The Statement of George Hutchinson

[babybird67]

ahhhhh

so it was Kew in Japan you went to? Now i get it.

[Observer]

HI

You know it's a pity we can't get a professional document examiner to peruse the signatures of some of the posters to this site.
all the best

Observer

[The Good Michael]

You know it's a pity we can't get a professional document examiner to peruse the signatures of some of the posters to this site.

That would be a graphologist; someone who reads personality traits from writing. Similar to tea leaves, astrology, phrenology, and religion.

Mike

[Christine]

A document examiner is not a graphologist, although someone can be both. A document examiner does not attempt to determine someone's personality. A document examiner could express an opinion on whether Toppy was Hutch or whether Abberline or someone else made notes, but he would have nothing to say about personality.

[Crystal]

As indeed, I don't. Haven't. Wouldn't. And quite right too. In my field of vision, handwriting traits are demonstrable from the physical evidence. I don't read personalities from text. In the case of Badham, ther3e are several to see. You can all go to Kew yourselves and look at the microfiche. It's free. Anyone can do it.

[Archaic]

KRESKIN'S KRYSTAL, Anyone?

Well, we needed another expert, and an unbiased one.

Hey, guys, maybe I can help. Guess what I got for Christmas? A genuine vintage 1971 KRESKIN'S KRYSTAL, complete in the original box. It is an advanced scientific instrument composed of a 'Crystal Base' (actually a block of Acrylic) inscribed YES/NO on opposing sides- twice each. There is a real faux-gold chain with an Acrylic Marble or something dangling at one end. There's also a handy 36-page Owners Manual which begins: ''Kreskin's Krystal is a Highly Sensitive Apparatus consisting of a Crystal Base and Pendulum. Its operation is based solely on sound Psychological Principles; there is nothing Supernatural or Occult in its functioning. Developed by Kreskin, Internationally Acclaimed Mentalist & ESP Expert.''

The box says: ''Use Kreskin's Krystal as a Lie Detector, a Sex Detector'' (his bad grammar, not mine) ''Hold the Pendulum over someone's hand. When held over a Female hand, the Pendulum will Swing in a Circle. When held over a Male hand, it will Swing either Horizontally or Vertically'' (!!! Duh.)

All you have to do is clear your mind, hold the pendulum by its chain, and Voila!- Yes/No Answers at your beck and call.
>> Any Questions? -Archaic (please don't be silly & ask who was Jack the Ripper- it has to be Yes/No)

[Ben]

I think you'll find it was you who introduced the idea of 'erroneous' information being 'fed' to Sue

Nope.

Definitely you.

In fact, I didn't even consider that possibility until you mentioned it.

So thanks - really thanks! - for enlightening me as to the possibility.

But pease don't back-peddle, in truly embarrassing fashion, by pretending that you claimed you knew that possibilty was wrong.

You never insinuated that it was "wrong" in your first post where that possibility was introduced, and even if you did, you'd be in error, since you've no way of knowing whether it was wrong or not.

So your suggestion remains a strong one, not that it matters much who made it in the first place. It doesn't matter if the hypothetical origin of that suggestion was new to the discussion either. He wouldn't merely be "forgiven" for submitting it for consideration. He ought to be congratulated, since its potential merit is blindingly obvious.

Because, my dear Crystal, a flawed expert is a flawed expert is a flawed expert

So, you're saying that an expert can only be "non-flawed" if he or she gets everything right all the time? Are you sure you're thinking these things through?

[Ally]

i dont understand this...havoc?.... I do not understand what has been misrepresented here either...

Two words: Romford Rose.

[Ben]

And as for the ridiculous aspersions cast in Crystal's direction.

Yes, I know precisely what her credentials are. In addition to which, here's a clue - you cannot enter the conservation room and handle the original document as Crystal has done unless you are a professional in the field. I know for certain that she did precisely that, and I have pictorial evidence of her findings. So too do a number of other posters. They are fully in the picture as to the extent of Crystal's experience and professionalism.

The truth is that the vast majority of decent people are behind Crystal's enlightening and proactive efforts.

Another ugly and ever-present reality is that Crystal has been the subject of a great deal of personal abuse, both publicly and privately, and her only "crime" is her association with me. Parasitical efforts have been made to discourage Crystal from having anything to do with me, and in the cases where those efforts proved unsuccessful, she was made a target of what can only be described as a hate campaign, albeit of the "Damn her for not listening to me when I urged her to accept that Ben's a bastard and agree with me instead!" variety. The orchestrators were a blissfully limited bunch, but they are also distressingly vocal.

Crystal had earlier expressed her intention to divulge her credentials to anyone who cared to contact her, but since the vitriol started, and the nasty insinuations about her motivations commenced, she grew less inclined to do that. Is anyone really surprised about that? She has a reputation to protect, not to mention a responsibility to her employers. I'd be just as discouraged if faced with the degree of hostility Crystal was subjected to, and all because she had the audacity to agree with Big Bad Ben.

Well, if people wish to doubt her, go right ahead.

I'll lose some sleep over it, but I can assure you that Crystal will lose none.

Just don't expect me to stop referring to her as the experienced professional I know full well she is. Argue against it, and I'll argue back, and round and round we will go. Anyone fancy that? I do.

I think most of us are aware of the truth of the matter.

[Ally]

Oh what a crock of crap. First of all, so far, there has been no verified proof Crystal went to Kew.

Second, if people are heaping doubt or casting aspersions on her reliability and honesty, she damn well should have thought of that likely outcome before she invented a sock puppet and attempted to stir up even more sht on the Hutchinson thread.

An action for which she has yet to apologize to the people in the chatroom she attempted to dupe and fool into saying crap in some pathetic "spy" attempt. Or whatever it was.

If she doesn't have the basic decency to apologize to the people she attempted to screw over and hoodwink, who the hell does she or anyone else think she is that her word should be seen as good enough?

A simple statement to certain posters, and you can forget me there, but a basic attempt at recognition that her attempting to trick them was wrong, would have gone a long way towards alleviating any suspicion about her or her intentions on the board, but she hasn't done it.

She just pretends it never happened and expects everyone else to do likewise. Uh no. Not likely.

[The Good Michael]

Hey, guys, maybe I can help. Guess what I got for Christmas? A genuine vintage 1971 KRESKIN'S KRYSTAL, complete in the original box.

Wow! Even though Kreskin was a fraud, I'm sure his Krystal (sp.) is the real McCoy. My expertise, professional though I may be, cannot compete with this little dandy. Try it out for us with the signatures. Please make sue there are some controls in place. We don't want any cheating.

Mike

[Ben]

Nope.

None of that is "crap" at all.

She was made the target of personal abuse purely on account of her friendship with me, and the fact that we agreed on several key particulars.

I have irrefutable proof that she want to Kew precisely as she said she would. I have several images from her visit, including several of the statement itself, and so do a handful of other posters. They know the score here too. She doesn't have permission to post them on a public website. In fact, it is precisely because of the nature of internet message boards that archival institutions are so wary about releasing such images, or so I've learned recently.

Again, if this doesn't satisfy you, fair enough, but it's more than a little unrealistic to expect her to divulge her full credentials when faced with such alarming and relentless hostility. I'm sure, incidentally, that she would have made a statement to certain posters were it not for the fact that those certain posters had already cultivated an unusual degree of bitterness towards her.

When people offend or excessively irritate me, I do a good deal worse in terms of retaliation that create a sock puppet, as I'm sure you're fully aware, and I certainly don't apologise to them afterwards. Why then must Crystal be singled out for condemnation?

[Ally]

Up until the time Crystal created a sock puppet, I had not said a single negative word to her and had chatted frequently with her in the chatroom. She still attempted to hose me in the chatroom.

There is another person who I know treated Crystal as a friend and she attempted to hose that person also, going so far as to have extended conversations wiht them under her "disguise".

Neither one of us had done a damn thing to her and quite frankly, you flatter yourself too much if you think she's disliked in anyway because of you.

I am perfectly capable of disliking her for her own actions and her own lack of apparent ethics.

And if you think creating sock puppets is an acceptable thing to do, purely for the purpose of dicking with members, then fine, you two really are perfect for each other.

And quite frankly, as you well know, I was perfectly willing to give her a second chance until she proved herself to be completely unworthy of it and completely lacking in any kind of personal responsibility and strength of character.

And if you knew all along she was Romford Rose, since you seem to believe she was only targetting those who had acted against her, you are just as much of a prat as she is.

[The Good Michael]

I'm sure, incidentally, that she would have made a statement to certain posters were it not for the fact that those certain posters had already cultivated an unusual degree of bitterness towards her.

How do you know this? You need to go back about 150 pages in the 1911 thread and really see what begat what. On second thought, you may not be able to "see". If you could, you would tell that things developed because of certain attitudes and not because of any connection with you. Frankly, I don't see a connection with you in this regard save as a supporter.

Cheers,

Mike

[Ben]

What does "hose" mean, in this context?

And why are you bringing up a poster's conduct in the chatroom as though it was relevant to a conversation about a witness statement from 1888?

The fact that you're seriously disputing the fact that a good portion of the hostility towards Crystal comes courtesy of her agreeing with and supporting me suggests very strongly that you aren't fully appraised of the full details. It might not be the reason that you've taken a dislike to her, but I'm afraid it's very much a reality. Some people have taken to hating her for not hating me - simple as. Whatever floats their boat, of course, but it has certainly occured.

You argue that "creating sock puppets" is an unacceptable thing to do, but I ask you, how is that any less acceptable than engaging in a vitriolic hate war that culminates in me totally melting down on the other numpty, or for that matter, you being generally caustic and rude to pretty much every poster for feck knows how many years.

When it comes to you, it's a case of "Oh, it's just Ally. She's like that. Don't rattle her cage!", but when it's Crystal, she's threatened with all sorts of punishment. Something's not right with that.