GSG xmas present

[GUT]

David, the credit is entirely yours sir, some of your research has been stunning. No wonder the hidden-clue-hunter loathes you. Notice, he often complains about you destroying his work, rarely about you trying to destroy his work. Keep it up!

I second that and the one plus trolliere has bought to the boards is some of the material David has found to show the error of The Great Historian's ways.

[Pcdunn]

Back to the beginning ...

Prom Perror, I've known a lot of Historiansover the years, statistics isn't usually in their training, so the great historian is now also great statistician, his number of degrees is amazing, even someone with a degree that uses statistics as one of their tools would consult an expert is stats on something this complex.

I recall that Pierre stated in the beginning of his time here on the boards that he was a statistician.

[GUT]

I recall that Pierre stated in the beginning of his time here on the boards that he was a statistician.

I must have forgot that one.

I thought he had settled on being a great historian. It is hard to keep up when he keeps changing his area of expertise.

[Henry Flower]

I must have forgot that one.

I thought he had settled on being a great historian. It is hard to keep up when he keeps changing his area of expertise.

Statistician, scientist, sociologist, historian, cinema buff....

Mr Benn's adventures take on a similar pattern. Mr Benn, a man wearing a black suit and bowler hat, leaves his house at 52 Festive Road and visits a fancy-dress costume shop where he is invited by the moustache, fez-wearing shopkeeper to try on a particular outfit. He leaves the shop through a magic door at the back of the changing room and enters a world appropriate to his costume, where he has an adventure (which usually contains a moral) before the shopkeeper reappears to lead him back to the changing room, and the story comes to an end. Mr Benn returns to his normal life, but is left with a small souvenir of his magical adventure.

[Pierre]

Hi everyone,

I have promised you a xmas present. With this present I hope that the GSG will be much clearer to all here.

The present has four parts (you may think it has more).

One is a new source.

One is the explanation for the GSG.

One is the motive for killing all the victims.

One is the explanation for the double negative in the GSG.

1. I have found a new document produced by an institution and it is in an archive in Britain.

In this document there are two lies. One is not being presented here since it is giving an ID connected to the data from the Whitechapel murders.

The other lie which is to be presented to you here is:

The person giving the data in this source told those who produced the source that he was a judge although he was not.

It is clearly written and visible.

There is an external function for the whole document which explains how it is connected to the Whitechapel murders.

There are also many sources which have a high explanatory value for the motive behind the GSG.

2. I will now give you the explanation for the GSG:

There was a very serious threat against him from the judges on the 1st and 2nd October. There is another original source from an archive stating this.

He wanted to stop them. There is another original source from an archive stating that.

There are several sources showing that:

There was a trial against him.

He was blamed.

He did not accept it.

He was very shamed.

One person knew that he was trying to stop the process and the communication is directed to him. There is more communication throughout the case and it is always directed to the same person.

On the night of the double event the killer knew what was going to happen on the 1st and 2nd October.

To stop the judicial process against him he wrote on the wall in Goulston Street:

The judges are not the men that will be blamed for nothing.

He took it upon himself to act like a judge in his own cause:

He was not the "judge" who would be blamed for nothing. He claimed that he was innocent.

(But he was guilty, there is a source for this).

3. The victims, all of them, were killed to make the procedure against him stop.

That was the paramount motive of the killer.

The murder of Stride was for the threat against him on 1st October, the murder of Eddowes was for the threat against him on 2nd October.

The judges are not the men that will be blamed for nothing.

= The judges at court were the men that were to be blamed for something: They were to be blamed for the murders.

If they stopped the procedure, the murders would stop.

4. The reason for the double negative is the two aspects of blame on judges:
the blame on the killer who acted as a judge in his own cause and the blame on the real judges.

When the murders stopped after Pinchin Street 1889, the judges had stopped the procedure.

I have some work to do but will read your comments and also respond later.

I wish you all a very Merry Xmas.

Best wishes, Pierre

I am struggling with a small set of very, very difficult sources at the moment. I am almost giving up this research.

What the past has left to us may indicate that the reason for erasing the writing was not Jews but Judges.

I am trying to understand if someone knew who Jack the Ripper was a bit earlier than I thought.

I am trying to understand the double event in the perspective of Lawende not being able to give his testimony at the inquest and the talk about "Jews" in connection to the writing as a talk constructed to hide "Judges".

It is just a test.

The problem of conspiracy is that it allows for too much interpretation. Therefore I am very reluctant to think along these lines right now.

What I do know is that in 1888 they had sources we do not have. I am trying to understand what this means for the sources I have found.

Pierre

[Pierre]

Prom Perror, I've known a lot of Historiansover the years, statistics isn't usually in their training, so the great historian is now also great statistician, his number of degrees is amazing, even someone with a degree that uses statistics as one of their tools would consult an expert is stats on something this complex.

Yes, GUT. I happen to like the university. And I have a few degrees as a result of this.

[GUT]

I am struggling with a small set of very, very difficult sources at the moment. I am almost giving up this research.

Pierre

Promises, promises, promises.

[John G]

I am struggling with a small set of very, very difficult sources at the moment. I am almost giving up this research.

What the past has left to us may indicate that the reason for erasing the writing was not Jews but Judges.

I am trying to understand if someone knew who Jack the Ripper was a bit earlier than I thought.

I am trying to understand the double event in the perspective of Lawende not being able to give his testimony at the inquest and the talk about "Jews" in connection to the writing as a talk constructed to hide "Judges".

It is just a test.

The problem of conspiracy is that it allows for too much interpretation. Therefore I am very reluctant to think along these lines right now.

What I do know is that in 1888 they had sources we do not have. I am trying to understand what this means for the sources I have found.

Pierre

It's a test which involves allowing for extreme possibilities in order to lend support for a weak theory.

[Henry Flower]

Still banging that drum. Pierre, nobody who has read your "Lawende was silenced" thread came away from it thinking Lawende had been silenced.

Remember that time you claimed YOU had been silenced? That was another error on your part.

It seems to be a speciality of yours.

[David Orsam]

The problem of conspiracy is that it allows for too much interpretation. Therefore I am very reluctant to think along these lines right now.

How things change. It was only little over a year ago, on 3 December 2015, that Pierre was telling us:

"I would also like to point out that my theory is not outlandish or far-fetched. It is simple and down to earth. It has nothing to do with free masons or politics."

Then, of course, it turned into a grand conspiracy (as Pierre now admits) involving two Chief Commissioners of Police, a number of senior detectives at Scotland Yard and the city solicitor, as well as who knows how many others.

Not "simple and down to earth" at all. No wonder is Pierre is troubled.

[Pierre]

It's a test which involves allowing for extreme possibilities in order to lend support for a weak theory.

The problem is that what you call "extreme possibilities" are small and simple things.

[Pierre]

Promises, promises, promises.

BS BS BS.

[David Orsam]

I am trying to understand the double event in the perspective of Lawende not being able to give his testimony at the inquest and the talk about "Jews" in connection to the writing as a talk constructed to hide "Judges".

Looks like Pierre's changed his mind again. Previously he told us Jack the Ripper was a police officer, now he must have been a sailor, given the importance he places on Lawende's testimony.

[DJA]

BS BS BS.

Some of us realized that over a year ago.

[Henry Flower]

The problem of conspiracy is that it allows for too much interpretation. Therefore I am very reluctant to think along these lines right now.

I think what you mean is, the problem with suggesting conspiracy where there was none is that too much "interpretation" becomes absolutely essential.

But don't worry, your reluctance to indulge in conspiracy theory Is immediately obvious to everyone here.