Druitt's 30 August Cricket Match

[caz]

I've always thought that the one striking thing about MJD's cricket club minuting that he had "gone abroad", was that there was no record of the club or teammates recording their thanks for his service.

If Monty had gone overseas, that would have been made clear and unambiguous. "Gone abroad" was a common euphemism for doing a vanishing trick, without warning or explanation. The cricket club was not best pleased with Monty for abandoning his commitments. They were not to know the turmoil that was going on in the man's mind.

Love,

Caz
X

[FISHY1118]

''So here we go again. You say something. Deny it. I post the exact post proving that you said it. Then you wriggle and dissemble. Embarrassing but hey….it’s'' what you do so we expect nothing more.''



No this is really how it goes , i say something ,you change or misinterpret it ,then you try prove it by posting it . Then you try to convince yourself and others its the truth!!! , childish, but hey you keep using the ''we' and really its just you .



'''Ok, I mention that fact that Druitt no longer has an alibi for the Tabram murder (which is not an opinion, it’s a fact.)''

Now let me set you straight on a fact , how could you possibly know Druitts whereabouts ''AFTER'' the 4th of Aug leading up to the 7th. ? You cant can you ?. You cant place him in London Noooooooooooooooo !!!, was he in Bournmouth on the 3rd and 4th? yes, after the 4th he could of been in Tinbucktoo for all you know, or any of a thousand places that would/could have establishished an alibi . So wrong is ''your fact'' and only your fact that Druitt No longer has an alibi for the Tabram murder. Youve made that up out of thin air .


And so, we can very clearly see that your claim was that because we know where he was on the 4th and because we don’t know where he was on the 7th then we have to assume that he was still in Bournemouth (as you said in post # 163 - or have you now changed your mind?)

And this is the classic misinterpret herlock weve become accustom too , notice how youve change it to make it sould like i said '' because we dont know were he was on the 4th that somehow that that means im asking people to believe he was in bournmouth on the 7th!!!
What is means herlock is exactly what is was when i posted it the first time, that after the 4th no one knows where he was. Not that he remained in bournmouth till the 7th which is what youve tired to use to make people believe that ive got him in bournmouth on the 7th as a fact!!!!!!! . your speciality i might add.


Just for once Fishy, stop wasting time denying what you clearly stated in black and white. No wonder you took the name Fishy considering the amount of time you spend wriggling on the hook.


hmmmm well what can i say to this , except stop being so defensive and picky and keep your insults and condesending comments off this thread ,as sure as eggs if you continue you will like last time youll have us closed down on this topic which would spoil it for everyone . We were all advised recentley by Admin not to partake in this kind of back and fourth retoric . Ive already had to advise another poster who has since insulted me ''twice'' ,dont be another. It wouldnt suprize me if ist too late for this thread.


In closeing this is why i have Druitt o No 2 on my RSL


In 1903, Inspector Abberline, gave an interview to the Pall Mall Gazette in response to a claim made in a Sunday newspaper that the Ripper was a young medical student who had drowned in the Thames. Abberline said, 'Yes, I know all about that story, but what does it amount to, simply this, soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young man was found in the Thames, ''but there is nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him'''. NOTHING , NOTHING ,NOTHING.




One more thing since you keep mentioning it , my only comment as to Sickert when people had him on their RSL for this reason and this reason only was

That he was in France at the time of the the murders in perticular the sept 8th murder of Chapman , my claim and still yet to be disproven is the letter from his mother on the 6th sept is unverified as far i can tell as to its year date , show me the original letter with the 6th of sept 1888 written on and ill shut up .

Do you think Cornwell would have found such a letter if it existed befor she spent millions on her research to try prove Sickert was JTR?

[Herlock Sholmes]

''So here we go again. You say something. Deny it. I post the exact post proving that you said it. Then you wriggle and dissemble. Embarrassing but hey….it’s'' what you do so we expect nothing more.''



No this is really how it goes , i say something ,you change or misinterpret it ,then you try prove it by posting it . Then you try to convince yourself and others its the truth!!! , childish, but hey you keep using the ''we' and really its just you .



'''Ok, I mention that fact that Druitt no longer has an alibi for the Tabram murder (which is not an opinion, it’s a fact.)''

Now let me set you straight on a fact , how could you possibly know Druitts whereabouts ''AFTER'' the 4th of Aug leading up to the 7th. ? You cant can you ?. You cant place him in London Noooooooooooooooo !!!, was he in Bournmouth on the 3rd and 4th? yes, after the 4th he could of been in Tinbucktoo for all you know, or any of a thousand places that would/could have establishished an alibi . So wrong is ''your fact'' and only your fact that Druitt No longer has an alibi for the Tabram murder. Youve made that up out of thin air .

You seem to have real trouble with understanding the difference between someone not having an alibi and being able to prove that someone was in a certain place. Please grow up. I’ve never stated that I know Druitt’s location. You’re changing the subject again. If we can’t prove that Druitt was elsewhere on the 7th then he HAS NO ALIBI. It doesn’t mean that he was guilty of course, but he HAS NO ALIBI. Ask Trevor, he’s an ex-police officer who doesn’t regard Druitt as a good suspect, but he will confirm this particular point. It’s very simple. Not being able to prove that someone was elsewhere, as is the case with Druitt, is the definition of ‘an alibi.’


And so, we can very clearly see that your claim was that because we know where he was on the 4th and because we don’t know where he was on the 7th then we have to assume that he was still in Bournemouth (as you said in post # 163 - or have you now changed your mind?)

More disgraceful twisting of what was said. Do you really think that other posters aren’t capable of reading back to see the stuff that you’re making up here Fishy? All that I’ve said was that Druitt no longer has an alibi for Tabram’s murder. This is a fact, proven on JTRForums by researchers like Gary. It was you who said that because he was in BOURNMOUTH on the 4th and because we didn’t know where he was on the 7th then he must still have been in BOURNMOUTH on the 7th. That was your kindergarten logic written in black and white. Why you’re now trying to deny in your usual way.

And this is the classic misinterpret herlock weve become accustom too , notice how youve change it to make it sould like i said '' because we dont know were he was on the 4th that somehow that that means im asking people to believe he was in bournmouth on the 7th!!!

You said it Fishy. I’ll quote it again:

“He was still in Bournmouth.” Post #162, 04-09-22, 12pm, by a poster called Fishy1118.

What is means herlock is exactly what is was when i posted it the first time, that after the 4th no one knows where he was. Not that he remained in bournmouth till the 7th which is what youve tired to use to make people believe that ive got him in bournmouth on the 7th as a fact!!!!!!! . your speciality i might add.

The post PROVES that you aren’t being truthful here.

Just for once Fishy, stop wasting time denying what you clearly stated in black and white. No wonder you took the name Fishy considering the amount of time you spend wriggling on the hook.


hmmmm well what can i say to this , except stop being so defensive and picky and keep your insults and condesending comments off this thread ,as sure as eggs if you continue you will like last time youll have us closed down on this topic which would spoil it for everyone . We were all advised recentley by Admin not to partake in this kind of back and fourth retoric . Ive already had to advise another poster who has since insulted me ''twice'' ,dont be another. It wouldnt suprize me if ist too late for this thread.

Stop playing the ‘innocent victim’ card Fishy. I’ve said nothing on here that can’t be proved to be factually correct; unlike you. All that I ever stated was that Druitt no longer had an alibi for Tabram but of course you could accept that. You had to try and find a way of maintaining a non-existent alibi and you did it by the worst piece of logic that I’ve ever seen on here and then you try justifying it by your usual tactic of twisting and wriggling.


In closeing this is why i have Druitt o No 2 on my RSL

Not interested.

In 1903, Inspector Abberline, gave an interview to the Pall Mall Gazette in response to a claim made in a Sunday newspaper that the Ripper was a young medical student who had drowned in the Thames. Abberline said, 'Yes, I know all about that story, but what does it amount to, simply this, soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young man was found in the Thames, ''but there is nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him'''. NOTHING , NOTHING ,NOTHING.

15 years after the case and we’ll after he’d retired. He favoured Chapman so if you place so much value in what he said I’m assuming that you favour him too? You appear to believe that senior officers like Macnaughten, Anderson and Munro would have thought “well, we better contact the retired Fred Abberline and keep him up to date with developments in the case.”


One more thing since you keep mentioning it , my only comment as to Sickert when people had him on their RSL for this reason and this reason only was

No Fishy that’s not the only reason. You’re forgetting that most of the things that Joseph said have been proven false. The Knight theory is a car crash Fishy. It appears that only you support it and you have the nerve to call Druitt a ridiculous suspect. Do me a favour.

That he was in France at the time of the the murders in perticular the sept 8th murder of Chapman , my claim and still yet to be disproven is the letter from his mother on the 6th sept is unverified as far i can tell as to its year date , show me the original letter with the 6th of sept 1888 written on and ill shut up .

Do you think Cornwell would have found such a letter if it existed befor she spent millions on her research to try prove Sickert was JTR?

Even Sickert expert and biographer Matthew Sturgis says that Sickert was in France at the time of the murders. I’ll take his opinion over yours but it’s not important. Sickert is so far below Druitt (and almost everyone else) as a suspect that it’s little more than a joke.

The only reason I mentioned Sickert is that you appear to apply far more stringent criteria when considering Druitt than you do when you’re considering your absolutely discredited Sickert/Knight theory. Rather like another poster who applies a rigid judgment to Macnaughten which Anderson appears to be exempt from.

Balance is what is needed. What we don’t need is people getting angry when certain suspects are mentioned (which occurs with Druitt). What we also need is honesty and a willingness to admit when we’re wrong. I’ve been factually wrong on Casebook numerous times and I’ve had it pointed out to me by various posters (Wickerman, Abby, Joshua, Jeff, FrankO, Sam, to name but 6) and I’ve held my hands up and admitted it. But you’ve done this twice in recent memory and 2 or 3 times in your previous period on here. Not once have you felt able to admit to an obvious error. Opinions and interpretations are different as there are no correct answers. But it’s different where facts are concerned and I’ve shown in black and white, categorically, that you aren’t being truthful. Facts written in black and white speak for themselves Fishy and all the obfuscation and subject-changing in the world won’t change that.

[FISHY1118]

Even Sickert expert and biographer Matthew Sturgis says that Sickert was in France at the time of the murders. I’ll take his opinion over yours but it’s not important. Sickert is so far below Druitt (and almost everyone else) as a suspect that it’s little more than a joke.

Ha ha and you believe him with out questioning his evidence to prove such a staetment ,you people believe your own fantasy ,really its a joke, you preach that that only suit your agenda and challenge all others when you dont agree with there post, amaizing.


Everthing else is not worth the effort any more ,your clearly wrong and you know it , the master of misinterpretation and understanding . so be it

Evertyhing is there in black and white i hope some day youll get it. but i doubt it .

[FISHY1118]

In 1903, Inspector Abberline, gave an interview to the Pall Mall Gazette in response to a claim made in a Sunday newspaper that the Ripper was a young medical student who had drowned in the Thames. Abberline said, 'Yes, I know all about that story, but what does it amount to, simply this, soon after the last murder in Whitechapel the body of a young man was found in the Thames, ''but there is nothing beyond the fact that he was found at that time to incriminate him'''. NOTHING , NOTHING ,NOTHING.

15 years after the case and we’ll after he’d retired. He favoured Chapman so if you place so much value in what he said I’m assuming that you favour him too? You appear to believe that senior officers like Macnaughten, Anderson and Munro would have thought “well, we better contact the retired Fred Abberline and keep him up to date with developments in the case.”


This is such a poor response to the above , remember NOTHING ,NOTHING ,NOTHING .....

[FISHY1118]

One more thing since you keep mentioning it , my only comment as to Sickert when people had him on their RSL for this reason and this reason only was

No Fishy that’s not the only reason. You’re forgetting that most of the things that Joseph said have been proven false. The Knight theory is a car crash Fishy. It appears that only you support it and you have the nerve to call Druitt a ridiculous suspect. Do me a favour.

That he was in France at the time of the the murders in perticular the sept 8th murder of Chapman , my claim and still yet to be disproven is the letter from his mother on the 6th sept is unverified as far i can tell as to its year date , show me the original letter with the 6th of sept 1888 written on and ill shut up .

The letter herlock only the letter will do as proof , and you dont have it , and you dont like it because you know its just hearsay and speculation and circumstanscial . This has nothing to do with knight but go on twist and change the subject again to suit you

[FISHY1118]

And this is the classic misinterpret herlock weve become accustom too , notice how youve change it to make it sould like i said '' because we dont know were he was on the 4th that somehow that that means im asking people to believe he was in bournmouth on the 7th!!!

You said it Fishy. I’ll quote it again:


No need, i was right the first time but thanks anyway

[FISHY1118]

In closeing this is why i have Druitt o No 2 on my RSL

Not interested.


So what, big deal that wasnt ment for you anyway

[FISHY1118]

This is a fact, proven on JTRForums by researchers like Gary. It was you who said that because he was in BOURNMOUTH on the 4th and because we didn’t know where he was on the 7th then he must still have been in BOURNMOUTH on the 7th. That was your kindergarten logic written in black and white. Why you’re now trying to deny in your usual way

And this is the classic misinterpret herlock weve become accustom too , notice how youve change it to make it sould like i said '' because we dont know were he was on the 4th that somehow that that means im asking people to believe he was in bournmouth on the 7th!!!
What is means herlock is exactly what is was when i posted it the first time, that after the 4th no one knows where he was. Not that he remained in bournmouth till the 7th which is what youve tired to use to make people believe that ive got him in bournmouth on the 7th as a fact!!!!!!! . your speciality i might add.

YOU it again , now whos being untruthful?

[caz]

Anyone else losing the will to live?

Please don't rise to it, Herlock. You are better than that.

Love,

Caz
X

[FISHY1118]

And when he does caz ill respond right back ,just as you would and know doubt have done when your post and opinions have come under such savage attack as have mine , especially when Admin gave everyone the same warning not to behave in this manner just 3 weeks ago .It pathetic its came to this .

[Herlock Sholmes]

Even Sickert expert and biographer Matthew Sturgis says that Sickert was in France at the time of the murders. I’ll take his opinion over yours but it’s not important. Sickert is so far below Druitt (and almost everyone else) as a suspect that it’s little more than a joke.

Ha ha and you believe him with out questioning his evidence to prove such a staetment ,you people believe your own fantasy ,really its a joke, you preach that that only suit your agenda and challenge all others when you dont agree with there post, amaizing.


Everthing else is not worth the effort any more ,your clearly wrong and you know it , the master of misinterpretation and understanding . so be it

Evertyhing is there in black and white i hope some day youll get it. but i doubt it .

Not really. I’d just say that the opinion of a respected biographer is worthy of attention and he’s not the only Sickert authority to have rubbished the silly claims of the Knight theory.

If the provable ‘truth’ is there in black and white why don’t you tell everyone on here as it’s certainly not just me that’s not seeing it. This is a forum entirely devoted to the subject of JTR so if you have illuminating information why don’t you begin a thread on the subject?

[Herlock Sholmes]

And when he does caz ill respond right back ,just as you would and know doubt have done when your post and opinions have come under such savage attack as have mine , especially when Admin gave everyone the same warning not to behave in this manner just 3 weeks ago .It pathetic its came to this .

There was no savage attack and no attack at all. I accused you of not telling admitting when you are wrong for which I provided evidence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Anyone else losing the will to live?

Please don't rise to it, Herlock. You are better than that.

Love,

Caz
X

Thanks Caz, I was going to respond to his other posts but I’ll leave it on your advice. It’s a sad state of affairs though when some subjects can’t be broached without this kind of stuff polluting threads and it’s equally sad when a poster doesn’t have the integrity to admit to an error when it’s pointed out in black and white. It’s frustrating to say the least but, as you say, it’s pointless arguing with nonsense and inventions.

[Herlock Sholmes]

This is a fact, proven on JTRForums by researchers like Gary. It was you who said that because he was in BOURNMOUTH on the 4th and because we didn’t know where he was on the 7th then he must still have been in BOURNMOUTH on the 7th. That was your kindergarten logic written in black and white. Why you’re now trying to deny in your usual way

And this is the classic misinterpret herlock weve become accustom too , notice how youve change it to make it sould like i said '' because we dont know were he was on the 4th that somehow that that means im asking people to believe he was in bournmouth on the 7th!!! You did.
What is means herlock is exactly what is was when i posted it the first time, that after the 4th no one knows where he was. Not that he remained in bournmouth till the 7th which is what youve tired to use to make people believe that ive got him in bournmouth on the 7th as a fact!!!!!!! . your speciality i might add.

YOU it again , now whos being untruthful?

You. I’m done talking to you Fishy. Find someone that enjoys lying to talk to.

End.