Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson?

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

  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    Chandlers shops, yes, but fried fish shops?

    I can’t imagine McCarthy serving fish and chips at 2 in the morning.
    In the 1895 P.O. Street Directory there was a Fried Fish shop at 98 Commercial St., just seven doors north of the Ten Bells.
    It was not there in the 1882 Directory, so was it there in 1888?

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    You get things wrong, repeatedly, and apologise for your lack of knowledge.
    On the irrelevant minutiae that you like to correct. I don't have a problem with that but trying to belittle others doesn't make your position any better and if you think it does then you need to revise that irrational fallacious position.

    You are not special privileged to know more either so get off that high horse. It's boring and irrelevant.

    If you want to discuss her meal fine. If you want to discuss me I'll just hit block and be done with it fast. I'm like that.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    You are not in any position to judge anyone here. I point to Sudgen, Begg and Casebook references.

    You reference what?

    Yourself usually.
    You get things wrong, repeatedly, and apologise for your lack of knowledge.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    Just go back to mushy pea fish suppers or sausage in batter while watching reruns of Morecambe and Wise on VHS and put the guesses aside. Maybe Cannon and Ball's The Boys in Blue would be apt for now.
    'Mushy Pea fish suppers?'

    You've been Googling again.

    Try some real research and you might learn something

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    A perfect summary of your grasp of the case.
    You are not in any position to judge anyone here. I point to Sudgen, Begg and Casebook references.

    You reference what?

    Yourself usually.

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    My dad wasn't born in the East End.

    Yours?

    I'm guessing he was born much further west. So much further that he probably never ate fish and chips from newspaper. But perhaps his son did, and took note of how closely a soiled fish and chip wrapper resembled American cloth.
    Just go back to mushy pea fish suppers or sausage in batter while watching reruns of Morecambe and Wise on VHS and put the guesses aside. Maybe Cannon and Ball's The Boys in Blue would be apt for now.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    I have said Fish and Potatoes plenty of times. You know this. Someone said chips. It's a moot point.

    Point is fish and potatoes were likely to be the staple diet of Dorset St. residents and I think the fact Hutchinson said Thrall St., where there is a Chandlery that is associated with George Yard buildings on the night of Tabram's murder of interest.

    That's not a moot point.
    A perfect summary of your grasp of the case.

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    I hadn’t realised that ‘supper’ invariably meant fish and chips. Where did you learn that from - Tom, Casebook, Sugden, Begg...?

    Why on earth would any serious researcher give a 21st century theorist’s version of late 19th century events as their source?
    I have said Fish and Potatoes plenty of times. You know this. Someone said chips. It's a moot point.

    Point is fish and potatoes were likely to be the staple diet of Dorset St. residents and I think the fact Hutchinson said Thrall St., where there is a Chandlery that is associated with George Yard buildings on the night of Tabram's murder of interest.

    That's not a moot point.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    It really does seem to me you want to play the game of "whose East End Dad is bigger, yours or mine".

    Why not just come out and say 'Only people from the East End' can understand the matters of this case and see how that plays out on the board?
    My dad wasn't born in the East End.

    Yours?

    I'm guessing he was born much further west. So much further that he probably never ate fish and chips from newspaper. But perhaps his son did, and took note of how closely a soiled fish and chip wrapper resembled American cloth.
    Last edited by MrBarnett; 12-02-2018, 05:08 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    You are not making any sense.

    Here you seem to doubt you can get a fish and chip supper in the wee hours of the morning.



    As I pointed out...

    At 1:40a.m. on the morning of the murder, Joseph and Elizabeth Mahoney returned home to their rooms at 37 George Yard Building after having enjoyed the bank holiday out. After getting Joseph settled, Elizabeth left again to fetch some supper from a chandler’s shop on Thrawl Street, returning within five minutes. - Wescott, Tom. The Bank Holiday Murders.

    We know you have a problem with Wescott's book but he is not the only source for this.

    I quoted Sugden and Begg plenty of times, so that collapses your idea I just use Casebook, which you seem to loath.


    I hadn’t realised that ‘supper’ invariably meant fish and chips. Where did you learn that from - Tom, Casebook, Sugden, Begg...?

    Why on earth would any serious researcher give a 21st century theorist’s version of late 19th century events as their source?

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    Why kippers in particular? Have you been reading Sherlock Holmes?

    Why not kedgeree?

    ��
    It really does seem to me you want to play the game of "whose East End Dad is bigger, yours or mine".

    Why not just come out and say 'Only people from the East End' can understand the matters of this case and see how that plays out on the board?

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post
    It has no impact on the facts, but it does on your ability to interpret them.

    You seem to rely almost entirely on Casebook for your sources. Even then, you often misread or misunderstand them.

    The fact that you frequently put ‘The Bank Holiday Murders’ forward as a source speaks volumes.
    You are not making any sense.

    Here you seem to doubt you can get a fish and chip supper in the wee hours of the morning.



    As I pointed out...

    At 1:40a.m. on the morning of the murder, Joseph and Elizabeth Mahoney returned home to their rooms at 37 George Yard Building after having enjoyed the bank holiday out. After getting Joseph settled, Elizabeth left again to fetch some supper from a chandler’s shop on Thrawl Street, returning within five minutes. - Wescott, Tom. The Bank Holiday Murders.

    We know you have a problem with Wescott's book but he is not the only source for this.

    I quoted Sugden and Begg plenty of times, so that collapses your idea I just use Casebook, which you seem to loath.
    Last edited by Batman; 12-02-2018, 04:04 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    Kippers would have been a popular breakfast.

    I think it's established that suppers could be got late.

    It's a solid fact she ate fish and potatoes.

    Also foreign ways of carrying food should be considered along with a cloth also being possible wrap.

    I think some people might be doubting Hutchinson's account so much that the idea Hutchinson actually saw a guy with a hot meal packages to also be imagined.

    Yet it's a fact she ate this before she was murdered.
    Why kippers in particular? Have you been reading Sherlock Holmes?

    Why not kedgeree?

    ��
    Last edited by MrBarnett; 12-02-2018, 04:02 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Batman View Post
    I really don't see how that being true or false can impact any fact on these matters.

    So back to my reply.

    I would like to know how we know the exact times.

    I think that between 11 and 12 everything including Doss houses are shutting up and it's all done by 12:30. However, Lawende and company stayed in a club until 1:30 am. Chandlery shops stay open to serve suppers to people going home. Open late on holidays?

    Also, what's your point?
    It has no impact on the facts, but it does on your ability to interpret them.

    You seem to rely almost entirely on Casebook for your sources. Even then, you often misread or misunderstand them.

    The fact that you frequently put ‘The Bank Holiday Murders’ forward as a source speaks volumes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Batman
    replied
    Kippers would have been a popular breakfast.

    I think it's established that suppers could be got late.

    It's a solid fact she ate fish and potatoes.

    Also foreign ways of carrying food should be considered along with a cloth also being possible wrap.

    I think some people might be doubting Hutchinson's account so much that the idea Hutchinson actually saw a guy with a hot meal packages to also be imagined.

    Yet it's a fact she ate this before she was murdered.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X