'The Swanson Marginalia' Revisited

[Chris]

People may be interested to know that Stewart has now put his questions directly to Paul Begg on www.jtrforums.com:
http://www.jtrforums.com/showthread.php?t=5269&page=6

Well, that was short and relatively sweet. Paul Begg doesn't remember noticing the differences, or even examining the annotations that closely, and doesn't appear to think the differences are important, because they could be explained "by many things", which he lists, though it's interesting that he doesn't include the possible explanation that Davies suggested - "the ageing process and either a mental or physical deterioration".

[Howard Brown]

Quick in and out: Since Ally's memory is apparently better than mine,I retract my claim to not deleting a post she made three years ago....even if the post was deleted by another moderator,its still my responsibility. I apologize to Ally.

[Ally]

No big How. Apology wasn't necessary, but it's accepted. God knows my own memory is an unreliable thing these days. Of course you are much, much older than I am so it's only natural you'd be more decrepit.

[Howard Brown]

Al:

Decrepit ain't the half of it,dear. If my butt wasn't on my shoulders,I wouldn't be able to find it half the time.

I did want to point out that the deletion of said post from three years ago definitely didn't transpire because I was contacted by Mr. Begg. Its water under the bridge anyway...

Seize you tomorrow on the Podcast. ...looking forward to discussing this Chris Scott fellow's book, The Ripper In Ramsgate...

[Robert]

Chris Scott? Isn't that the name of.....Chris Scott?

Regards

Henry Crun

[Ally]

Al:
I did want to point out that the deletion of said post from three years ago definitely didn't transpire because I was contacted by Mr. Begg. Its water under the bridge anyway...

Yeah apparently as it turns out, my prose is just so god awful that it can't be allowed to see the light of day.

Well, that was short and relatively sweet. Paul Begg doesn't remember noticing the differences, or even examining the annotations that closely, and doesn't appear to think the differences are important.

So he doesn't remember noticing the differences or examining it in any great detail. Well, I do find it interesting especially when we have this account from Jeff:

Yes clearly Paul had examined the original in detail and spoken at length with Jim Swanson. Indeed when i first met Paul around 2001 he clearly described the different colour pencils to me, at that time. So i don't believe it was a secret.

Oh well, history is apparently mutable indeed. As is proven often on the boards.

[Jeff Leahy]

So he doesn't remember noticing the differences or examining it in any great detail. Well, I do find it interesting especially when we have this account from Jeff:
Oh well, history is apparently mutable indeed. As is proven often on the boards.

I was pretty vague on what i said Ally because I was working from memory, I also said that I remember seeing coloured reproductions of the marginalia, yet having searched a few weeks ago, I've been unable to trace those photos.

I simply don't remember ever not knowing about he different pencils that where used. I'm simply being as honest as possible when saying that.

However trying to drag me up as a witness given my memory testiment is poor..

As as matter of interest does anyone else remember colour copies of the marginalia having ever been reproduced on casebook?

Pirate

[Chris]

I was pretty vague on what i said Ally because I was working from memory ...

I'm puzzled. How was it in any sense "vague" when you said this?
... when i first met Paul around 2001 he clearly described the different colour pencils to me, at that time.

Apparently that was sheer invention. I don't want to be overly harsh, but really ...

[harry]

All these words,remarks and suspicions arising from one obvious conclusion,(mine at least)that a fellow named Anderson included in a book,a claim that was false.That claim being that a person was identified as being 'Jack the Ripper".A claim that has no official support or evidence,physical or documentary,to support it.

[Nothing to see]

Dear Al:

Just as a brief sidebar, I'd like you to kindly explain the following, since its news to me. I really don't want to start up a separate thread for the comment,since we have mutual goals for the thread here....

The very good reason I have for not disturbing you on your fluffy cloud there is because, it has been proven, that if I post something over there that you don't like, you'll complain and have it deleted. So what's the point? It is better that Stewart posts the questions, because at least he has the standing not to have his posts poofed if you don't particularly like them.

I'd like you to back that statement up with one example of that happening,when you get a chance. I am completely in the dark about this comment. Thank you.

How

I'm confused here. There is another board to post on exclusively about JTR and Ally decides who gets to post there?

[Jeff Leahy]

Ally “God knows my own memory is an unreliable thing these days.”

Chris it wasn’t invention, but my main area of interest at this time was in the Maybrick Diary and related to a completely different project I was working on in 2001/2003.

I remember being aware of the marginalia. I don’t ever remember not being aware that two pencils were used.

I also believe that I saw colour reproductions of the marginalia.

I also have a recollection of sitting for some time with Paul in the ‘Plantation’ discussing his meeting with Jim Swanson, at length.

However I was working from memory and like Ally my memory is not what it was.

I realize that your area of expertise is in the detail. Mine is in the bigger picture.

And the bigger picture is that Swanson ‘Probably’ wrote the marginalia

Pirate

PS NTS..no there is another site and Howard gets to decide who posts there..P

[Chris]

Jeff

Perhaps it's best just to note that what you stated here as a fact (without qualification) turned out not to be true - for whatever reason - and leave it there.

[Jeff Leahy]

I'm sorry chris but there is all the worlds difference between making something up and being uncertain on precise dates. Especially when working from memory.

I think Eric Morecomb stated: I'm playing all the right notes, but not necessarily in the right order.

I wonder how accurate your memory would be on the exact time of events eight years ago?

Pirate

[Natalie Severn]

All these words,remarks and suspicions arising from one obvious conclusion,(mine at least)that a fellow named Anderson included in a book,a claim that was false.That claim being that a person was identified as being 'Jack the Ripper".A claim that has no official support or evidence,physical or documentary,to support it.

Beulah,peel me a grape!

So Anderson was no angel ?

Luv ya Harry! short and sweet and to the point.

[Chris]

Jeff

So it's only the "precise date" you are unsure of?

You still assert that when you first met Paul Begg he "he clearly described the different colour pencils" to you? You're just not sure precisely which year this happened?