Some questions re. Lechmere

[David Orsam]

Some say kneeling, they're wrong.

Thank you for making my point for me Columbo. Some would say "kneeling", exactly. That's what people say. They might not technically be correct but that's how it is used in normal every day speech.

[Columbo]

And even more time involving yourself in it?

Without a doubt!

Columbo

[MrBarnett]

Absolutely ridiculous argument, and I wasted time reading it!

Columbo

And even more time involving yourself in it?

[Columbo]

David,

If the knee isn't touching the floor, it is not providing support, the foot is. I thought Casebook had reached the bottom of the barrel with Pierre's insistence that 'closing time' had something to do with road closure. I was wrong: this site has become so 'clever' it's absurd.

Gary

Absolutely ridiculous argument, and I wasted time reading it!

Columbo

[Columbo]

Yes I'm agreeing - and have already agreed - but that knee doesn't have to touch the floor. You can support yourself on bended knee or knees which don't touch the floor. English is my first language and if I kneel down outside in the street to do something, say tie my shoelace, I'm not going to place my knee on the ground. I don't crouch down to tie my shoelace I kneel down to do it. Same if I was going to kneel down temporarily to check if someone was breathing in the street.

It's not even important because by kneeling - however he did it - it doesn't mean that Paul would automatically have got blood on his trousers.

No you would technically crouch to tie your shoe. Some say kneeling, they're wrong.

Columbo

[MrBarnett]

Yes I'm agreeing - and have already agreed - but that knee doesn't have to touch the floor. You can support yourself on bended knee or knees which don't touch the floor. English is my first language and if I kneel down outside in the street to do something, say tie my shoelace, I'm not going to place my knee on the ground. I don't crouch down to tie my shoelace I kneel down to do it. Same if I was going to kneel down temporarily to check if someone was breathing in the street.

It's not even important because by kneeling - however he did it - it doesn't mean that Paul would automatically have got blood on his trousers.

David,

If the knee isn't touching the floor, it is not providing support, the foot is. I thought Casebook had reached the bottom of the barrel with Pierre's insistence that 'closing time' had something to do with road closure. I was wrong: this site has become so 'clever' it's absurd.

Gary

[David Orsam]

No, David, that's not how people with English as a first language speak. 'Kneeling' means supporting oneself by one or more knees.

Yes I'm agreeing - and have already agreed - but that knee doesn't have to touch the floor. You can support yourself on bended knee or knees which don't touch the floor. English is my first language and if I kneel down outside in the street to do something, say tie my shoelace, I'm not going to place my knee on the ground. I don't crouch down to tie my shoelace I kneel down to do it. Same if I was going to kneel down temporarily to check if someone was breathing in the street.

It's not even important because by kneeling - however he did it - it doesn't mean that Paul would automatically have got blood on his trousers.

[MrBarnett]

I posted five links images there of people who I would say are kneeling but who you prefer to say crouching. And I could have posted many more. It's really much of a muchness. This is Wiki:

"To crouch means "to bend down; to stoop low; to lie close to the ground with legs bent, as an animal when waiting for prey or in fear."

Crouching may involve squatting or kneeling"

It's a variation of the same thing. That's how people speak Gary. I've no doubt that was the same in 1888 for all classes.

The real issue here, however, is that I managed to find those five images immediately from a Google images search of the word "kneeling" yet Fisherman who did the same search appears to have missed them all. Funny that.

No, David, that's not how people with English as a first language speak. 'Kneeling' means supporting oneself by one or more knees.

[David Orsam]

Fish,

I think we may have to eat our words.

David has managed to Google an image of a crouching man with the caption:

'Portait of a smiling cute guy kneeling over the white background'

Obviously the last word on late Victorian working class English usage.

Gary

I posted five links images there of people who I would say are kneeling but who you prefer to say crouching. And I could have posted many more. It's really much of a muchness. This is Wiki:

"To crouch means "to bend down; to stoop low; to lie close to the ground with legs bent, as an animal when waiting for prey or in fear."

Crouching may involve squatting or kneeling"

It's a variation of the same thing. That's how people speak Gary. I've no doubt that was the same in 1888 for all classes.

The real issue here, however, is that I managed to find those five images immediately from a Google images search of the word "kneeling" yet Fisherman who did the same search appears to have missed them all. Funny that.

[MrBarnett]

Fish,

I think we may have to eat our words.

David has managed to Google an image of a crouching man with the caption:

'Portait of a smiling cute guy 'kneeling' over the white background'

Obviously the last word on late Victorian working class English usage.

Gary

[David Orsam]

Sorry about that. I mistakenly thought that "I assume you must feel that the documentary made a huge error by omitting such a key part of the evidence?" was a question.

You really must concentrate Fisherman. I was talking about my #76 obviously. Because I said you had successfully managed to divert attention away from the issues I raised. There were no questions in that post. And, in any case, no, when I said "I assume you must feel...." I wasn't being so foolish as to ask you a question (because you don't answer them).

[Pierre]

Sorry about that. I mistakenly thought that "I assume you must feel that the documentary made a huge error by omitting such a key part of the evidence?" was a question.

Goodnight now, Sir David.

Yes, indeed. Sir David is the one who must concentrate.

Regards, Pierre

[Fisherman]

Do concentrate Fisherman. I wasn't asking you any questions on this occasion. Because THAT would be a waste of time. I was saying that you simply avoided the issues I raised in my post.

Sorry about that. I mistakenly thought that "I assume you must feel that the documentary made a huge error by omitting such a key part of the evidence?" was a question.

Goodnight now, Sir David.

[David Orsam]

"Based on the premise" is not a valid situation in a court room, David. If you are accused for having murdered X1 and the judge says that you also will be convicted for murdering X2, X3, X4 and X5 without trial for each of these murders, you would not accept that, and you would ask why. And then they would tell you "this is our premise". You would certainly not accept that. And this is not how the legal system works.

We are not in a court room Pierre.

As you have said yourself many times on this forum.

If one is trying to establish who Jack the Ripper was, this is not going to be established in a criminal trial due to the death of all the suspects. It will be established, after hearing the arguments in favour, by experts on the subject who are familiar with the facts of the case. People known as Ripperologists.

And those arguments - those historical arguments - can be, perhaps must be, based on a premise or two. That is how historians work Pierre.

[Columbo]

Who said Paul was looking to see "the frost of breath" coming from Nichols' mouth? The Times said that he knelt down to try and hear her breathe.

oops