A major breakthrough

[Dane_F]

There is a very small chance that I am wrong. Letīs hope I am.

I think this one point needs to be made clear to you as I've seen you repeat this similar line of thinking often.

No one, other than yourself, gives one shite if you're wrong.



I thought 18 months ago arguing with Fisher that he was detrimental to the ripper field with his outlandish theory. However Fisher had the manhood to actually post his research for peer review and would respond when objections were made to his theory. He didn't worry about anyone stealing his suspect or anything of the sort. He said he had evidence and posted it.

For as much grief as I have given Fisher for his theory, he at least presented it. He can have pride in that. There's no pride in what you're doing. Actually, it's the exact opposite. Your actions seem to be controlled by fear and cowardice.

[Pierre]

My dear Pierre,

Ah Ethics.

Yes that would be the subject which previous posts have indicated a complete lack of clarity on.

It would appear that ethics are an area to which an extremely flexible approach is taken in the continuing saga which began over a year ago.

The serious issues raised on this subject, which were referred to in posts 538 and 542 from this thread, not to mention post #71 from Thread : Charles Allen Lechmere - new suspect?, sadly seem to be an area which there is no willingness to address or discuss.

Certainly such a reticence calls into question most, if not all that you post given that the (Mythical) Ethical Issue is central to you not naming a suspect.

Steve

Hi Steve,

I know what you and everybody else here wants. But my research is beyond that. I am not important. The sources are.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

I think this one point needs to be made clear to you as I've seen you repeat this similar line of thinking often.

No one, other than yourself, gives one shite if you're wrong.



I thought 18 months ago arguing with Fisher that he was detrimental to the ripper field with his outlandish theory. However Fisher had the manhood to actually post his research for peer review and would respond when objections were made to his theory. He didn't worry about anyone stealing his suspect or anything of the sort. He said he had evidence and posted it.

For as much grief as I have given Fisher for his theory, he at least presented it. He can have pride in that. There's no pride in what you're doing. Actually, it's the exact opposite. Your actions seem to be controlled by fear and cowardice.

If you say so. But that does not help anyone with the case.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

To repeat a question Pierre seems to want to avoid answering: is it not obvious to a real historian like Pierre that there is a very great ethical difference between stating:

a) I accuse **** of having been the dastardly Whitechapel Murderer!

and

b) I am researching and compiling evidence relating to the possible involvement of **** in the murders. At this stage there is no proof and I have an open mind. Obviously I hope I am wrong, so I am putting his name out there in the hope that others might help me uncover definite proof that he was not the killer.

What would be unethical about (b) Pierre? Others either help you to prove that he was the killer (in which case the ethical problem disappears) or they more likely offer some simple piece of 'data' you have overlooked which proves the hypothesis wrong - in which case no ethical lapse takes place and you are, as you have always claimed, delighted to be proved wrong about him, and the great burden is lifted from your shoulders.

Why not do that Pierre?

Why not?

Because it is my case now.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

Ahh, so your suspect would be one more meaningless one. We already knew that.

Mike

It would be meaningless if the research was unfinished.

There are just two alternatives for me: no or yes.

Regards, Pierre

[Henry Flower]

I know what you and everybody else here wants. But my research is beyond that.

If that's true why not take your research somewhere else and stop killing the boards with your stupid game?

You are an ass.

[GUT]

If that's true why not take your research somewhere else and stop killing the boards with your stupid game?

You are an ass.

That's cruel and unnecessary.


Asses are useful.

[Hercule Poirot]

Because it is my case now.

Regards, Pierre

This whole thing has turned into a 'Me, myself and I' thing. Reminds me of Trump's narcisissim. Claims to be the greatest without delivering a single piece of evidence. A total waste of time.
Hercule Poirot

[GUT]

This whole thing has turned into a 'Me, myself and I' thing. Reminds me of Trump's narcisissim. Claims to be the greatest without delivering a single piece of evidence. A total waste of time.
Hercule Poirot

Yep me me me.

But produce nothing.

Claims to be a great historian, but every historian I've shown his BS to says no way, maybe have done junior high school history but if he went to uni his lecturers should be sacked.

[Dane_F]

If you say so. But that does not help anyone with the case.

Regards, Pierre

If you had the best interest of the case in mind you would have presented your theory long ago.

Your actions help you and you alone. Maybe if you spent less time posting on here and more time doing your research you'd actually have what you need instead of only thinking you had then proven wrong by an actual expert and better researchers.

[Graham]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been under the impression that one of the DON'Ts on these boards is to claim that you know the identity of the Ripper but won't/can't reveal a name?

Graham

[John Wheat]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been under the impression that one of the DON'Ts on these boards is to claim that you know the identity of the Ripper but won't/can't reveal a name?

Graham

I think you might be right Graham.

Cheers John

[Brenda]

.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been under the impression that one of the DON'Ts on these boards is to claim that you know the identity of the Ripper but won't/can't reveal a name?

Graham

I don't think our Admin cares.

I believe in having rules and following them, but I would be damned if I would allow one person to bring down my website I'd worked so many years to make top-notch in the interests of maintaining a "democracy". Because that's exactly what is happening.

It's just sad to come back here and see the same old stuff going on.

*Kudos to those that are still creating the interesting threads.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

I know what you and everybody else here wants. But my research is beyond that. I am not important. The sources are.

Regards, Pierre

Pierre


Please explain how this reply from you relates to the points made in the post you are replying to; it appears to be posted simply to make it seem that you are replying when orf course you certainly are not.


Why will you do anything but address the issue of the double standards of the ethical issue you are hiding behind.

I am not asking for a name here or even details of sources, so the premise in your reply is wrong!

Show some integrity and honest and answer the points raised in posts 538 and 542.



No you are certainly not important there we agree.

We have no idea if the sources are important given you refuse to divulge them, indeed we do not know if they really exist.


Steve

[Elamarna]

Because it is my case now.

Regards, Pierre

Your Case?

Are you laying a claim to ownership?

It really makes me wonder like your other statements: about needing to do this, owing it to history and telling the victim descendents personally, why there is this big personal need ?

What are you not say?

Or is it just ego and arrogance?


steve