Hi all,
I have to agree with Fish here. I wrote a study of the Nichols murder years ago (it's called 'Old Wounds' and is in the Dissertations section), and I came away from my research with the impression that both Cross and Paul touched the body. In fact, I would argue that the slight movement Paul wishfully thought was Nichols breathing was actually Cross slightly jarring the body.
Regarding what Garry and Fish are discussing, I have mixed feelings. Garry is absolutely correct in that it appears Fish has changed his longstanding beliefs on Stride (which used to be a major point of contention between he and myself), based solely on the fact that his new suspect's mum lived near Berner Street. This does seem disingenuous. However, we've all changed our minds on various aspects of the case and for various reasons, so why should Fish be an exception? If the study of his new suspect opened his mind to interpretations of the evidence that he'd been close-minded to before, then all the better.
But also, I was shocked to see Fish suggesting Garry should be banned. For what? Staying on topic in a thread and discussing the evidence? Granted, such behavior may no longer be the norm, but surely it's not an Admin issue? The reality Fish is that you're now in 'suspect theory' territory, which means you need to toughen up and prepare to have your character assassinated. You're getting off easy so far. Oh, by all means defend yourself and give as good as you get, but I think when you start threatening to go tell mommy you've rather lost the battle and are behaving like a wuss. So I say don't go there.
Also, some advice. It's difficult if not impossible to discuss a theory before you've published it. That's why I avoid any indepth discussions about Le Grand. I'll let the book I'm writing speak for itself. You should consider ceasing all discussion on this until your essay is published and we've had a chance to read it. Then discuss it ONLY with those who have read your essay.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
I have to agree with Fish here. I wrote a study of the Nichols murder years ago (it's called 'Old Wounds' and is in the Dissertations section), and I came away from my research with the impression that both Cross and Paul touched the body. In fact, I would argue that the slight movement Paul wishfully thought was Nichols breathing was actually Cross slightly jarring the body.
Regarding what Garry and Fish are discussing, I have mixed feelings. Garry is absolutely correct in that it appears Fish has changed his longstanding beliefs on Stride (which used to be a major point of contention between he and myself), based solely on the fact that his new suspect's mum lived near Berner Street. This does seem disingenuous. However, we've all changed our minds on various aspects of the case and for various reasons, so why should Fish be an exception? If the study of his new suspect opened his mind to interpretations of the evidence that he'd been close-minded to before, then all the better.
But also, I was shocked to see Fish suggesting Garry should be banned. For what? Staying on topic in a thread and discussing the evidence? Granted, such behavior may no longer be the norm, but surely it's not an Admin issue? The reality Fish is that you're now in 'suspect theory' territory, which means you need to toughen up and prepare to have your character assassinated. You're getting off easy so far. Oh, by all means defend yourself and give as good as you get, but I think when you start threatening to go tell mommy you've rather lost the battle and are behaving like a wuss. So I say don't go there.
Also, some advice. It's difficult if not impossible to discuss a theory before you've published it. That's why I avoid any indepth discussions about Le Grand. I'll let the book I'm writing speak for itself. You should consider ceasing all discussion on this until your essay is published and we've had a chance to read it. Then discuss it ONLY with those who have read your essay.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
Comment