Tweet
Ben, you bastard, you're bloody right about Hutch and Toppy !
Amitiés,
The Bastard Expert
Amitiés,
The Bastard Expert
-
-
Hi Ben,
See post #1243. It's all there.
Be good.
Love,
Caz
X"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov
Comment
-
Yes Ben, behave yourself! Surely you know attack is the first line of defence?
Your obsessed chick fan,
CrystalComment
-
That's the spirit, Dave!
Caz, you can't expect me to be "good".
Not when Crystal brings out my naughty side so well.
Comment
-
Having wiped off the last stains of beer from the moniter at having laughed so hard, I can only hope that Caz has been appeased, Gareth!
That was beautiful!
Best regards,
BenComment
-
Thanks, Ben - although the baritones need a bit more practice, I feel.Kind regards, Sam Flynn
"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)Comment
-
...and we've got no evidence that they are Sue Iremonger's relatives, Sam.
Amitiés,
DavidComment
-
Okay, everybody!
As you will know, I wrote to SKL to get some general information on signatures, and I posted the resulting answer from Frank Leander a few pages back.
This response from the SKL was something I had not counted on - I did not know to what degree they would help nosy citizens prying into other countries criminal history. And so, I was happy to receive such a generous answer.
In fact, I was so encouraged as to copy Sams board of signatures from page 57 on this thread and forward it to Frank Leander, humbly asking if he could possibly ponder to ...??
And he did! Therefore, I can now publish the wiews of one of the most renowned Swedish forensic document examiners. The translation from Swedish to English is something I have taken care of myself, and to verify it all, I also post the Swedish version in the end of my post.
Here it is:
"Hello again!
I wish to strongly underline your wiew that comparing research into signatures must be done using the original material and I/we would not have the possibility to write a full expert´s opinion on the material supplied. Under the circumstances, however, I would like to express myself thusly:
It cannot be ruled out that we are dealing with the same person - there is a number of matches of a common character (character of style, degree of writing skill, the spreading of the text, certain proportions), and, as far as can be judged from the copy there are also a number of matches when it comes to the shapes of single letters.
Against these matches one must pose differences in certain liftings of the pen (?), the proportions of the tch-group and the perhaps most eyecatching differences in the shaping of some of the letters; G (the ground-shape), r and n at the end of the signature.
The differences could be explained by H. being relatively young at the first writing occasion, the surrounding circumstances as available writing space, function of the pen and similar things. The signature at the top is unquestionably the one that differs most at any rate.
In conclusion, you must see this as a spontaneous, personal comment from me and not as a full expert opinion, since such things cannot be done from a material like this!
Good luck with the hunt!
Frank Leander"
What is very interesting here is that Leander tells me that the fact that Hutch was a young man may have played a role - for I never told Leander his age! I have written back since, and asked if this was something Leander could conclude from the text, and I am much intrigued to find out.
It shuld be added that the signatures from Sams post was all I supplied Leander with, together with the information on when they were written and the fact that the one at the top was the only one where we were not sure if we were dealing with the same writer.
Therefore, Leander did not know, for example, that the finishing n could be written by Toppy without that upward-pointing curl. Nor did he know that there was only a very limited set of George Hutchinson´s about at the right time and place. Or, for that matter, that Toppys own son(s) had witnessed about him being the witness.
I have told him this in my latest letter (the one asking how he concluded that the writer of the police report signature was young), and if he takes the time to answer me again, I will let you all know.
Until that time, we can ponder that a top authority in the field tells us that although there are differences in a few singled-out letters and the tch-group (differences that can be explained and overcome by a number of things, according to Leander!), the overall character of style and the writing skills - and that means nothing but the overall impression! - involved tell us that we may certainly be looking at the same writer!
So, here we have a renowned expert´s opinion on the matter, bolstered with the details that he used to reach his conclusions - the way that it should be. And to me, it all reinforces what I have said all along: The possibility that George William Topping Hutchinson was the Dorset Street witness is and remains a clear and obvious one.
And by now, we have one of Swedens foremost experts in the field telling us that the signatures DO tally in so high a degree that it can be safely said that they may well have been written by the same man!
As promised, I end my post by offering a lesson in the much dreaded Swedish language. Enjoy!
The best,
Fisherman
Hej igen!
Jag vill starkt understryka din uppfattning om att jämförande undersökningar av namnteckningar måste ske med originalmaterial och jag/vi skulle inte ha möjlighet att skriva något sakkunnigutlåtande på bifogat material. Under de omständigheter som gäller skulle jag dock vilja uttrycka mig enligt följande:
Det går knappast att utesluta att det rör sig om samma person - det finns ett antal överensstämmelser av allmän karaktär (stilkaraktären, graden av skrivskicklighet, skriftens utbredning, vissa proportioner) och såvitt kan bedömas från kopian också några formöverensstämmelser beträffande enskilda bokstäver. Mot dessa likheter måste dock ställas olikheter gällande vissa pennlyftningar (?), proportionerna i tch-gruppen samt de kanske mest iögonfallande skillnaderna i några bokstavsformer; G (grundformen), r och n i slutet av namnteckningen. Olikheterna skulle kunna förklaras av att H. är relativt ung vid det första skrivtillfället, skrivomständigheterna såsom tillgängligt skrivutrymme, pennans funktion eller liknande. Den översta namnteckningen bryter dock av mest från de övriga, helt klart.
Sammanfattningsvis, du får se ovanstående som en spontan, personlig kommentar från mig och inte som ett professionellt handstilsutlåtande för det kan det ju aldrig bli tal om när materialet ser ut som det gör!
Lycka till med spaningen!
Frank LeanderComment
-
I'm not getting involved. I'm not getting involved. I'm not (Toppy is Hutch) getting involved.
Mikehuh?Comment
-
Excuse me Fisherman, but that was a SWEDISH document examiner when we are dealing with BRITISH signatures. I'm afraid we have to toss that out. Sorry, but it just must be so.
Mikehuh?Comment
-
Hi Fish,
just an idea, ask him about the capital G -1888 and 1898.
Amitiés mon cher,
DavidComment
-
Mike writes:
"that was a SWEDISH document examiner when we are dealing with BRITISH signatures"
Holy crap, Mike - I never thought of that! Well, then, back to the drawing board ...
The best,
FishermanComment
-
David writes:
"Hi Fish,
just an idea, ask him about the capital G -1888 and 1898."
But he´s SEEN both of them G:s, David. They were involved in the material. And in represented no obstacle that could not be overcome to his eyes.
Of course, I did not ask him specifically, but if he had seen them as totally incomparable, he would surely have remarked on that.
The best,
FishermanComment
Sink the Bismark
Comment