There's Something Wrong with the Swanson Marginalia

[Phil Carter]

Hello Chris,

I have been honest in my comments. As far as intelligence being insulted is concerned, if you feel that way, I can only say this.
Respectfully, I am not privy to other people's personal interpretations. How I interpret your comments for example, does not reach the level within my train of thought that insults my intelligence, because I believe that you would never mean to do that. Knowing you the little I do, I'm sure that unintended effect of that nature would not be a nice feeling. If you believe me to be of that mode, deliberately or otherwise, you are, respectfully, mistaken. Especially this time.
Again, I wish you a pleasant evening.

best wishes

Phil

[caz]

Hi Ally,

Oh yes, here we go. No ammunition left, no answer to whether I have really done the impossible and made it impossible to examine the facts on the message boards, or whether you just got your own arguments in a twist along with your knickers. When all else fails hit me with the diary on a thread you started, for the purpose of discussing (and I quote) ‘purely the fact that there is something amiss with the Swanson Marginalia’.

Not even a theory, but a fact. And in your original post you implied that anything off-topic would be reported.

Why not stick to a topic you can actually claim to know something about, so everything you type can be based on purely the facts?

It is painfully clear that you still know bugger all about the diary, if you are seriously claiming it’s only a ‘remote possibility’ that it was forged by someone other than the Barretts. Good God alive, there is zero possibility that either Barrett ‘forged’ it and even your late pal Melvin Harris knew that much.

‘Is it likely someone would fake an entire diary in an attempt to throw up a fake suspect?’

No it isn’t. But then, we only have the one diary, and unless you faked it yourself, you don’t know what its creator was attempting to do. It’s entirely possible that the presumption by ripperologists, that it had to be all about them, and trying to con them with a new fake ripper suspect, is entirely arse about face, and that it was all about James Maybrick, and the mischievous, darkly comic portrayal of him as a conveniently contemporary and infamous murderer.

I agree that a faker hoping for fame and fortune might well have done better to invest in lottery tickets than to have written those 63 pages for any purpose you have come up with thus far to account for its existence. But that would be circular reasoning, wouldn't it, to presume the motivation behind a fake and then judge the faker accordingly.

Love,

Caz
X

[Chris]

That's marvellous.

The thread became so ridiculous it spontaneously metamorphosed into a Diary discussion.

[Ally]

Oh yes, here we go. No ammunition left, no answer to whether I have really done the impossible and made it impossible to examine the facts on the message boards, or whether you just got your own arguments in a twist along with your knickers. When all else fails hit me with the diary on a thread you started, for the purpose of discussing (and I quote) ‘purely the fact that there is something amiss with the Swanson Marginalia’.

Oh I am dreadfully sorry Caz, was I supposed to actually answer that? I thought it was useless rhetorical speech making, that didn't require a direct answer, much like you have not directly answered my rhetoric about your own obsessions and enthusiasms. I mean it's quite all right for you to say that I was engaging in useless, desperate obsessive argument, but oh yes, god forbid I point out that what is desperate uselessness to one person is another's jolly good fun.

Why not stick to a topic you can actually claim to know something about, so everything you type can be based on purely the facts?

Really that one is just too easy.

It is painfully clear that you still know bugger all about the diary, if you are seriously claiming it’s only a ‘remote possibility’ that it was forged by someone other than the Barretts. Good God alive, there is zero possibility that either Barrett ‘forged’ it and even your late pal Melvin Harris knew that much.

Well that worked better than I could have hoped in regards to proving desperate obsessiveness. I mean, I just threw it out there as an example, I didn't think you'd actually prove my point by picking up the gauntlet and start actually debating the merits of the diary. Pot, nice to meet you. I am kettle.

And now as I think it has been quite nicely proven that you'd rather argue the merits of my personal obsessions and the diary rather than Swanson, I'll let you have the last word on both my pot stirring bitchy obsession, and the like, and hereafter confine myself to actually discussing the merits of the actual marginalia, and not whether it's worth debating.

Whether you believe it is worth debating or not is entirely irrelevant. I do believe it's worth the debate and I plan to keep doing it.

Love,

Ally

[Ally]

Phil

For the last time - what I really object to is the silly evasion and obfuscation. Obviously you were referring to Martin Fido's book. Why on earth couldn't you have the honesty to admit it, rather than pretending I was reading something into your post that wasn't there - or pointing out that you didn't use the word "book." That kind of thing is just a waste of time and an insult to the intelligence.

Agreed.

[Trevor Marriott]

As the authenticity of the annotations has been questioned and in my opinion quite rightly so having regard to all the facts and issues surrounding it. I wonder where Nevel Swanson now stands with all that is being suggested.

It is noted that certain ripperologists who were involved initially with the marginalia and most certainly recently having regard to the documentary must have made him aware of what is being suggested. But to date we all remain in the dark as to not only his thoughts and views but theirs as well.

I am sure he has been given advice by these persons and I wonder what advice they have given him in relation to whether he should agree for it to be rexamined or refuse to allow it to be re examined or whether he should issue his own statement. For all we know he perhaps he wants to co-operate but is acting on advice which may be turn out to be bad advice,

At the moment the silence is deafening from all parties.

I would therefore invite anyone one or all of them to come on here (note this is not a demand) to enlighten us all as to where everyone now stands with this.

Or if they choose not to accept my offer perhaps with the permission of Mr Swanson they might furnish me with his contact details in order for me to speak to him first hand on behalf of us all and to raise the concerns with him putting them in a different perspective to what he may well have perceived from his ripperologist friends.

I personally feel that in the interests of historical accuracy Nevel Swanson should agree to a re examination and further forensic tests. Throwing a veil of silence around it now isnt going to make this go away in a couple of weeks if thats what the thinking is behind the silence.

[Hunter]

It is noted that certain ripperologists who were involved initially with the marginalia and most certainly recently having regard to the documentary must have made him aware of what is being suggested. But to date we all remain in the dark as to not only his thoughts and views but theirs as well.

I am sure he has been given advice by these persons and I wonder what advice they have given him in relation to whether he should agree for it to be rexamined or refuse to allow it to be re examined or whether he should issue his own statement. For all we know he perhaps he wants to co-operate but is acting on advice which may be turn out to be bad advice,

I have not posted on this thread, but I must say that this is an outlandish accusation based purely on your speculation of the proclivities of people that don't owe you, or anyone else, an explaination for anything. It is one thing to raise legitimate questions ( as I believe Ally has done) but to continue nefarious accusations after the administrator of this site has given due warning in that reagard is petulance that does you no good service.

I would like to see a discussion of the details of the manuscript in question... as I believe that is fair, but the outright slander of individuals without any base in facts in comtemptible and below someone who professes to be a reasearcher in this field.

[Trevor Marriott]

I have not posted on this thread, but I must say that this is an outlandish accusation based purely on your speculation of the proclivities of people that don't owe you, or anyone else, an explaination for anything. It is one thing to raise legitimate questions ( as I believe Ally has done) but to continue nefarious accusations after the administrator of this site has given due warning in that reagard is petulance that does you no good service.

I would like to see a discussion of the details of the manuscript in question... as I believe that is fair, but the outright slander of individuals without any base in facts in comtemptible and below someone who professes to be a reasearcher in this field.

I think I find your post outrageous, falsely accusing me of slander It is there for all to see I would suggest that you withdraw that immediately or it is I who will make a formal complaint to admin against you.

The post was written calmy and thoughtfully and the invitation to all parties was made and in a friendly and cordial manner in an effort to prove or disprove the authenticty of the document once and for all.

[Monty]

If your pleaing to someone Trebor at least get their name correct. Its insulting else.

Nevill is a grown man and I'm sure makes his own descisions, including the appointment of a legal team and an independant means of testing the document should he wish to do so.

My advice to him, not that he has sort it but you are going to assume anyway, would be to steer clear of anyone here, including me.

Its very naïve of you to think someone, who essentially owes you nothing,should answer your desperate plea. Especially viewing your behavior across the board as a whole.

You are about to reap what you've sown I suspect.

Monty

[jason_c]

I have not posted on this thread, but I must say that this is an outlandish accusation based purely on your speculation of the proclivities of people that don't owe you, or anyone else, an explaination for anything. It is one thing to raise legitimate questions ( as I believe Ally has done) but to continue nefarious accusations after the administrator of this site has given due warning in that reagard is petulance that does you no good service.

I would like to see a discussion of the details of the manuscript in question... as I believe that is fair, but the outright slander of individuals without any base in facts in comtemptible and below someone who professes to be a reasearcher in this field.

For the first time im with Trevor on this. He has thankfully toned down his aggressive postings(but my god he still makes me want to punch my monitor when i read his posts).

All i would say is that on here we tend to exaggerate the importance of these messageboards. If the Swanson family wish to respond to a bunch of internet posters then they will. If they dont then its not necessarily sinister, or beyond belief.

[Trevor Marriott]

If your pleaing to someone Trebor at least get their name correct. Its insulting else.

Nevill is a grown man and I'm sure makes his own descisions, including the appointment of a legal team and an independant means of testing the document should he wish to do so.

My advice to him, not that he has sort it but you are going to assume anyway, would be to steer clear of anyone here, including me.

Its very naïve of you to think someone, who essentially owes you nothing,should answer your desperate plea. Especially viewing your behavior across the board as a whole.

You are about to reap what you've sown I suspect.

Monty

Many different ways to spell Nevill i.e Neville,Nevell perhaps he himself might want to come on here and clarify which is correct

Instead of being negative as you repeatedly are shown to be in your posts try being positive for a change. Can you honestly sit there and having regard to all that has been discussed surrounding the marginalia have no reservations about some or all of its authenticity ?.

From a personal point of view I dont care whether or not the document is ever re examined. If its not there is always going to be that doubt lingering in peoples minds. I can also see why the eminent band of Kosminski followers would not want it re examined. They seek to use it to support their beleifs that he was the killer.

The nearest Kosminski came to being a serial killer was to murder a bowl of serial at breakfast each day

With regards to the shenanegens which went on with the MM where I was accused of demanding. On this occassion I have been polite and cordial in my requests and still that does not satisfy.

The die has been cast and the gauntlet thrown down. The invitation has been presented and the questions asked. It is a matter now as to whether any of the parties choose to pick up the gauntlet and respond.

You make it seem that this is a one man crusade adopted by myself I can assure you it is not. I know that many on here are of the same opinion and view as myself on this same issue.

Being a former fraud squad officer you should know that any re examination of the documents should be carried out independently to ensure fair play.

[Ally]

With regards to the shenanegens which went on with the MM where I was accused of demanding. On this occassion I have been polite and cordial in my requests and still that does not satisfy.

The problem is of course that the people you basically called thieves are the people who have the name and number you are asking for. I have no idea if you've made it up properly with them, but there's probably not a whole lot of good will operating towards their providing you with the contact information. Polite only counts when you want people to focus on what you say, not how you say it, it doesn't do much for granting favors to previously tromped on persons.

I would be happy to contact Neville as well and ask him. I have questions about the marginalia, and despite what people believe, I actually have not made up my mind one way or another as to its authenticity. I have no real interest in seeing it retested because I don't think that there's anything to test, and believe it or not, I am on occasion polite and cordial when the mood strikes me.

I do however think that an independent person getting Mr. Swanson's view at this time would be helpful. I don't think I'd necessarily consider Trevor independent, and I would understand if people didn't consider me independent either.

But I do think it would be great if a neutral party to question Mr. Swanson could be agreed upon, and efforts made in that direction if Mr. Swanson were willing. He did agree to do a documentary so he is not entirely opposed to being questioned.

[Monty]

Trevor,

Who are these Kosminskites you refer to?

You keep claiming these people do not want the document tested (not that its their call anyway) yet you hide their names behind this label. Surely they would wish the test to be undertaken as a positive result supports their position.

Obviously a negative one would support yours. As you are pushing for a re test can I assume you will be funding the fairly considerable costs? Or your agent? Or TV exects? Bearing in mind the publication issue contained within the Freedom of information act.

And what are the specifics of these tests? The exacts exactly?

Shenanigans re the MM? You mean the innuendo surrounding a well respected author and researcher of theft without any evidence or even real basis whatsoever?

Please do not mistake my negativity for caution.

Monty

[Monty]

The problem is of course that the people you basically called thieves are the people who have the name and number you are asking for. I have no idea if you've made it up properly with them, but there's probably not a whole lot of good will operating towards their providing you with the contact information. Polite only counts when you want people to focus on what you say, not how you say it, it doesn't do much for granting favors to previously tromped on persons.

I would be happy to contact Neville as well and ask him. I have questions about the marginalia, and despite what people believe, I actually have not made up my mind one way or another as to its authenticity. I have no real interest in seeing it retested because I don't think that there's anything to test, and believe it or not, I am on occasion polite and cordial when the mood strikes me.

I do however think that an independent person getting Mr. Swanson's view at this time would be helpful. I don't think I'd necessarily consider Trevor independent, and I would understand if people didn't consider me independent either.

But I do think it would be great if a neutral party to question Mr. Swanson could be agreed upon, and efforts made in that direction if Mr. Swanson were willing. He did agree to do a documentary so he is not entirely opposed to being questioned.

I think this is an excellent idea, in theory.

However I'm not sure if Mr Swanson would trust anyone if he has been keeping abreast of the posts here.

Monty

[Ally]

Or even if he isn't keeping abreast, if anyone else were keeping him abreast with their own special slant on it?

However, that is what the neutral party would be for. Or if you are saying that Neville will refuse simply because people have been questioning it, that's more of a slur on him than anyone else has so far provided.

You are presuming that he is so rigid and intolerant in his character that any questions regarding the authenticity are automatically presumed as being bad.

If he was actually keeping abreast, and not being kept abreast through the kinds of machinations that characterize Ripper squabbles, I'd think he'd realize there were genuine people with genuine questions and would welcome the chance to have his say.

Maybe a podcast?