The Aberconway Version

[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

[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.

[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 He was in the process of getting the permission from Keith but as Keith has withdrawn that permission then Stewart can't post.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

[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.

[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

[jason_c]

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

[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

[corey123]

I would find it wise to...like I earlier said.... let this topic die. The more people talk, the less we get to see, do, talk about, the more new posters will stray away from the site, and the more the 'usuals' will dissapear. Mike is right, if those who wish to research their theories, whether they be conspiracy or not, they need to do so in a civil manner. If they cant do so, I would think the appropriate action would be expulsion. As is the only right move to make, quarenteen the problem, then remove it, unless a better solution can be made. I know of many who endorse Trevors theories, yet do they cause an uproar like this? No!

Removal is the only way, other than apologies which I have little hope for.

With all due respect,

Corey

[spyglass]

THIS IS GETTING VERY CHILDISH AND TIRESOME NOW!!!

C'mon we are all suposed to be grown ups... not politicians...I think everyone needs to stert again after a few days rest from it.

[corey123]

Like I said from the beginning, let this topic die.

[Stewart P Evans]

Understood

I would just like to again thank those posters who have understood my position and shown some support.

There are many who are going to be mightily disappointed when they see the full document if they think there is something of great relevance or importance to be seen. In fact a reading of Keith's 1987 piece on the 'Aberconway version' combined with the A-Z entry on it has shown most of what is of relevance. As is stated in the latter volume the vital section is pages 5-6, 6A and 6B which they give in full.

In whole it comes across as what many believe it to be, merely Macnaghten's draft version of the official document which has been in the public domain for many years. Yes, I think that it should be published full and yes, I believe it will be published in full - as and when the three authors are ready to do that. This decision has nothing to do with me and I have no influence in the matter.

[Natalie Severn]

Hello Fleetwood Max,
I have known Stewart , through the casebook ,for a number of years and have never known him to be anything but a scrupulous,fair and a superb researcher, as well as being kind and extremely generous.He has made himself clear.He does not feel he is in a position to be posting Keith"s document.
But I too am really disappointed that things have reached this impasse as I have very much appreciated Simon"s and others sterling contributions too .
By the way Mike, I think Stewart himself may actually reserve judgement about Irish plots---ask him sometime about what Macnaghten is supposed to have said about a plot to assassinate Balfour!
But seriously, lets hope this all begins to settle and heal soon,
Best
Norma

[jmenges]

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

I hope that this was meant as a joke.

JM

[Chris]

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.

I'm sorry, but the fact is that during the earlier discussion several people suggested to Trevor Marriott that he should contact the authors of the "A to Z" directly, and so far from asking for people's help in doing so his only response was an outright dismissal of the suggestion.

The following is one example, from 1 November:
"Well all the pussyfooting that has gone on with your suggested way of approach has not worked so I put it another way which I dont believe amounts to a demand.
It would be nice for those persons to come out and at least say why they will not publish it, that would be a start. Until they start to show some tranparency this ill feeling towards them is going to continue.
Perhaps you should decide which side of the fence you are sitting on. You are not excatly overwleming us with pearls of wisdom, Anyone can sit here and critisise and make suggestions."

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=152889&postcount=84

[Dr. John Watson]

. . . if those who wish to research their theories, whether they be conspiracy or not, they need to do so in a civil manner. If they cant do so, I would think the appropriate action would be expulsion . . . Removal is the only way, other than apologies which I have little hope for.

With all due respect,

Corey

Your point is well taken, Corey, but instead of civility (one can be quite obnoxious, yet in a "civil" manner), the word I would use is respectful: Respectful of another's ideas, another's right to express these ideas, another's right to explore and question these ideas, and another's right to disagree. Trevor was arguably disrespectful toward some in his comments, insofar as questioning their forthrightness, but should that be enough to permanently "expel" him from our group? Especially considering the fact that in the past, far worse insinuations and outright accusations have have been hurled among and between some of the must respected and dedicated Ripper researchers on these boards, worse than anything Trevor Marriott is accused of. The researchers (for the most part), the Casebook, and Ripperology have all survived - for the better, I think. If and when any among us oversteps the bounds to the point where he/she should be banned permanently, we can trust in the judgment of our Casebook founder - a man who has shown himself to be both fair and honest, with no need of any help or encouragement from the mob.

John the Old One