Hello Ben,
I just read the thread on Forums, it is certainly sparking debate, as this thread also.
The fact is I can see all the points against my case, and I appreciate them all, I can understand that rumours can fuel newspaper accounts, and it is possible [ although unlikely ]that a actual sum was mentioned regarding a payment to a man called George Hutchinson, it also appears unlikely that Barnett was drunk during the inquest, although considering the ordeal that he had encountered the past days not impossible, it is also not impossible that he was being comforted by a woman of ill means, even though he was still at his sisters.
The fact is we have no idea what happened in 1888, and we have no idea about the actual people who are casted in this murder mystery.
My aim in this thread is to suggest that GWTH was infact the man known as Gh, and although I was not the finder of that American arcticle, and therefore take no credit, I suggest that as the sum of money mentioned is relevant to the sum of money mentioned on Radio, and in Faircloughs publication, it does give credence to my opinion.
I am not even giving an opinion as to the honesty of the sighting, purely mentioning there appears to be a snippit of truth in there, although others disagree.
The handwritng case is not a proven science as we all know, just as Rigor mortis, which is another thread.
Regards Richard.
I just read the thread on Forums, it is certainly sparking debate, as this thread also.
The fact is I can see all the points against my case, and I appreciate them all, I can understand that rumours can fuel newspaper accounts, and it is possible [ although unlikely ]that a actual sum was mentioned regarding a payment to a man called George Hutchinson, it also appears unlikely that Barnett was drunk during the inquest, although considering the ordeal that he had encountered the past days not impossible, it is also not impossible that he was being comforted by a woman of ill means, even though he was still at his sisters.
The fact is we have no idea what happened in 1888, and we have no idea about the actual people who are casted in this murder mystery.
My aim in this thread is to suggest that GWTH was infact the man known as Gh, and although I was not the finder of that American arcticle, and therefore take no credit, I suggest that as the sum of money mentioned is relevant to the sum of money mentioned on Radio, and in Faircloughs publication, it does give credence to my opinion.
I am not even giving an opinion as to the honesty of the sighting, purely mentioning there appears to be a snippit of truth in there, although others disagree.
The handwritng case is not a proven science as we all know, just as Rigor mortis, which is another thread.
Regards Richard.
Comment