Hutch in the 1911 Census?

[Crystal]

Utter, utter, nonsense.

You already HAVE made slanderous comments on this thread, concerning myself and other posters.

It will be plainly clear to anyone reading those translations side by side that yours suits your agenda rather too well.

My stance has nothing to do with my view on Hutch. It has everything to do with your persistence in LYING about other people on this thread.

As to the notion that you don't twist words - Hah!

Pull the other one.

[Ben]

Many thanks indeed for providing the above translation, Crystal, and I extend the same to your Swedish friend, of course.

It is refreshing to see Leander's initial caution and circumspection further underscored. On the strength of the above, I can only echo your view that such unambiguously neutral stance was unlikely to mutate over time to the point of coming down on one side or the other. There is clearly no talk of the "positive end of the scale" here, let alone any insuination of "probability". With the above in mind, the very notion that Leander's views somehow "offset" yours or those of Sue Iremonger can safely be eradicated, as can the suggestion that the "Hutch wasn't Toppy" premise is in any way "damaged" by anything he said.

Many thanks again!

Ben

[The Good Michael]

I don't know what anyone else read, but I read that the examiner leans in the favor of Toppy as Hutch. Fisherman did nothing to mislead. He spelled out the intentions of Leander's message, in my opinion. Because he did that, he clarified Leander's intent. I don't think that's misleading.

Cheers,

Mike

[Crystal]

Thanks Ben.

I would hope - I expect forlornly - that Fisherman would now stop painting you as irrational and obsessed, since the boot seems to fit him rather better.

Cx

[Crystal]

I don't know what anyone else read, but I read that the examiner leans in the favor of Toppy as Hutch. Fisherman did nothing to mislead. He spelled out the intentions of Leander's message, in my opinion. Because he did that, he clarified Leander's intent. I don't think that's misleading.

Cheers,

Mike

'Anyone else' - assuming them to be without a rampant Toppy bias, would read it as neutral. Because it is.

[The Good Michael]

Crap.

Bathroom's down the hall and to the left.

Mike

[Crystal]

Does it double up as a dining room?

[The Good Michael]

Does it double up as a dining room?

By all means. Take a bite of what you serve.

Mike

[Fisherman]

I will make one more point before I leave this thread. It concerns the core of this discussion - who lies, who twistes, who tells the truth, who has honest intentions?

Crystal, or a friend of hers, called Frank Leander, to check my veracity. So she tells us. She is not willing, however to share what came out of that conversation: "As for Leander, well, I will post what he said in due course", she says.

That relates to my post where I said that Crystals allegations that I was responsible for numerous faulty statements were left unsubstantiated, and where I said that it seemed nothing had come from the call she had made, that could point to any dishonesty from either Leander or me.

I have now checked with Leander if he has received the call Crystal claims was made, and where she will relate the results in due time. It now emerges that NO call was made - he has not had anything to do in any form in this errand other than with me.
So Crystal has been intentionally misleading us all here - at least I can find no other explanation.

In light of this, I think that Crystal may not be the best of sources when it comes to pointing out who should be ashamed of themselves and who need not be.

Fisherman

[Crystal]

Leaving so soon, Fish?

Oh Dear.

[The Good Michael]

Fisherman,

I believe you completely. Why someone would deceive is beyond me. You haven't done that. Trust me. I have faith in you on this.

Mike

[Crystal]

Well, that's lovely Mike

But it isn't a matter for faith, is it?

[The Good Michael]

Crystal,

I have faith that you're a liar. Therefore, I believe Fisherman. It's as simple as anything... as you even.

Mike

[Ben]

No, Fisherman.

Here is what Crystal said:

"As for Leander, well, I will post what he said in due course."

She was, of course, referring to "what he said" in his initial latter, as translated by her Swedish friend. And true to her word, she did produce "what he said" in due course, hence the appearance of that translation today.

[babybird67]

Michael

that comment was a little below the belt dont you think?

I think it's plain that document examiners can't really give professional opinions when they havent actually seen the documents to do so, don't you?