Independant re-examination and forensic testing of the Swanson Marginalia?

[jason_c]

As I understand it the Chief Superintendent of the Metropolitan Police has vowed to abide by the outcome of this vote.



Get voting folks!

[Phil Carter]

Hello Jason,

What? No Commanders of the various departments scattered around SY? It's a great dish of ointment to me. (to quote-Ronnie Barker)

Still, I'm sure that all upright standing members of the general public interested in the Jack the Ripper saga, may be interested in this simple, long standing form of multiple choice questionnaire.

I can but "protect and serve". Protect those who wish to remain anonymous with a closed, no-name vote, and serve the question on a plate for those with an interest in this particular dish.

Seriously, I am grateful and thankful to all who wish to cast an opinion, one way or the other. At least it will give an small indication of those interested enough in the situation of where they stand on this web-site.

Others who don't care, or who don't know and are undecided, are given the opportunity to ignore or wait a while.

best wishes

Phil

[Monty]

That seems to be your answer to a number or both current and recent post on here.

Surely you mean question Trevor?

Its you who have yet to provide an answer.

Monty

[Roy Corduroy]

Thanks Phil, I voted No. The Davies summary is good enough for me.

Roy

[Phil Carter]

Hello Roy,
Thank you for your participation.
Hope all is well with you.

best wishes

Phil

[Trevor Marriott]

Thanks Phil, I voted No. The Davies summary is good enough for me.

Roy

Hi Roy have you seen the report in its entirety as what has been released clearly shows the results to be inconclusive.

[The Good Michael]

Sometimes I think any results of any testing won't be accurate enough for those who already believe one way. I don't believe retesting is necessary.

Mike

[Chris]

Hi Roy have you seen the report in its entirety as what has been released clearly shows the results to be inconclusive.

Saying simply that the results were "inconclusive" doesn't really give the full picture, though. Although he acknowledged that his findings did not show unequivocally that Swanson was the author, Davies was able to conclude that "there is strong evidence to support the proposition that Swanson wrote the questioned annotations." On a scale of 1 to 9, he rated the annotations at 7.

[Trevor Marriott]

Saying simply that the results were "inconclusive" doesn't really give the full picture, though. Although he acknowledged that his findings did not show unequivocally that Swanson was the author, Davies was able to conclude that "there is strong evidence to support the proposition that Swanson wrote the questioned annotations." On a scale of 1 to 9, he rated the annotations at 7.

Strong evidence to support is not conclusive.It still leaves a reasonable doubt. Until that doubt is removed there will still be grave concerns.

[The Good Michael]

Interesting. 33% more people, literally hordes, seem to think it isn't worthwhile to re-examine the Marginalia.

Mike

[Trevor Marriott]

Interesting. 33% more people, literally hordes, seem to think it isn't worthwhile to re-examine the Marginalia.

Mike

A difference of 4 as we speak hardly hordes

[harry]

I vote yes.I believe there are and have been, people clever enough to alter a document without being detected,and that there are persons,equally clever,who can detect that documents have been altered.

[Monty]

Too general a question and not at all helpful.

There is more to this than a simple question of testing.

Theres the specifics and costs to consider. What tests are to be done and why? What are we trying to establish?

And who is going to pay the considerable costs?


Can we ask those questions too?

Monty

[Phil Carter]

Hello Neil,

It's easy. Set up a thread, ask a question and wait for the responses leaving it open for all to CHOOSE whether to vote or not. Thats what I did.

As to your critique of just about anything I write, say, do, or attempt... it matters not one jot. You appear to have developed a personal bias. I find that sad, especially from such a well reknowned historical researcher as yourself.

Nothing personal Neil. Just a polite, quietly thought-out opinion.

best wishes

Phil