Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Where does Joseph Fleming fit into the equation?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I submit that Henrietta's account was a mistake, and she meant that mental illness had been in the family for 160 inches. That would mean there was another, even taller brother to Joseph.

    Mike
    huh?

    Comment


    • There were ben many reported ghost sightings of tall men at Claybury and this phenomena continues at the gated Repton Park residential estate which the asylum has been converted into.

      In October 2011 Sam Faiers from the Only Way Is Essex was attacked at Repton Park.
      This is in some way interconnected to the case for Fleming being Jack the Ripper.

      Comment


      • That's hilarious, Mike and Lechmere.
        I guess you find yourself clever posting this just after Chris Scott has taken the pain to share some fascinating biographical détails.

        This thread isn't specifically about Fleming's height, but if you want to cling to this 6'7 and prevent others to discuss all aspects of Fleming's cadidacy, here is a well balanced post from Fisherman in 2009 that you could medidate :

        David!

        I agree with you that if Fleming was Marys ex-lover AND frequent visitor, it´s baffling that we have no mentioning of his height. Moreover, there is a lot of material pointing to the fact that the Victorians were the shortest Brits, historically. I´ve found it on the net, where there is this passage:

        "There's an interesting table printed in "The Tudor Tailor" by Ninya Mikhalia and Jane Malcolm-Davies on height of people from London. For simplicity's sake, I'll list only the males:

        Prehistory: 5' 7"
        Roman: 5' 6.75"
        Saxon: 5' 8"
        Medieval: 5' 7.5"
        Tudor: 5' 7.5"
        Georgian: 5' 7.25"
        Victorian: 5' 5.5"
        1998: 5' 9""

        So, if this is something to go by, "Joe the Giraffe" would in fact have been a more deviating person in Victorian England than in any other era of the kingdom! And so, the case you argue is a sound one, David. But as long as we have that 6.7 record staring us in our faces, maybe we should not call it a given.

        Comment


        • What you don't grasp is that average heights have no bearing on this matter.
          The incorrect age given for Fleming at Stone has no bearing on it.
          His wardrobe is irrelevant.
          The so-called Lincolnshire Giant is irrelevant.

          Chris Scott has shown that Fleming's paternal genes were nurtured on the Isle of Thanet, not London.

          Comment


          • What you don't grasp is that average heights have no bearing on this matter.
            Splendid.

            The incorrect age given for Fleming at Stone has no bearing on it.
            Of course, an uncorrected mistake on the same page proves that another mistake would undoubtedly have been corrected. And what is worse, the records of the City of London Infirmary, as Debs has pointed out, give his correct age (just as Henrietta certainly did), and even the date of his baptism.
            Equally splendid.

            His wardrobe is irrelevant.
            Sure. Thanks to the hook, we have the thinnest dock labourer ever, after having been introduced to the tallest East Ender.

            The so-called Lincolnshire Giant is irrelevant.
            Because is weight quite fits his height ?
            Or is it because Fleming never worked for a travelling circus ?

            Comment


            • Chris - thanks so much for posting that biographical information regarding Fleming and his family. Fascinating.

              David -

              I'd say this James Evans is worth further research. A lunatic from Bethnal Green called James Evans... He's not Fleming, but could be the one from whom JF took his alias.
              An interesting idea - the same occurred to me.

              Comment


              • Fleming's paternal genes were nurtured on the Isle of Thanet, not London.
                Oh well Ed, that proves it then. Who hasn't heard of the Giants of Thanet?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Lechmere View Post
                  What you don't grasp is that average heights have no bearing on this matter.
                  I would suggest that you conduct some basic statistical research, Lechmere, especially with relation to deviation about the mean.

                  The statistical mean is important because it provides context. The average male height in the East End during the relevant period was estimated to have been 5' 5". If Fleming really was 6' 7" he would have been fully fourteen inches taller than the average man on the street and would thus have been regarded as something of an oddity. This would have attracted comment from those who saw him out and about - certainly from those who actually knew him.

                  So average height is of relevance when considering the supposedly 6' 7" Fleming. Very much so.

                  For my part, I remain open minded. I can see both sides of the argument and wouldn't commit myself either way on the basis of the present evidence. But average height is an issue that must be accorded due consideration, like it or not.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Garry Wroe View Post
                    I would suggest that you conduct some basic statistical research, Lechmere, especially with relation to deviation about the mean.

                    So average height is of relevance when considering the supposedly 6' 7" Fleming. Very much so.
                    Hello Garry.

                    Might I suggest you conduct this same basic research in the region of Spalding, Lincolnshire. I'm sure we can come up with similar stats to prove James Bradshaw couldn't exist either.
                    Regards, Jon S.

                    Comment


                    • Hi Jon,

                      Keep barking up the wrong tree.
                      Everybody will understand Garry's point, except those who don't want to.

                      Cheers

                      Comment


                      • Stats are no use unless you are looking at general features like the colour of his hair or eyes, etc.

                        No-one denies the height being discussed is out of the ordinary, and anyone who knows the value of stats already knows that stats are only useful when discussing 'the ordinary'.
                        An exception never shows up in statistics, only the average. So lets dispense with the pretense that stats can be an indicator in this argument.

                        To the detriment of statistics nationwide, James Bradshaw existed, but the stats say he couldn't.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by DVV View Post
                          Hi Jon,

                          Keep barking up the wrong tree.
                          Everybody will understand Garry's point, except those who don't want to.

                          Cheers
                          True - and also people who don't understand statistics.

                          There truly is some spectacularly ill-informed twaddle on this thread.

                          Comment


                          • Up on the Hill...

                            Mrs (Mc) Carthy almost certainly met Fleming. Mrs Phoenix too. Nothing from either of them about a plastering giant.

                            One wonders why?

                            Comment


                            • Mrs Carthy spoke about a man being in the building trade and that Kelly lived with her for a very short time along with other unfortunates. She didn't mention his name. She didn't mention he was a plasterer. She mentioned that she thought the two would marry. Sounds like speculation. Again, we still have no confirmed sighting of a tall man by anyone in contact with Kelly. We do however have lots of confirmed sightings of NBA players who are much taller than 6'7".

                              Mike
                              huh?

                              Comment


                              • A luddite may wonder why, but then again a luddite may build a case on what was not said, as your typical luddite is prone to do.

                                Regards, Jon S.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X