Seaside Home?

[Jeff Leahy]

I

And in case you cant grasp it "probably" and "conclusivley" are totally different.

!

Of course I understand the difference a hand writing expert can only give a probability of something being written by the same person..

You can claim that probability is conclussive...as one could be reading the Davis report that it is conclusive. However Davis examine the original.

You have not stated the identity of your expert , so his credencials cant be judged, and you have not shown us what it was that he examined? Was it the real marginalia were they actual examples of Swansons hand writing?

I presume from your comments you sent someone some photocopies and slipped them a Fiver and got a tacky brown envelope back in the post...hardly criminal investigation..

And what the hell do the ledgers have to do with the marginalia surely they are completely seperate. Not remotely related?

Will you name this expert now please so I can run checks?

Yours Jeff

[Trevor Marriott]

Nobody asked you to spend thousands of pounds, Marriott (as you insist on using surnames), nor, as far as I am aware, was anyone asked to contribute. I certainly wasn't. So don't come that. As for you making money, nobody blames you for that, or at least I certainly don't, but I do object to pushing yourself forward as an authority when, by general agreement it would seem, you are short on facts and accuracy.

Any answer yet on what my thinking is, and do you have those examples of Martin Fido back-peddling that you so confidently asserted he's done a few posts back?

The difference in thinking is that I apply logic and reasoning you would appear lack those attributes along with others.

My answer to the back pedalling has already been answered, Kosminski,Kaminsky, Cohen and the ridiculous suggestion that the police got the names mixed up et etc. Those are the type of comments and to be expected from historians, I dont see the likes of Stewart or Rumbelow coming out with anything like that beacuse we know that although this took place in 1888 there would still have been proceedures etc in place.

I am not wanting to take anything away from Matin Fido he is obvioulsy an excellent and well respected resercher and historian but even the best dont alway get it right. and just because of who they are are we not allowed to challenge their commnets and views.

On the subject of making money since 1987/88 there have been a lot of people who have made a lot of money out of Kosminski and this Marginalia and Andersons book. Reputations have been put on the line and now in the light of new developments and other lines of thinking those reputations are in danger of crumbling, arent they Mr Begg ? and they dont like that thought .

[PaulB]

The difference in thinking is that I apply logic and reasoning you would appear lack those attributes along with others.

Yeah, right.

My answer to the back pedalling has already been answered, Kosminski,Kaminsky, Cohen and the ridiculous suggestion that the police got the names mixed up et etc. Those are the type of comments and to be expected from historians, I dont see the likes of Stewart or Rumbelow coming out with anything like that beacuse we know that although this took place in 1888 there would still have been proceedures etc in place.

Except that isn't Martin back-peddling. That was his theory back in 1987. As for your disparaging observation about historians, it isn't even worthy of being dignified with a response.

I am not wanting to take anything away from Matin Fido he is obvioulsy an excellent and well respected resercher and historian but even the best dont alway get it right. and just because of who they are are we not allowed to challenge their commnets and views.

I see, so you don't want to take anything away from Martin Fido, but you think it's okay to come here and say, "Martin Fido has backpedalled so many times Fords have presented him with a new car its got one forward gear and 10 reverse." That trite little attempt at humour was rude and insulting and wrong - Martin hasn't back-peddled at all. So, sure you can challenge Martin, but it's always a good idea to have some understanding of what it is you are challenging. You clearly don't. That's why you are ridiculed.

On the subject of making money since 1987/88 there have been a lot of people who have made a lot of money out of Kosminski and this Marginalia and Andersons book. Reputations have been put on the line and now in the light of new developments and other lines of thinking those reputations are in danger of crumbling, arent they Mr Begg ? and they dont like that thought .

Sadly, that's total crap. Just because your thinking on the subject is wrong and ignorant and gets slapped down by practically everybody, you have to search around for a face-saving excuse and the best you can come up with is that people are frightened by the new information you allegedly posses and are trying to save what you perceive as their "crumbling" reputations. My reputation, such as it is, doesn't depend on Kosminski or Anderson or the marginalia, and as it is manifestly obvious that you don't know or understand or care what my thinking actually is, you don't realise just how wide of the mark you actually are. You don't understand Martin's thinking either, hence you have consistently misrepresented him. I still doubt that you've actually read his book. You show no sign of it. Your ignorance about what other people think and why they think it is so profound that it is far from surprising that you flail around being silly and rude and offensive remarks and deluding yourself that anybody gives a damn about any new information you've uncovered, let alone that they fear their reputations are going to suffer because of it.

By way of example, Martin Fido is 70-years-old, a former Oxford don, a professor at Boston University, something of a polymath, and frightening intelligent. The author of books on numerous subjects such as Dickens and Shakespeare, plus a crime historian of note and distinction and considerable knowledge, and a lifelong academic with a knowledge of what historians do, how they do it and why they do it, who 20-years ago wrote a ground-breaking book about Jack the Ripper. His reputation doesn't depend in any way on whatever new information you've got. He doesn't believe Kosminski was the Ripper, he wouldn't be bothered if Cohen was shown tomorrow not to have been the Ripper, and it wouldn't matter to him if Anderson was shown to have been talking through his bottom. And neither would I. And that would be if we actually thought you had anything, but on your track record not even that seems likely enough to cause so much as a tremor of concern.

In fact, what you don't realise is that if you do have new information, if you are able to put Kosminski, Druitt, et al into the bin, that would be great. There would be a new piece in the jigsaw, we'd be getting closer to seeing a meaningful picture. You see, Martin and I and Rob House and Monty and Debra Arif and Rob Clack and Caz and so many other people, we are interested in the truth, not in reputations.

[mklhawley]

On the subject of making money since 1987/88 there have been a lot of people who have made a lot of money out of Kosminski and this Marginalia and Andersons book. Reputations have been put on the line and now in the light of new developments and other lines of thinking those reputations are in danger of crumbling, arent they Mr Begg ? and they dont like that thought .

Completely uncalled for. This is merely an opinion based upon one's perception of the world. Completely uncalled for.

[robhouse]

Internet troll: (definition from wikipedia)

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

"Trolls aspire... to the level of trouble they can cause in an environment. They want it to kick off. They want to promote antipathetic emotions of disgust and outrage, which morbidly gives them a sense of pleasure."

[Trevor Marriott]

Internet troll: (definition from wikipedia)

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

"Trolls aspire... to the level of trouble they can cause in an environment. They want it to kick off. They want to promote antipathetic emotions of disgust and outrage, which morbidly gives them a sense of pleasure."

So now I am a troll as well as a buffoon I think you would be well advised to button your lip you are very brave hiding behind the keyboard.

I am entitled to air my views on here just as much as the next person if they are not what you want to hear tough maybe its because the truth hurts and you like Monty can only retailate by name calling etc. Its time for you and some of the others to escape from the cocoon you have all being living for the past 20 years and face the real world and come to terms with reality.

You and the others who you run with on here have nailed your various colours to the mast now its time for those to be questioned and challenged and if there are other plausible explanations they should be given a fair hearing, something they dont get on here, and I am not just mentioning the issues with me many other persons have joined casebook and attempted to air their thoughts and views only for the same individuals to use what can only be described as bully boy tactics in trying to destroy these peoples views and opinions and forcing them to leave.

Welll its time someone stood up to you and your other cronies and make you understand that just beacuse of who you all are thinking you are the bees kness of ripperology you are automatically right well you are not and I am sure other people are seeing through you all now, lets hope the trend continues you are already in the minority.

If all of you had a £ for every time you include in a post the words "What if" "I think" "Maybe" "Perhaps" "Might have" "Could have" "Probably" all words used to prop up flagging theories. You would all be very rich men

I have no doubt everyone has used those words at some time but some have used then to the extreme and still continue to do so as the posts from Messrs Begg and Leahy show.

Face it over the past 4 years Ripperology has changed more people have become involved new ideas new evidence and even new suspects, have been introduced. much of which goes totally against the grain of what had been readily accepted by some.

Now you people with your Tumblety and Kosminksi and Druitt suspects and others for some reason cant bear the thought that you might have to kiss then goodbye, well we may well be now left with a situation where there are no likely suspects left just mere suspicion against a small minority. If that happened you and others on here would have to go out and get a proper life, frightening thought isnt it. ?

[Trevor Marriott]

Of course I understand the difference a hand writing expert can only give a probability of something being written by the same person..

You can claim that probability is conclussive...as one could be reading the Davis report that it is conclusive. However Davis examine the original.

You have not stated the identity of your expert , so his credencials cant be judged, and you have not shown us what it was that he examined? Was it the real marginalia were they actual examples of Swansons hand writing?

I presume from your comments you sent someone some photocopies and slipped them a Fiver and got a tacky brown envelope back in the post...hardly criminal investigation..

And what the hell do the ledgers have to do with the marginalia surely they are completely seperate. Not remotely related?

Will you name this expert now please so I can run checks?

Yours Jeff

Come on Jeff I didnt think even you would stoop so low as to suggest that. You really should read previous posts you keep asking me questions which i have answered in previous posts.

The identity of my expert is irrelevant at this stage whether they be the best in the land it is academic because you would still question their qualifiacations because you are one of those who want to belive the marginalia is genuine.

In fact if my expert were the best in the land then there would be absolutley no chance then of Nevill giving it up for re examination

[Jeff Leahy]

Come on Jeff I didnt think even you would stoop so low as to suggest that. You really should read previous posts you keep asking me questions which i have answered in previous posts.

The identity of my expert is irrelevant at this stage whether they be the best in the land it is academic because you would still question their qualifiacations because you are one of those who want to belive the marginalia is genuine.

In fact if my expert were the best in the land then there would be absolutley no chance then of Nevill giving it up for re examination

Trevor I very much doubt that you could find a decent hand writing expert willing to risk his reputation on such a fool hardy acessment..

I there fore conclude that your bluffing..

If you genuinely have any evidence what so ever then bring it forward and let it be judged..What exactly are you scared of...more failour?

What you are doing is deliberately miss leading the public who dont fully understand the implications of what your doing and saying, by trying to discredit perfectly honourable people with your lies.

Either bring forward and present or shut up and apologize

Yours Jeff

[Supe]

Can't we simply ignore Marriott? Let him blather and bluster to an empty room, so to speak, and even he will soon tire of his own words. His ideas, including the monstrous nonsense about the apron piece found in Goulston Street, have all been found wanting and he is such an execrable writer that no one new to the field is in any danger of being persuaded by his misguided notions.

He is rude, crude, a boor, and a bore and trying to debate with him only imparts a false sense of validity to his arguments. Resist his taunts and insults and if we suffer a while in silence we may well be rid of him.

Don.

[Monty]

Trevor,

Your labelling of me as a bully amuses me. I'm not the one sending abusive Emails to those who criticise me. My talking is out in the open for all to see.

Numerous times I have provided evidence which has cast doubt over your theories.

Numerous times I have questioned your evaluation of evidence and cited why.

And numerous times your response was not to provide counter evidence but to abuse. Now that won't wash with me, I don't take such cr@p.

You stated I was part of a cabal. You were asked to either provide evidence or retract. You did neither. I let that slide, cos I'm a good guy. Heck. I even promoted you for this years conference, yet I'm the bully.

Some people are just so ungrateful.

Monty

[Jeff Leahy]

Sorry Don but if Trevor has had new hand writing analysis done on the marginalia why is he hiding these results?

After months of barraiting the police about hiding information and not releasing what is in teh publics interest it appears that it is he TREVOR MARRIOTT that has been hiding and deceiving the public and his fellow peers..

Why are your secret tests being kept from us?

We what trabsparacy

Who is the secret expert

Jeff

[Supe]

Jeff,

if Trevor has had new hand writing analysis done on the marginalia why is he hiding these results?

If he did, most likely because he has another book or tv show in the offing. As I said a long time ago, Trev is not at all impressive on his own, but what a great agent he must have.

Anyway, by pressing him for answers he clearly has no intention of giving you only help increase an audience for the probable book or television show.

Don.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor I very much doubt that you could find a decent hand writing expert willing to risk his reputation on such a fool hardy acessment..

I there fore conclude that your bluffing..

If you genuinely have any evidence what so ever then bring it forward and let it be judged..What exactly are you scared of...more failour?

What you are doing is deliberately miss leading the public who dont fully understand the implications of what your doing and saying, by trying to discredit perfectly honourable people with your lies.

Either bring forward and present or shut up and apologize

Yours Jeff

I told you I never bluff there is a time and a place for everything I will try to make sure you are there.

I should say to you the same about the authenticty of the marginalia put it up for re examamination or stop telling people its authentic.

I have nothing to apologise for I will shut up now becaue this is becoming tiresome any annoying to me trying to offer reason and logic to those who do not have the apptitude or capabilty to understand it.

[Trevor Marriott]

Trevor,

Your labelling of me as a bully amuses me. I'm not the one sending abusive Emails to those who criticise me. My talking is out in the open for all to see.

Numerous times I have provided evidence which has cast doubt over your theories.

Numerous times I have questioned your evaluation of evidence and cited why.

And numerous times your response was not to provide counter evidence but to abuse. Now that won't wash with me, I don't take such cr@p.

You stated I was part of a cabal. You were asked to either provide evidence or retract. You did neither. I let that slide, cos I'm a good guy. Heck. I even promoted you for this years conference, yet I'm the bully.

Some people are just so ungrateful.

Monty

Monty you are biggest culprit on here you continually reject what people say on here in favour of you old outdated theories to which you can provide no corroboration for anyway.

And now you have taken to me and want to be my agent how does 10 % sound

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

This thread has deteriorated into a demeaning slagging-match.

Let us all take a breath and return with posts more worthy of discussion.

Many thanks.

Regards,

Simon