The Aberconway Version

[Simon Wood]

Hi Ally,

It could be construed from your last post that I have slurred Keith, Paul and Martin. This is not the case. You have come late to this particular party, so I perfectly understand any confusion on your part and am grateful you took care to qualify your point with a "maybe".

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.

Regards,

Simon

[Ally]

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.

But again, if he and the ill will he has caused and the implied slurs to Keith, Paul and Martin is the sole reason that it is not now being brought forth, then it is a case of everyone else being punished because of the actions of one man's graceless jackassery (well maybe two men's).

If that is the reason, and I do not know if it is, then I would implore Keith to not allow his rightfully felt disgust for Trevor to impede everyone elses thirst for knowledge. You say the matter should be laid to rest to allow ill feelings to subside. For how long precisely? Trevor will be back in a few weeks and then the subject and the ill feelings will simply rise again.

Right now, the vast majority of people wanting to see the documents are NOT the one who has wronged or slurred Keith and Co.

But again, this is based on speculation that Keith's reasons involve Trevor, and attributing a retribution to his actions that may not actually be there. In any case, I would think that Keith is more a gentleman than those who have wronged him and he can be trusted to act accordingly since he cannot punish the one without spiting many.

[Chris]

Ally

As Stewart has said, Keith Skinner approached Christopher McLaren to ask for permission to make the document publicly available. As I understand it, that was nearly a month ago, after it became apparent that Trevor Marriott had contacted someone from a different branch of the family who knew nothing about the document. It is as a result of Keith Skinner's request that Mr McLaren has now asked him to make it available on the Internet. So I think that explains why the decision rests with Keith and Mr McLaren, not anyone else.

We all know what has made the situation so awkward in the interim - the public criticism and slurs directed at the authors of the "A to Z" and now at Stewart. Of course you can say that logically that should all be ignored and the document should be made instantly available for the benefit of everyone else. On the other hand, I think if I were put in that position I should feel very much like telling Trevor Marriott exactly what he could do with his demands for "transparency."

On the whole, I think the best thing would be for people to let the discussion drop for a bit so that the ill-feeling that's been caused can subside. But what do I know?

[Ally]

You are probably right and I have misunderstood which is why I was asking Stewart for clarification. As I said, I take full responsibility for the fact that I am not operating with a complete deck currently and I want to repeat, I AM NOT trying to stir, simply to comprehend.

This was the part that confused me:

You are totally wrong to say that it is my 'decision to not publish the letter'. That decision is Keith's, with Mr Mclaren's permission. I am sure that Keith will have the document published when he sees fit to do so.

and this:

There is nothing to hide in all this and I am sure that the document will be published at the right time. But it is true to state that no one is going to be coerced in to producing it, especially when they had not even been approached with a view to publishing it in the first place.

This is the part mostly that has confused me. Mr. McClaren has asked that it be published on the internet, so what is the "right time" being waited for? Where is the coercision now? Mr. MClaren has asked it be published, surely he is not coercive?

This is the part I am wondering what I have missed.

If it is simply that Keith is currently too busy, which is understandable, then there are others like Stewart who have access to the document who have said they are willing or as I have suggested someone could suggest that Mr. McClaren send it to one of the websites if Keith is currently too busy to do so.

[Chris]

I have indeed read the messages and I don't understand what has changed. Mr. McClaren has asked that the document be published on the internet, Keith has decided not to do it now.

I think you have indeed misunderstood. If you go back and look again at the messages, you'll see that no one has said that.

[Ally]

I think you need to read the other messages following the one you quoted, because the situation has changed since then.

I have indeed read the messages and I don't understand what has changed. Mr. McClaren has asked that the document be published on the internet, Keith has decided not to do it now.

I do not understand the reasoning behind his refusal of Mr. McClaren's request.

If it is pure pique at the fact that Marriott is a total pill, that is not necessarily reason to deny Mr. McClaren his request if it is being held purely to spite Trevor. While I totally and completely get that Trevor has behaved in a manner that is IMO completely reprehensible to any person who values basic decency and fair play, spiting him is not necessarily sufficient cause to deny Mr. McClaren, the person who owns the document and without whose generosity no one would have access to, his request.

Of course, I could be completely misreading what is going on, I fully admit I don't operate with all lights running these days, but I am genuinely confused as to the denial.

That being said, if Trevor has Mr. McClarens contact info, he can request that Mr. McClaren send a copy of the document to one of the webmasters (I understand if Trevor doesn't want it going to Casebook) but he can give Mr. McClaren direct contact to any website that would be willing to publish it.

Again, I am not trying to stir, genuinely AM NOT. I just don't think everyone else with a genuine interest should suffer because Marriott has IMO approached this with all the tact and grace of a lumbering baboon.

[Stephen Thomas]

A very clever and well worded post, Ally.

Yes indeedee, what on earth could the problem be?

People want to see this and it seems to be on offer so why not post it?

[Chris]

I am confused.

I think you need to read the other messages following the one you quoted, because the situation has changed since then.

[Ally]

As and when any decision is made I shall be posting the copy of the document with the permission of the person who holds it.

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.

[Stewart P Evans]

Thank

Yes, this has to end. I should just like to thank those who have had the insight to understand the issues here and to give their kind support. It is appreciated.

There is nothing to hide in all this and I am sure that the document will be published at the right time. But it is true to state that no one is going to be coerced in to producing it, especially when they had not even been approached with a view to publishing it in the first place. Keith's credentials are proven and do not need going into here. It really is a very unfortunate episode and let's hope that it can be forgotten.

Simon and Trevor are two dedicated researchers with a keen interest in the case - but that is true of all of us, I hope. Please let's not get over-zealous and I hope that the dust can now be allowed to settle.

[The Good Michael]

Hunter,

I agree. Theories must be created out of evidence. Instead theories are created out of the air (or from an orifice), and then evidence is manipulated or imagined to fit the theories. That is what makes most ripperologists unscientific in their approaches.

Mike

[corey123]

Hello Hunter,

I admit, I have been one of those "wild theorists" who proposed theories first, then to 'throw manure' up and 'see if it sticks'. However, I haven't used such methods as I have seen the past months, no slander, no accusations, no gun-point trickery. I suppose the fact that everyone has their petpeave theories is ammendable up to a point where one must draw the line. The line has been long crossed in this case, and it is ammusing that some are supprised at the reaction to some of the rather outlandish statements made by some.

I agree with you Cris, Stewart, Maria, et al. This has to end before progress can be made. This pursuite was for progress? The consequence of few have delayed the purpose of this battle.

With all due respect,

Corey

[Hunter]

I've been expecting something like this to culminate for some time now. It is the result of overzealous theorists who form their notions first, and then throw a bunch of manure to see if some of it sticks; instead of making the proper inquiries and conducting the relevant research first, to ascertain if there is any justification to promulgate an idea. Any historian of any note would understand the necessity of the latter if he/she is to maintain any credibility.

To produce this document in this atmosphere would be perceived as handing over the goods at gun-point... a precedent that Mr. Skinner and/or Stewart Evans rightly chose not to promote.

Stewart:

A. Lincoln once told the story about a man who, while riding his horse, found that the horse had gotten his foot caught in the stirrup. Upon gathering up the reins, he looked down and said, "If you're goin' to get on, I'm goin' to get off." The trouble is that the horse wouldn't know where to go; except, maybe back to the barn.

You are one of the people who have tried to steer the reins of Ripperology on the right path for many years; despite the fact that the old horse gets its foot caught in the stirrup on occasion. I know its frustrating... been there, done that in other historical endeavors. I can only count about 8 or nine books on this subject that deserve any credence. Four of them have your name on them as co-author. Your proverbial horsemanship in this particular manner is outstanding. When the old nag gets his foot caught in the stirrup, gather up the reins, put pressure on the bit and spur him a little. He'll eventually get untangled and go in the right direction.


"The irony of the information age is that it has given new respectability to uninformed opinion." - John Lawton, 1995


.

[Dr. John Watson]

Perhaps the worst examples of 'camps', divisions, and falling out of authors with each other occurred in the 1990s over the dreaded 'diary'.

How well I remember that! Talk about trench warfare! This incident hardly rises to that level of widespread dissention, but you are absolutely right about honest disagreements leading to greater knowledge on all sides. Unfortunately, in this particular matter, it doesn't look like anything good is going to come out of it - unless and until the Aberconway document is finally published in its entirety for all to see.

John the Hopeful

[corey123]

Hello Stewart,

I was speaking of the two 'main' camps. Multi-ripper and a single serial killer. I understand there are various camps, as you said, such as Keith Skinner, Morris, et al, and then Paul Feldmen, the diary camps.