Seaside Home?

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor, you and Phil both pointed to where Macnaghten exonerated Kosminski (and Ostrog) in the Aberconway version. Does this mean you are Druittists now?

Otherwise, yes I'm confused. Because this is part of the Aberconway version that you, me, the average Joe knew about already. Before people requested and Adam & crew at the magazine were kind enough to show us the whole thing.

Or else you are de-contextualizing. (credit Natalie Severin with that word )

Roy

Hi Roy

In my opinion Druitt was no more the Ripper than you and I. The MM is an unreliable document as has been proved to be so. After he wrote it is it quite clear that by what was written in his notes (AV) he retracted the suggestions that Kosminski and Ostrog were ever involved.

As has also been stated many times the police were still hunting the ripper in later years long after Druitt was dead and buried.

To fully appreciated the mindset of the police at the time of the murders and after i would strongly advise reading the sourcebook that shows the mindset of the police in various letters and correspondence etc.

I have spent many months viewing other police documents and correspondence which to me as a former police officer has been invaluable in trying to assess and evaluate excatly how much they were lacking in this overall investigation. What i have seen and read paints a picture of the police clutching at straws to the point of desparation in trying to catch this killer.

[Roy Corduroy]

Trevor, you and Phil both pointed to where Macnaghten exonerated Kosminski (and Ostrog) in the Aberconway version. Does this mean you are Druittists now?

Otherwise, yes I'm confused. Because this is part of the Aberconway version that you, me, the average Joe knew about already. Before people requested and Adam & crew at the magazine were kind enough to show us the whole thing.

Or else you are de-contextualizing. (credit Natalie Severin with that word )

Roy

[Trevor Marriott]

You accomplished neither of your stated objectives. Instead (as usual) you just wasted everybody's time with a bunch of nonsense. Congratulations.

Th truth hurts doesnt it ? you are another Kosminski`ite who cant handle the truth

[robhouse]

I have said all I have to say now and am now withdrawing from further postings I just coulnst bear this debate to be so one sided as it was turning out to be. There were a few wrongs that needed putting right and a few people who needed to be reigned in. "Jobs a good`un " adios amigos

You accomplished neither of your stated objectives. Instead (as usual) you just wasted everybody's time with a bunch of nonsense. Congratulations.

[Jeff Leahy]

I. "Jobs a good`un " adios amigos

Your clearly wiser to how that has been done than I am? good night all Jx

[Trevor Marriott]

Because that is what did and has happened, it really is that simple..

Example: We know that Schwartz gave a statement to Swanson about the incident in Berner Street...however that statement is lost or destroyed..we know this because Swanson wrote to teh Home Office and that document has survived...

What your really arguing is that you dont like the fact that these documents no longer exist...

And thats not my fault, Beggs fault, Fido's fault or uncle Tom Cobly for that matter, its simply the world (as ripperologists) that we inhabbit..

Theres nothing crumbling because NO NEW INFO has been added

Yours Jeff

I have said all I have to say now and am now withdrawing from further postings I just coulnst bear this debate to be so one sided as it was turning out to be. There were a few wrongs that needed putting right and a few people who needed to be reigned in. "Jobs a good`un " adios amigos

[Jeff Leahy]

I dont dispute that some records were lost stolen or destroyed but why is it that whenever important issues are raised and questions asked of you and others we always get the answer like "well it could have been or it might have shown, but it was probably in the file that were lost or destroyed" when clearly there is no answer to the questions or issues raised as i said its an easy way to avoid saying "ok you could be right and we could be wrong" but no you stand firm with your beleifs despite them crumbling around you.

Because that is what did and has happened, it really is that simple..

Example: We know that Schwartz gave a statement to Swanson about the incident in Berner Street...however that statement is lost or destroyed..we know this because Swanson wrote to teh Home Office and that document has survived...

What your really arguing is that you dont like the fact that these documents no longer exist...

And thats not my fault, Beggs fault, Fido's fault or uncle Tom Cobly for that matter, its simply the world (as ripperologists) that we inhabbit..

Theres nothing crumbling because NO NEW INFO has been added

Yours Jeff

PS and sometimes new information does come to light..Tom Wescott posted new information on another site recent and I have openly stated that I think the balance of evidence now places Pipeman on the opposite side of the street and that SPE and Rob Clack have been proved correct..so I'm hardly dogmatic

[Trevor Marriott]

Its not wearing thin..

Its simply a statement of fact..

The records were largely lost or destroyed..

I'm currently working on Hannah Tailfords coroners report...the simple fact is that none of the other Stripper Victims cononers reports survived they were all destroyed...as a matter of standard practice at the time only so many reports wre kept and archived...only luck aloud Hannahs to survive and that was 1964!

The rest were not destroyed through conspiracy, bad police procedure or the royal family stepping in and ordering them destroy even if I have discovered an interesting connection to Prince Philip...its just the way it is...no conspiracy..

Why do you guys have such difficulty understanding something that is so blindingly obvious?

Yours jeff

I dont dispute that some records were lost stolen or destroyed but why is it that whenever important issues are raised and questions asked of you and others we always get the answer like "well it could have been or it might have shown, but it was probably in the file that were lost or destroyed" when clearly there is no answer to the questions or issues raised as i said its an easy way to avoid saying "ok you could be right and we could be wrong" but no you stand firm with your beleifs despite them crumbling around you.

[Jeff Leahy]

The nearest Kosmisnki came to becoming a serial killer was when he was taken to the asylum and when asked what he wanted to eat for breakfast he said "he could murder a bowl of cornflakes"

I think the gag was meant to read Schizo-bix

[Jeff Leahy]

Rob
Prime suspect you are talking utter rubbish someone needs to take you aside and explain to you the differences between a prime suspect, a likely suspect and someone who comes under suspiscion by reason of their actions.

Aaron Kosminski may well have come under suspicion by reason of the incident with his sister the same applies to Cutbush. Thats a long way from sugesting they were prime suspects.

You only have to read all the connecting papers and police correspondence to see how naieve the police were at times. Many of these documents clearly show they didnt have a clue about the killer let alone have a prime suspect, not then nor in 1891 nor in 1895 and certainly not in 1910 when Hans Christian wrote his book,

Apart from Anderson of course who clearly states: Undiscovered murders in London are rare, and the Jack teh ripper crimes are not within that catigory'

What everyone here has failed to do is demonstrate why he would lie...

Yours Jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

Actually, listening to Paul Begg in numerous podcasts lately he is one of the least dogmatic commentators on the subject of JtR. I know he has different views on the marginalia to yours but I think your being unnecessarily crude in your description of him.

New material should'nt be constantly challenged? Of course if new material goes against preconceived ideas then it may be overly scrutinized. Its simply up to those presenting new material to make there case. Its better if this is done without smart-arsed comments or in a snide manner.

Trevor, you're your own worst enemy.

Do I care I speak and say on here what others on are frigthened to say the bully boy tactics of some of these posters will not cut the ice with me and they certainly wont beat me into submission.

Someone also needs to take you aside and explain to you the diference between a sense of humour and smart arsed comments etc, because clearly you cant differentiate.

[Jeff Leahy]

There you go again Jeff just as I said previous the same old chestnut to cover over the cracks "lost or stolen or destroyed records" thats wearing thin now.

Its not wearing thin..

Its simply a statement of fact..

The records were largely lost or destroyed..

I'm currently working on Hannah Tailfords coroners report...the simple fact is that none of the other Stripper Victims cononers reports survived they were all destroyed...as a matter of standard practice at the time only so many reports wre kept and archived...only luck aloud Hannahs to survive and that was 1964!

The rest were not destroyed through conspiracy, bad police procedure or the royal family stepping in and ordering them destroy even if I have discovered an interesting connection to Prince Philip...its just the way it is...no conspiracy..

Why do you guys have such difficulty understanding something that is so blindingly obvious?

Yours jeff

[jason_c]

But Jason you do have Ripperologist who have done and still do champion the same theories Paul Begg to name but one.

What you have to accept is that whatever new material comes forth there are those that will constantly challenge it and wont accept it simply because it goes against their beliefs and of course now his lovechild Leahy is doing the same I just home somebody in the family heard of contraception the thought of any more is frightening.

Actually, listening to Paul Begg in numerous podcasts lately he is one of the least dogmatic commentators on the subject of JtR. I know he has different views on the marginalia to yours but I think your being unnecessarily crude in your description of him.

New material should'nt be constantly challenged? Of course if new material goes against preconceived ideas then it may be overly scrutinized. Its simply up to those presenting new material to make there case. Its better if this is done without smart-arsed comments or in a snide manner.

Trevor, you're your own worst enemy.

[Trevor Marriott]

And the ignorance continues.

Kosminski compared to Feigenbaum.

A solicitors hearsay against two senior Yard officials.

Get a grip Trevor.

Monty

Yes and look at one of them Hans Christian name fits him aptly.

If you are going to use Senior Yard officials why not quote all those in later years who went public saying they didnt have a clue, argument cuts both ways.

And as far as Feigenabaum was concerned at least we know he murdered someone with a long bladed knife and cut the throat almost to the point of decaptiation. Does that ring any bells or are you deaf as well as daft.?

The nearest Kosmisnki came to becoming a serial killer was when he was taken to the asylum and when asked what he wanted to eat for breakfast he said "he could murder a bowl of cornflakes"

[Monty]

There you go again Jeff just as I said previous the same old chestnut to cover over the cracks "lost or stolen or destroyed records" thats wearing thin now.

And the ignorance continues.

Kosminski compared to Feigenbaum.

A solicitors hearsay against two senior Yard officials.

Get a grip Trevor.

Monty