 10 November. Given that the only information in that newspaper was of "a woman" having heard this song, you evidently thought that the killer had (for reasons which remain obscure) manipulated a woman to falsely inform a reporter that she had heard Kelly singing this song.

You were unaware, however, that there were two mentions of Sweet Violets in the Times earlier that day. The first saying that the woman who heard it lived opposite Kelly, something that would in itself cause you difficulty in explaining how the killer pulled that off. But even worse, it turns out that McCarthy was the source of the PMG's information that "a woman" had heard the song being sung. How was the killer going to gull McCarthy into first thinking that the woman was a local resident and secondly into informing the press of this?

It was for this reason that you quickly decided to change the subject and move onto a point that you've obviously been dying to mention all along, namely that Sweet Violets refers to a woman called Zillah and that there is a character called Zillah in a Byron play who discovered a murder. For you, and I think for you alone, this has some kind of significance.

Does it worry you at all that you are not convincing anyone else?

[David Orsam]

Byronīs Zillah was popular, since she was in a play by Byron, who was popular.

Do you have any evidence at all to show that Byron's 1821 play "Cain - A Mystery" was "popular" in the 1880s and had not been completely forgotten?

[David Orsam]

How do you know what terrified who, David?

Let's put it this way Pierre. I'm suggesting that the mention of Sweet Violets in the press terrified absolutely no-one.

If you are able to identify a single person who was terrified by it then here's your opportunity.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;390351]

Pierre, you haven't responded to my query about the period of reflection.

OK. Yesterday my wife asked a question about the case, which I thought I had not answered. It turned up I had. And then I realized I didnīt need time for reflection. But I donīt see why that should be of any interest for you.

It seems to me that what has happened in this thread is that, at the start, you thought that the first appearance of the mention of Sweet Violets was in the Pall Mall Gazette during the afternoon/evening of 10 November. Given that the only information in that newspaper was of "a woman" having heard this song, you evidently thought that the killer had (for reasons which remain obscure) manipulated a woman to falsely inform a reporter that she had heard Kelly singing this song.

You were unaware, however, that there were two mentions of Sweet Violets in the Times earlier that day. The first saying that the woman who heard it lived opposite Kelly, something that would in itself cause you difficulty in explaining how the killer pulled that off. But even worse, it turns out that McCarthy was the source of the PMG's information that "a woman" had heard the song being sung. How was the killer going to gull McCarthy into first thinking that the woman was a local resident and secondly into informing the press of this?

As you realize, the sources are problematic from the perspective of reliability. This is something we must always take into consideration when we hypothesize about the past. Therefore, it is not always possible to establish the provenience of the different types of statements in the papers. I am satisfyed to think that the provenience of the statement of the song can not be well established as to who said it to different papers.

The consequence of the problems I mention is that we can not say who told the papers about the song and from were it first came. That is something, in the case of "Sweet Violets" we have to accept, and it is often a problem in establishing historical facts.

And that is why I tell you, David, that I have a hypothesis.

It was for this reason that you quickly decided to change the subject and move onto a point that you've obviously been dying to mention all along, namely that Sweet Violets refers to a woman called Zillah and that there is a character called Zillah in a Byron play who discovered a murder. For you, and I think for you alone, this has some kind of significance.

No. I understand that you are suspicious since you write in a forum about suspects but I am not one of them.

Does it worry you at all that you are not convincing anyone else?

If I wanted to convince anyone, I would have used the approach of ripperologists.

[Pierre]

Let's put it this way Pierre. I'm suggesting that the mention of Sweet Violets in the press terrified absolutely no-one.

If you are able to identify a single person who was terrified by it then here's your opportunity.

Thanks for the opportunity. I will get back to it when the hypothesis is disproved.

And now I have work to do.