The Halse version

[lynn cates]

OK

Hello Michael. Thanks. I see what you mean.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Hello Stephen, Ken, Jon. Although logically there is no difference, yet the Halse version seems to connote, "If you blame us, then we'll give you a reason to do so."

I agree with this. Only a remark that seemed supportive of Jews combined with an apron from victim placed directly beneath it, could cause enough of an outrage that it would have to be expunged. It doesn't mean that this was the intent of the message. It means it was the feared interpretation of it.

Mike

[Hunter]

My wife tries to put me on ignore until she finds my dirty laundry in the floor.

[Monty]

I would but I'm not childish enough to put someone on ignore.

Rob

Now now Mr C, each to his own.

Besides, you know as well as I do the ignore facility doesn't necersarily mean words aren't read.

Monty

[Rob Clack]

As you could from me Robert.....if you didnt have me on ignore.

Monty

I would but I'm not childish enough to put someone on ignore.

Rob

[Monty]

I'd believe a police officer with 25 years of experience rather than an armchair detective with an agenda.

Shame you've got me on ignore, you could learn a lot from me.

Rob

As you could from me Robert.....if you didnt have me on ignore.

Monty

[Monty]

Halse stated it looked recent, in response to questioning.

He didn't state it was recent.

And for those who are interested, the files were stored seperate from the letters, as the files were case related.

The assumption all was lost in the blitz isn't entirely true.

Monty

[Rob Clack]

Hello David,

no, I dont especially "trust" Swansons words, but I have to ask, given so many discrepancies- would you rather trust the word of Halse who claims to know the difference between recent chalk writing and elder- by sight- which under the circs is impossibke without actually knowing- or the Chief Inspector of the Met writing his official report to the Home Office? I queston BOTH comments, thereby questioning whether some knew more than they said. Just WHO do we actually believe David?

Kindly

Phil

I'd believe a police officer with 25 years of experience rather than an armchair detective with an agenda.

Shame you've got me on ignore, you could learn a lot from me.

Rob

[DVV]

Halse, no question.
The Met having been so bitterly criticized for the erasure, trust me, had it been blurred, we would have known. Because they would have publicized it. Public critics, public response.
And while I'm here, why do you think Arnold lastly expressed the opinion that Eddowes wasn't a ripper victim ? - and so doing, he made a wonderful freudian slip.

[Phil Carter]

Hello David,

no, I dont especially "trust" Swansons words, but I have to ask, given so many discrepancies- would you rather trust the word of Halse who claims to know the difference between recent chalk writing and elder- by sight- which under the circs is impossibke without actually knowing- or the Chief Inspector of the Met writing his official report to the Home Office? I queston BOTH comments, thereby questioning whether some knew more than they said. Just WHO do we actually believe David?

Kindly

Phil

[DVV]

Hi Phil

Swanson had all the reports at his fingertips. Therefore must have taken the word "blurred" from one.

No, he got it from the horse's mouth, I think. Too bad this horse was Arnold, in all probability.

We have no mention of it from any known police statement.

Because it wasn't blurred. Had it been, the Met would have publicized it. Or do you think they did not care ?

So we must accept that the writing MAY have been blurred

I don't, Phil. I'm surprised you trust the Met in that instance - for once.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Simon,

No, I dont speak for you or anyone else. But the likes of you and I that wander a different road temds to put us in a group besides the "norm". My apologies if it was taken any other way.
Its not cold here by the way- springtime and blue skies. Snow has melted.

hello Jon,

Yes, my point exactly, chalk writing cannot, under those circs, be deemed "recent" at all. So for Halse to utter the comment under oath is either ridiculous or an indication of knowledge. If timewise unkown. This brings his testimonx into question. Is Halse basing his assertations on what exactly? Because the apron piece was found under it? Thats connecting two things without evidence on the assumption the bearer of the apron piece wrote it because of the location of both the apron piece and the writing.

Swanson had all the reports at his fingertips. Therefore must have taken the word "blurred" from one. We have no mention of it from any known police statement. But Swanson is hardly likely to have made it up. We must presume his memory is sound. So we must accept that the writing MAY have been blurred, and for reasons unknown to us was not mentioned at the inquest or anywhere else that we know of.

Like I said, I dont know the answer to all of this. But I agree with Simon- we have not been served up the truth of the matter, and closing ones eyes and saying that it isnt possible that there is more to this than we know is in my humble opinion foolhardy. So what if it turns out that it was all part of something else? Whoppee. Some people may have got it wrong. So what? The answer is far more important than anyones opinion, past or present. If I am wrong, it doesnt matter. Id rather find out what really happened, if we can ever get that far.

Kindly

Phil

[Wickerman]

That's your right Simon, so I will try my best to respect that and goad no more.

Yes, MacDonalds, David Hasselhoff and Patricia Cornwell.

Still, we passed over Englebert Humperdink and Piers Morgan so its not all one way.

Monty

And I hear "Da Pilk" (An Idiot Abroad), is now set to add The New World to his exploits!

Regards, Jon S.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Monty,

Could you send over some stiff upper lip?

There's nothing the Yanks love more than a good cry or a panic.

In return we'll send you decent restaurants with proper service.

Regards,

Simon

[Monty]

That's your right Simon, so I will try my best to respect that and goad no more.

Yes, MacDonalds, David Hasselhoff and Patricia Cornwell.

Still, we passed over Englebert Humperdink and Piers Morgan so its not all one way.

Monty