The Statement of George Hutchinson

[Observer]

Hehehe, he's certainly doing that Ben. Laughing his wideawake hat off no doubt

all the best

Observer

[halomanuk]

Hutch is a proverbial pain in the arse...official.

[The Good Michael]

Observer,

Of course you have nothing to apologize for. Crystal was trying to play the victim and to redirect the outrage. I think Hutch can rest easy now.

Mike

[Ben]

Although threads discussing Mr Hutchinson seem to get a bit out of hand do they not

They certainly do, Observer.

And it provides us - well, me at least - with an opportunity to observe that he's still wreaking havoc even from beyond the grave.

[Observer]

Hi

What a strange woman women, Crystal that is. As I have stated in a previous post my suspicions were not 100% certain regarding the possibility that babybird might be an alter ego of Crystal/Romford Rose. I was in two minds you see, which one I can't remember at the moment, ask the other fella, hullo this dual personality carry on is catching.

Thing is a precedent had been set, and with babybird being so supportative of Crystal the alarm bells started to ring, falsely so as it turns out.

Babybird has reacted with incredible calm since my insinuation that she might be an alto ego of Crystal, and accepted my apology, so good on her. She admits above that no one vilified her, so where Crystal is coming from in her last post is beyond me.

This has left a sour taste in my mouth, and in hindsight, I now regret what I said but that's life. As babybird says best thing is to put this little episode behind us, and hope that this thread can return to some kind of normality. Although threads discussing Mr Hutchinson seem to get a bit out of hand do they not

All the best

Observer

[Ally]

[QUOTE=Crystal;86825]

Hi! Or maybe that should be - HAH! I bet none of you expected to see me here again, did you? Oh well, tough. I have things to say, and I'm bloody well going to say them.

Oh and what it only took you a solid week to come here and "defend" yourself? Shows conviction that does.

All Jen ever did was be friendly and open to all. I would suggest, and I'm utterly correct, that anyone who thought otherwise is an extremely unpleasant person, which, by the way, is nothing to be proud of.

Yep. All she did was be friendly and open to all AND DEFEND YOU AND YOUR HONOR right from the start, immediately after Rose. And you let her, knowing full well people who were doubting it had good cause, and you just let her go on defending you because you were too much of a coward to come clean.

Second. The Romford Rose debacle. Whatever anyone chooses to believe about this, the FACT of the matter is that I apologised, UNRESERVEDLY at the time. I have the response submitted to me by Admin

.

So what if you apologized to Stephen in private? Did you ever apologize to me for attempting to hose me? NO. You sent me a PM two days ago that was one of those wussy "IF I OFFENDED you, tell me what I did and I will apologize" crap. You never apologized to me. Did you apologize to Mike for going in the chatroom and hosing him? We considered you chat buddies, we talked to you all the time in there and you still decided to play your stupid, infantile mindgames and NO ONE not one single person has received an apology from you for doing it. The only reason you apologized to the admin was to keep your lying butt on the forums. How about ponying up and apologizing to everyone on the Hutchinson thread and the chatroom for your deception. WHERE'S THAT APOLOGY.

Where's the apology to Jen to lying to her and allowing her to defend you when you were rightly being doubted?

Where's the apology to Mike for slandering him and making him out to be some dog in heat?

Where's those apologies?

As to my 'motives' - what bloody motives? OH, SURE, of course I want to be vilified in public. Who wouldn't? I love it. Yep. No.

How about the motives of why you would don a sock to trick, lie to and deceive people who counted you as a friend and more?

But of course, I realise that some people just have dick envy, and are desperately small, petty individuals - without pointing the finger in any particular direction, I must stress - who have no life to speak of outside this forum, and who find it utterly threatening when somebody like me gets up off their arse and actually does something, instead of choosing to engage in endless, tedious, circular arguments.

Oh yeah, I know I can speak for myself when I say I have total envy of a person who is so mentally and emotionally deficient that they have to play childish sock puppet games with the members here. You are truly someone I admire and aspire to emulate. Why, maybe I'll go out and write my very own hoax diary and dedicate it to you. Because you know, the pathetic liars of the world are EXACTLY who I want to be like.

You know what. Kudos, you went to Kent to expand debate.

The problem is the person giving opinions has to be trustworthy. You are a liar. You lie all the time to everyone. How could we even trust your conclusions for a single second? Anyone who knows you knows full well when it comes to your "obsession" you will lie, trick and manipulate the truth to have the facts come out in your favor. So no one can actually believe any of your conclusions anyway.

[babybird67]

just to be clear...

I posted publicly about the doubts over my identity, because those doubts had been expressed publicly. Given the circumstances, i understood the doubts, and trust any such doubts have now been resolved.

I received no messages villifying me, either privately or publicly.

Other issues can be dealt with privately.

I hope this thread can return to its primary purpose of discussing the statement of George Hutchinson.

[halomanuk]

She said you came onto her Mike ?
Weird...

[The Good Michael]

Looking at Crystal's post one more time, I suggest it is the typical sort of rant that a child has wherein, the fingers are pointed at others as if they are responsible for her actions. By some of us wondering what the truth about Jenny was, we are all of a sudden morons, as if believing everything in this forum is true, is somehow an intellectually superior position to take. No one vilified BB. It is another bit of posturing to redirect guilt. There is no mention of her private messages to others insisting one of us had a vendetta against her because he "came on" to her in private but was rejected. This is revolting at the very least, if not slander. It is the kind of thing that makes me ill. This woman is manipulative and vindictive in my opinion, and is to be avoided at all costs, much like that Felicity Lowndes character. I see the same personality flaws in both of them. This latest post supports that hypothesis.

Cheers,

Mike

[The Good Michael]

Well, that meant a lot. Yawn.

Mike

Thank you, and Goodnight.

Hi! Or maybe that should be - HAH! I bet none of you expected to see me here again, did you? Oh well, tough. I have things to say, and I'm bloody well going to say them. Or did we all imagine I'd a: just roll over and let myself be kicked; or b: come back wearing sackcloth and ashes with a bell round my neck? Shame for those who thought they'd killed me off, hey? Life's a bitch.... or somebody is, at least. Notice, please, that I don't say who. Maybe I'm referring to myself, maybe that was just a general comment, or maybe.... Well, who can say?

You all should know by now that I'm not prepared to. OH NO, not duplicitous Crystal. All my secrets are my own.

First - the people who have doubted and vilified Jenny, in public and in private, are hideous, despicable morons. I am not culpable for the mentally deficient antics of people who scheme and plot in bizarre ways against innocent members of this community. All Jen ever did was be friendly and open to all. I would suggest, and I'm utterly correct, that anyone who thought otherwise is an extremely unpleasant person, which, by the way, is nothing to be proud of.

Second. The Romford Rose debacle. Whatever anyone chooses to believe about this, the FACT of the matter is that I apologised, UNRESERVEDLY at the time. I have the response submitted to me by Admin. Look, here it is:


After receiving your message from this afternoon and considering it, the restrictions have been lifted from your account. Your willingness to accept responsibility weighed heavily in your favor as very few people do that these days.

Understand clearly that this issue has used up two strikes. A third of this magnitude and you are out, there will be no warning and no appeal.

I appreciate that this was out of character for you and I don't expect it will happen again.

Hmm.. Well, I bet you didn't expect me to do THAT, did you? OH that bloody Crystal, full of surprises.

And, by the way? Anyone who says that is not the response I had from Admin at the time is a fraud and a liar. I liked that! Funny, huh? See, I do have a sense of humour!

Now then, if anyone reading this is actually intelligent enough to grasp it, there are a few things in there that may perhaps be noted. 1. I apologised unreservedly at the time. 2. Admin accepted that apology, and that it was out of character. 3. I wasn't allowed to do it, EVER AGAIN. And look. I havent'. Because - OH LOOK! Jenny isn't me and I'm not her. How utterly, bloody ridiculous and infantile all this hysteria has been. Back to the playground with you, children. Since my apology was accepted at the time, I rather think that should have been the end of the matter, and I know exactly why this has come up again now - and I know, and so do others, perfectly well, that is has nothing at all to do with Romford Rose.


As to my 'motives' - what bloody motives? OH, SURE, of course I want to be vilified in public. Who wouldn't? I love it. Yep. No.

I'm not looking for applause, I couldn't care less. I haven't been paid for any of the work I've done at Kew, so look it can't be that! Hmm... running out of ideas here - anyone else got any?

Well, since you all may struggle with that one, I'll give you a clue. I wanted to help. Ready? Here is comes....I wanted, in fact to further debate, because, like it or not, people, that's what I do. It's my job, and my main concern in life. That's what motivates me. And from the very beginning of my time on this forum, that has been my primary motivation. In fact, that was what drew me in the first place.

But hey, what the hell? I can still do that, you know, and nobody here can do a bloody thing about it. Life's a Bitch, hey? I couldn't care less what people think about that. I went to Kew, quite clearly, and I saw the statement of Hutchinson, and the rest, quite clearly. And the observations I made are all sound. I would be astonished if anyone else working in the field disagreed with me. Where I have not been certain, I have said as much. I haven't made any wild claims here. It's my work, my reseach, and my intellectual product. I can do what I bloody well like with it. Sit on it, publish it.... hmm... decisions, decisions....

But of course, I realise that some people just have dick envy, and are desperately small, petty individuals - without pointing the finger in any particular direction, I must stress - who have no life to speak of outside this forum, and who find it utterly threatening when somebody like me gets up off their arse and actually does something, instead of choosing to engage in endless, tedious, circular arguments.

For those that would prefer to continue said circular arguments, knock yourselves out. I, on the other hand, will publish my findings, possibly in Swedish - Um, Ok, not Swedish - but maybe, let's say, in Medieval Latin, Old or Middle English? Yes, you know, I'm warming to that idea. It'd be so much fun watching people try and translate it! OH Damn that Crystal, she's bloody cleverer than all of us put together. Shame, huh? Life really is a bitch, isn't it?

Another day. My motivations, and reasons for being here have all left me, and so, with regret, I have no reason to post again.

Thank you and goodnight.


C.E.J. Day.


OR AM I???

[babybird67]

morning Mike

Observer,

You are thinking as I am.

Mike

You were thinking as Observer commented, that your little feathered friend may also be involved.

Talking with you has been like talking riddles at times, and i didn't know why. Now i do. And i understand your doubts within that context. But i have chatted with you many times in the chatroom and i do believe any pretense on my part to be anything other than what i am would have been apparent to those members here with whom i have had regular and frequent contact and conversations.

I am pleased to hear that you havent said anything detrimental about me apart from the above, which, as i say, i do understand within the context of what i now know. I just wish you (or someone else) had told me before...i'm not good with riddles. I need things

s-p-e-l-l-e-d o-u-t l-e-t-t-e-r b-y l-e-t-t-e-r.

You may like to have a gander at my new signature which Mark designed for me last night...thought it was fairly apt under the circumstances and will probably keep it for a few weeks at least.

You can imagine that the duplicity that was a great annoyance to some, was more than a little devastating for me. Everything i did and said regarding Crystal was done in good faith and complete ignorance of what, it now seems, others were aware of. I can only apologise for my utter stupidity, and i would particularly like to apologise to Ally, to whom in my ignorance i had ascribed a disliking of Crystal, and therefore me by association, based on personal preference alone. I am sorry Ally that i doubted your motives. It is more than apparent to me now that yours were not the motives that i should have been doubting.

[The Good Michael]

BB,

If you look closely, you'll see that I never said anything against you, only that things are not what they seem and that this forum isn't a great way to know the truth about people. Never once did I knock you. I was only being guarded at times, and you surely see why now.

Cheers,

Mike

Just caught up on whats been bantied about since Ive been off for a few days.....and I can say now that I have, for me, the issue of George Hutchinson is resolved, hes the one that had an unbelievable suspect sighting on the 5th Canonical murder. Thats his rap sheet, and I dont see why it should change. They thought he lied, so do I. Done.

I think perhaps some of you should re-evaluate what youre doing and how your doing it. The mean spirited crap that gets slung around for the sake of a less than critical issue about a DISCREDITED WITNESS is beyond me.

Catch you on more relevant discussions.

Best regards

[Observer]

No Problem babybird.

Hehehe nice one Ben

all the best

Observer