The Aberconway Version

[Dr. John Watson]

This entire mess can be laid 100 percent at Trevor's doorstep and there is absolutely no spin needed. He blundered in shooting off his mouth and everyone is poorer for it.

That judgment is a bit harsh, I think, made without knowing the full history. From what I understand (and I'm not suggesting this is the whole story), it seems that quite early on, Trevor sought help in locating the present owner of the document from his Casebook colleages, and the advice he received was basically to back off. When he persisted, he was sent on a long buggy ride which led to nowhere. We are hearing only now that the Aberconway document was about to be published when Trevor began pressing for it, but why then was it not published? Trevor states that he attempted to contact Keith Skinner but was unable to secure his address from anyone - and the fact that he wrote to the wrong McLaren is evidence that those "in the know" were not sharing that with him. Not saying anyone had an obligation to assist Trevor, but I can understand his frustration at feeling rebuffed by those who might have helped him and didn't. Clearly, some of Trevor's actions in this instance were unacceptable, certainly the insinuation of dishonesty on the part of the very ones who have done the most for Ripperology. That was entirely unwarranted; I know it stung Stewart deeply, and a retraction is clearly in order. But by the same token, I'm not about to condemn or write off anyone among us who is out there in the trenches, probing for leads, digging through archives, poring over microfilm, dealing with red tape and bureaucrats, trying to develop new sources, discover new evidence - anything that can shine new light on this fascinating murder case - and for Trevor's unrelenting efforts in that arena, I applaud and encourage him. I'm not defending his methods or his actions in this particular case, but neither am I willing to join a lynch mob.

I earnestly hope that all concerned can reach a meeting of the minds and bury the hatchet (tho not in anyone's skull!). Stewart himself has recognized Trevor's sincerity and value as a researcher, and I know he supports Trevor's efforts to crack the Special Branch files. If all will simply shut up now and let both sides work things out between them, hopefully they and the rest of us can put this miserable incident behind us.

John the Eternally Hopeful

[jason_c]

I fully endorse any disparaging remarks about Trevor Marriot on this thread.

[The Good Michael]

You know, it's the conspiracy loonies here who start all the crap. Make no mistake. They are loonies. My guess/belief is that there are no revelations in the McLaren Aberconway copy, just as there's no ark on Mt. Ararat, there is no Atlantis, and there was no Irish involvement in the JTR murders. While we're at it, Kelly was murdered in her room, and Stride was not part of the Berner Street Club. Loonies belong in canada and in Minnesota calling to each other in their haunting, cooing cries across the lakes. They don't belong here screwing up everything. Friggin' nutcases.

Mike

[Stewart P Evans]

Misunderstanding

No idea on the 'dishonesty' comment...but seems to be much a do about nothing. So Trevor Marriott accues you of dishonesty....that's the internet....and that's people...not everyone is going to give you a fair crack of the whip.
It seems to me that you're saying because Trevor questioned your personal ethics you're not going to publish the said document that many other people would like a look at. Now that to me is a strange situation.
Perhaps it's a case of the age old adage: "knowledge is power"? What other possible conclusion should people draw? That you're petty enough to deprive 99% of the people on this board a look at the document....i.e. those people who haven't called into question your personal ethics....all because of the comments of one poster? Or is this simply cyber drama?
Gotta say Stewart....whatever your reasons....you're not painting a particuarly good picture of yourself here.

You seem to be sadly misunderstanding the situation.

Trevor Marriott suggested dishonesty on Keith Skinner's part. Keith does not post on these boards (or any others) and he is an old and close friend of mine (and has been for the past twenty four years). He also made a similar suggestion about Keith's co-authors, Paul Begg and Martin Fido, both of whom are also old friends of mine. I merely spoke up on Keith's (and the others') behalf. But primarily for Keith as it is he who owns the copy. All three are professional authors and researchers who do not need suggestions of dishonesty made about them.

I am the last person to be petty and having served nearly thirty years as a police officer I am hardly likely to be. I am not depriving anyone of anything. In fact many will attest that I am the one who usually helps all I can and have shared much of my material with many. So I resent these remarks. For the last time - the document is not mine to post or publish and I do not have permission to post or publish it either. If Keith wants it published he can easily get one of several persons to do that.

Finally it is crap like this that is now driving me from the boards.

[tji]

Hi Mac

If I am following this correctly, I don't believe Stewart has the permission to post. He was in the process of getting the permission from Keith but as Keith has withdrawn that permission then Stewart can't post. He explains it all in post number 54.

Tj

[Fleetwood Mac]

I thought I had made the situation clear. Publishing of the full document (not letter) is not in my hands and it is not my decision as to whether it appears here or anywhere else. However, it is my decision that I shall not be posting the document for the reasons given. I do not like to be accused of dishonesty - have you not followed what has been going on? I am speaking from my own perspective - not anyone else's. You know the amazing thing is that the one person who owns the copy of the document and has been given the right to use it as he wishes - Keith - has been approached by no one! Nor have either of his fellow authors of the A-Z. A truly bizarre situation given what has been alleged by some on these boards.

No idea on the 'dishonesty' comment...but seems to be much a do about nothing. So Trevor Marriott accues you of dishonesty....that's the internet....and that's people...not everyone is going to give you a fair crack of the whip.

It seems to me that you're saying because Trevor questioned your personal ethics you're not going to publish the said document that many other people would like a look at. Now that to me is a strange situation.

Perhaps it's a case of the age old adage: "knowledge is power"? What other possible conclusion should people draw? That you're petty enough to deprive 99% of the people on this board a look at the document....i.e. those people who haven't called into question your personal ethics....all because of the comments of one poster? Or is this simply cyber drama?

Gotta say Stewart....whatever your reasons....you're not painting a particuarly good picture of yourself here.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Good Michael,

Given the current state of play, a "$hit-eating grin" would be the last thing on my face.

How well you don't know me.

Regards,

Simon

[The Good Michael]

There you go again, this time ignoring your unfounded accusations against me whilst in the same breath turning my words into an imagined personal insult.

Simon,

You just gotta have a $hit-eating grin on your face as you type this. We must all be stupid while you are so clever. You and Marriott must be having one heck of a love fest.

Mike

[Ally]

Excuse me Simon but how in the world else is what you said supposed to be taken as anything other than a personal insult? When you tell someone that their words are "neatly spun" you are accusing them of twisting, distorting or manipulating the truth. That is absolutely an insult and your attempt to play coy and innocent is pathetic.

You absolutely have insulted Stewart, your defense and volunteering to be Trevor's mouthpiece is an insult to the people who he has by insinuation implicated in duplicity and theft, especially since there is no apology coming from him or his spokesperson.

Trevor is one hundred percent responsible for this mess. All he had to do was ASK Keith to post the document and it would have been done. Keith was in the process of getting permission once the question was raised and in the meantime, Trevor shot off his mouth and implied that the authors of the A-Z were somehow complicit in nefarious deeds.

This entire mess can be laid 100 percent at Trevor's doorstep and there is absolutely no spin needed. He blundered in shooting off his mouth and everyone is poorer for it.

He needs to man up and apologize though I doubt he has the sack for it.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Stewart,

There you go again, this time ignoring your unfounded accusations against me whilst in the same breath turning my words into an imagined personal insult.

Neatly spun.

Regards,

Simon

[Chris]

Thus, due directly to Marriott's efforts, the location of the original document was firmly established for all to see - and its owner prompted to request its publication on the internet (which request has yet to be complied with).

Part of the problem is that, because of the way Christopher McLaren's letter was phrased, it wasn't evident that his request came as a result of an approach to him by Keith Skinner, who had contacted him after it became apparent that Trevor Marriott had written to someone from a different branch of the family who didn't know anything about the document.

That was unfortunate, given the fact that - as well as the more serious innuendo about stolen documents - there were also a lot of silly accusations about "squirreling things away," a lack of "transparency" and so on. In fact while these accusations were being made Keith was in the process of getting permission to publish the document. If only Trevor Marriott had done what several people here were urging him to do, and contacted Keith Skinner directly, all this misunderstanding and ill-feeling could have been avoided.

[Ally]

DJW,

Ah but even from what Trevor's posted, the owner of the document had already been made aware that there was an issue, had been asked for his permission to post it, and had granted it. If Trevor hadn't been such a total wank in his accusations against the people who had it, we might already have seen it. So what precisely is there to "thank him for". The necessary permissions have already been granted, and now, because he behaved like such a tool, the people who possess it are withholding it from everyone.

Do I think that is the "right" thing to do? No. Is that technically their "right" to do so? Yes I suppose. Except that Mr. McLaren (apologies for having gotten his name wrong all along) has asked that it be posted to still rumors and it is apparently not being done.

He can of course send a copy of the document directly to the website, which of course, I hope he does in fact do and then it will be published without the ill grace and bumbling of Trevor impeding its publication.

However one thing is still completely clear. Trevor implied that the authors of the A-Z had illicitly obtained the document which has been proven false, and he does in fact owe them a sincere and public apology. In addition to us hoping that Keith not allow spite to prevent him from doing the right thing, we all ought to be chastising Trevor for doing the WRONG thing and so far, failing to man up, admit his mistake and apologize for it.

[Dr. John Watson]

I completely agree that Marriott has done enormous harm to the cause of bringing this document to the public view. That people are actually giving him credit for its possibly being published is both ignorant and ludicrous.

In post no. 4, I thanked Mr. Marriott for his efforts in tracking down the current whereabouts of the Aberconway document. This was in response to post no. 1 which quoted a letter from the current owner of the Aberconway document to Trevor Marriott which reads in part: "Dear Mr Marriott: Thank you for your letter of October 14th . . . my mother's copy of my grandfathers notes is in my possession. I have heard that there have been rumours that it had been stolen from my family. This is untrue . . . In view of the recent rumours I have asked Mr Skinner to publish it on the internet, where it would be available to all. Yours sincerely, Christopher McLaren."

Thus, due directly to Marriott's efforts, the location of the original document was firmly established for all to see - and its owner prompted to request its publication on the internet (which request has yet to be complied with). It was for that reason I thanked him. Nothing ignorant or ludicrous about it, and anyone who suggests that is simply full of beans.

Ally, we seem to agree that publication of the document should not be withheld from all simply to punish Marriott, and if that is your position, I support it fully. Hopefully, with your efforts, we shall yet be able to view it in its entirety - on these boards.

John the Hopeful

[Stewart P Evans]

Interest

Hi Stewart,
I am confused. If the person whose permission is needed is Mr. McClaren's and he appears to have given it, indeed, asked that it now be published on the internet, then what precisely is the current delay?
Not attempting to stir or be rude to anyone, my question is genuinely asked, but it appears that the permission has been given by the person who actually owns the document and he has requested it be published, so why are his wishes not currently being followed?
Once again, I want to stress, I am NOT attempting to accuse anyone of anything, I am genuinely confused about this.

Ally, it's quite simple really.

Keith is in possession of a copy of the 'Aberconway version' that he was given by the Mclaren family twenty four years ago with permission to use it for his book. Keith used it in his 1987 book, explaining the provenance, and it was subsequently used in 1991 in the A To Z of which Keith was a co-author. It is a lengthy document so not all of it was published, merely the parts that were felt to be relevant, about the suspects. Since then until now Keith has never been asked to provide a full copy of the document.

Seeing the interest generated on these boards Keith decided that it would be nice to publish it on these boards for all to see. He had already provided me with a copy and asked if I would post it for him when he had made contact with Mr Christopher Mclaren to get his nod of approval. This he did. However, because of the adverse effect of posts on these boards Keith withheld the go ahead. For my part I cannot post it without Keith's permission and I do not have that permission.

Mr Mclaren is aware that suggestions had been made on these boards that the original document had been stolen, which he obviously realised was a nonsense as he still owns it. It is, actually, a privately owned document and no one has the 'right' to see it without necessary approval. As I am heartily sick of all this nonsense I merely stated that I shall not be posting it - even if Keith gave permission - which he hasn't. I hope that helps.

[Stewart P Evans]

'Neatly Spun'

...
Just for the record, I have not posted any "unjustified antagonistic statements" [SPE, Post #35] so there is nothing for which I have to apologise or prove. Whilst I did note how Stewart Evans neatly spun the discussion around to the matter of my posting of Trevor's correspondence with Mr McLaren, any perceived slights by me to anyone's reputation or integrity are purely the product of his own imaginings.
...Simon

The terse post to me stating, 'Neatly spun' implies twisting and misrepresentation on my part when, in fact, I was stating facts. In case Mr Wood hadn't realised it the word 'spin' in this context is used in a derogatory sense.