Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson

[Fisherman]

Can you post them.

I thought you were talking about complete reports, if it's only two we have no idea what may be in the others.

If you had not added the last sentence, I would gladly have posted them. If it is not enough for you that the police almost two full months after the murder referred to the carman as Cross, then I fear nothing is good enough for you.

On the 19:th of October, they either did n ot have his real name, or they chose to leave it out of their reports for some unfathomable reason. Maybe you can suggest something colourful, though?

If you want to live in denial, why would I stand in your way?

Iīm sure there are hundreds of other reports where both names were mentioned. All sadly lost, and all sadly failing to clear the carman on this point.

[GUT]

If you had not added the last sentence, I would gladly have posted them. If it is not enough for you that the police almost two full months after the murder referred to the carman as Cross, then I fear nothing is good enough for you.

On the 19:th of October, they either did n ot have his real name, or they chose to leave it out of their reports for some unfathomable reason. Maybe you can suggest something colourful, though?

If you want to live in denial, why would I stand in your way?

Iīm sure there are hundreds of other reports where both names were mentioned. All sadly lost, and all sadly failing to clear the carman on this point.

Typical. If you've got em post em otherwise you're just another Pierre.

[John Wheat]

I would gladly discuss the facts, but there has to be some sort of level of decency. Try again, if you really want a debate.
If you just want to call people names, then donīt try again.

I won't apologise for telling it like it is. However I'm feeling charitable. So my question is how are you the person who has written the most about Lechmere, the person who has started the most threads about Lechmere and the person who has done the most research into Lechmere not the biggest Lechmere fanatic?

[Fisherman]

I won't apologise for telling it like it is. However I'm feeling charitable. So my question is how are you the person who has written the most about Lechmere, the person who has started the most threads about Lechmere and the person who has done the most research into Lechmere not the biggest Lechmere fanatic?

fanatic
noun
1. a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.

So, John, fanatism lies in loosing touch with reality.

Like in thinking that a changed name in combination with an inquest is not something that could be remotely suspicious.

Like in claiming that the name issue is the only point against Lechmere - and that per se, it is not a point against him at all.

Like in arguing the way you do, wishing egg on your opponents faces and rejoicing in hoping that they are wrong. Itīs a hilarious example of a wet dream.

[John Wheat]

I would gladly discuss the facts, but there has to be some sort of level of decency. Try again, if you really want a debate.
If you just want to call people names, then donīt try again.

fanatic
noun
1. a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.

So, John, fanatism lies in loosing touch with reality.

Like in thinking that a changed name in combination with an inquest is not something that could be remotely suspicious.

Like in claiming that the name issue is the only point against Lechmere - and that per se, it is not a point against him at all.

Like in arguing the way you do, wishing egg on your opponents faces and rejoicing in hoping that they are wrong. Itīs a hilarious example of a wet dream.

You have not answered the question and you are being absurd. You are clearly a Lechmere fanatic as you are convinced he was Jack because he found a body and used a false name even though that name could easily be traced back to him.

[Fisherman]

You have not answered the question and you are being absurd. You are clearly a Lechmere fanatic as you are convinced he was Jack because he found a body and used a false name even though that name could easily be traced back to him.

Once again, being convinced of something has nothing to do with being a fanatic. I am convinced the earth is round, for example, and that you are - sadly - posting drivel out here. Both things are demonstrably true, and very unfanatic.

It has also been pointed out to you that the name issue is neither the sole not the main reason that I find Lechmere the best suspect there is.

Fanatism is trying to deny this.

And now I have spent more than enough time on you. I have no illusions of any progress on your behalf, and I dislike wasting time.

Goodbye.

[Fisherman]

Typical. If you've got em post em otherwise you're just another Pierre.

No, I am not, since I stated the origins. You are welcome to look them up in the literature, they are frequently quoted there. They are substanial reports, both of them. I suggest The Ultimate Sourcebook by Evans. The latter of the reports is signed Donald Swanson.
Happy hunting.

Unless, of course, you choose to trust me...? Otherwise, search the site with the three parameters Swanson, report and october. I checked the dates, they are correct.

[John Wheat]

Once again, being convinced of something has nothing to do with being a fanatic. I am convinced the earth is round, for example, and that you are - sadly - posting drivel out here. Both things are demonstrably true, and very unfanatic.

It has also been pointed out to you that the name issue is neither the sole not the main reason that I find Lechmere the best suspect there is.

Fanatism is trying to deny this.

And now I have spent more than enough time on you. I have no illusions of any progress on your behalf, and I dislike wasting time.

Goodbye.

As usual you are wrong. Lechmere is a terrible suspect at best. Bury is clearly the best Ripper suspect by several country miles. With you it is like banging my head against a brick wall. I think you'll find it's you that's made no progress. You're failure to admit you are the biggest Lechmere fanatic is frankly slightly worrying and says a lot about you.

[Fisherman]

As usual you are wrong. Lechmere is a terrible suspect at best. Bury is clearly the best Ripper suspect by several country miles. With you it is like banging my head against a brick wall. I think you'll find it's you that's made no progress. You're failure to admit you are the biggest Lechmere fanatic is frankly slightly worrying and says a lot about you.

Would you categorize yourself as the biggest Bury fanatic? Or as a Bury fanatic overall?

[John Wheat]

Would you categorize yourself as the biggest Bury fanatic? Or as a Bury fanatic overall?

I would say it's debatable as to wether I am the biggest Bury fanatic. However as regards Bury I'm probably right.

[Fisherman]

I would say it's debatable as to wether I am the biggest Bury fanatic. However as regards Bury I'm probably right.

Letīs not debate it at all. Letīs just hear you say whether YOU categorize yourself as a Bury fanatic or not.

[John Wheat]

Letīs not debate it at all. Letīs just hear you say whether YOU categorize yourself as a Bury fanatic or not.

Going by your definition of a fanatic I am clearly not one however that definition is one definition of a fanatic and is not gospel. I may fit other definitions of a fanatic. A fanatic could be described as someone who is heavily into something or someone this could be a pop star. If fanatic could be used to describe someone who is heavily into the idea that Bury was Jack the Ripper then I would say I am a Bury fanatic by that definition as you are heavily into Lechmere being The Ripper then that would also make you a fanatic.

[Fisherman]

Going by your definition of a fanatic I am clearly not one however that definition is one definition of a fanatic and is not gospel. I may fit other definitions of a fanatic. A fanatic could be described as someone who is heavily into something or someone this could be a pop star. If fanatic could be used to describe someone who is heavily into the idea that Bury was Jack the Ripper then I would say I am a Bury fanatic by that definition as you are heavily into Lechmere being The Ripper then that would also make you a fanatic.

I am not asking you whether you think it possible that some definitions may fit you when it comes to fanatism.
I am asking you to state clearly whether you yourself would describe yourself - a man who just crashed into another thread stating that the suspect discussed there is nowhere near as good as Bury, and who just stated that Bury is way ahead of any other suspect - a Bury fanatic.

Do you think you can manage a "Yes, I consider myself a Bury fanatic" or a "No, I donīt consider myself a Bury fanatic"? Or is the question too demanding?

[John Wheat]

Letīs not debate it at all. Letīs just hear you say whether YOU categorize yourself as a Bury fanatic or not.

I am not asking you whether you think it possible that some definitions may fit you when it comes to fanatism.
I am asking you to state clearly whether you yourself would describe yourself - a man who just crashed into another thread stating that the suspect discussed there is nowhere near as good as Bury, and who just stated that Bury is way ahead of any other suspect - a Bury fanatic.

Do you think you can manage a "Yes, I consider myself a Bury fanatic" or a "No, I donīt consider myself a Bury fanatic"? Or is the question too demanding?

I have answered your question. It is you who has complicated matters by giving a very hardline definition of a fanatic that would seem to only fit religious lunatics.

[Fisherman]

I have answered your question. It is you who has complicated matters by giving a very hardline definition of a fanatic that would seem to only fit religious lunatics.

Not at all. YOU and nobody else introduced the term fanatic, and you and nobody else must therefore define things. You claim that I am a Lechmere fanatic, but you refuse to state whether you are a Bury fanatic.

Thanks for the thoroughly illuminating exchange.