Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would a Doctor or a Policeman participate in major crimes such as these?

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

  • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

    But that matching doesn't show the size of the pieces or the patch and more importantly, they didn't make up a full apron
    You keep stating your opinion as if it was fact. So far, you have provide no evidence that the two pieces didn't make up a full apron.

    Your opinion is unsafe.

    "The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren

    "Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer

    Comment


    • The Fisherman 'goodbye', 'just back to say, briefly' approach seems to be en vogue.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

        There’s only one person manipulation or censoring evidence and that you Trevor. And you’re clearly doing it to prop up your ‘new unestablished theory.’

        Welcome back.
        It would help if you also stopped referring to newspaper reports when there are officially signed depositions which are far more accurate

        Pc Long found the apron piece at 2.55am he would then do what he said in did in GS before taking it to Leman St police station a 7 minute walk so the GS piece could not have arrived at Leman St police station much before the body arrived at the mortuary at 3.15am

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

          Actually, the press often include more than the official papers, which do not by nature give full verbatim exchanges.
          That you ignore such just shows how poor you methodology and actual understanding is.
          The press reports are unsafe, and as can be seen often conflict with each other so I fully understand what you say but in this case, we have signed depositions and it is wrong to suggest that what is printed in a newspaper report was actually said in the way it has been reported. of reported correctly

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Fiver View Post

            You keep stating your opinion as if it was fact. So far, you have provide no evidence that the two pieces didn't make up a full apron.

            Your opinion is unsafe.
            and no one has produced any evidence to show that when matched they actually made up a full apron

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

              Please stop using testimony from newspapers when there are officially signed depositions which are far more accurate

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

              Like the officially signed deposition where Brown said that he match up the two parts using the patch?
              Regards

              Sir Herlock Sholmes.

              “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

              Comment


              • Originally posted by harry View Post
                Well Fiver,
                We are dicussinng murders .They are decided in courts of law.Proven or unproven is a result.

                That is the problem. Police didn't leave written reports,and some are lost,therefor their thoughts cannot be known

                Who are these multiple witnessses you claim saw Eddowes wearing an apron? List them.

                Brwns observations about the apron was at the Mortuary,not at the murder scene.What other witnesses claim to have seen him Match apron pieces.

                I said apparantly took over.
                Why do you need spoon feeding Harry.

                PC Robinson who arrested Eddowes and walked with her to the station where she was booked in.
                PC Hutt who was in charge of the prisoners in the station. He saw her several times in her cell during the course of the evening. Then he saw her being released and even spoke to her.
                Wilkinson the lodging house door man.

                All said that she was wearing an apron before her murder.

                Now I’m expecting you to say “yes but they didn’t check the label on the apron so we can’t say it was the same one!”

                She was wearing an apron. This is a fact.


                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                  But that matching doesn't show the size of the pieces or the patch and more importantly, they didn't make up a full apron

                  www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                  Firstly, no one ever stated that it didn’t make up a full apron.

                  Secondly, as we don’t have the information perhaps you could tell us how you’ve managed to create a diagram which you claim proves your point?

                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                  “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Elamarna View Post

                    Actually, the press often include more than the official papers, which do not by nature give full verbatim exchanges.
                    That you ignore such just shows how poor you methodology and actual understanding is.
                    Exactly. It’s called cherrypicking Steve.
                    Regards

                    Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                    “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Dickere View Post
                      The Fisherman 'goodbye', 'just back to say, briefly' approach seems to be en vogue.
                      Its like bands/singers who go on a ‘final tour.’

                      Regards

                      Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                      “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                        It would help if you also stopped referring to newspaper reports when there are officially signed depositions which are far more accurate

                        Pc Long found the apron piece at 2.55am he would then do what he said in did in GS before taking it to Leman St police station a 7 minute walk so the GS piece could not have arrived at Leman St police station much before the body arrived at the mortuary at 3.15am

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        Unlike some I have no problem admitting to an error. I should have said 2.55 instead of 2.20 of course. But it’s still nowhere near the ‘hours’ later that you tried to say. You made another non-point.

                        Regards

                        Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                        “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post


                          Like the officially signed deposition where Brown said that he match up the two parts using the patch?
                          that proves nothing, other than the two pieces matched and there is no issue with that

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                            Exactly. It’s called cherrypicking Steve.
                            Its called using the best primary evidence

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                              Its called using the best primary evidence :
                              In that case you'll no doubt be delighted to accept Hutt's signed deposition where he says;

                              "I noticed she was wearing an apron. I believe the one produced was the one she was wearing when she left the station"

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                                In that case you'll no doubt be delighted to accept Hutt's signed deposition where he says;

                                "I noticed she was wearing an apron. I believe the one produced was the one she was wearing when she left the station"
                                That doesn’t count when it works against Trevor though. You should know the rules by now Joshua.
                                Regards

                                Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                                “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X