Did Hutchinson get the night wrong?

[Ben]

Your kind words mean a great deal as always, Jen.

And I'm in fully agreement with everything you say. The accusation that you of all people were ever responsible for "scorn and mocking" will be very difficult to sustain. The only individual who has made it his mission to resort to "scorn" and "mockery" is "The Good Michael", whose insulting behaviour Fisherman has unfortunately sympathized with to the point of defending him as a "compassionate" poster.

The suggestion that you have done anything similar is absurd.

All the best,
Ben

[Lechmere]

Babybird
The Met Office specifically said that the rain did not fall as showers on 9th – it was light and continuous according to their records.

[Ben]

“If the people of the courtroom had been asked to show what THEY believed body language portraying waiting for somebody to come out would look like”

They wouldn’t need to be asked, Fisherman. There was never any doubt at the time that Lewis’ impression was the correct one. Nobody at the time had a problem with it. Not one person scratched his silly head and said “Duh, boss! I don’t get it. How could she tell that the man was waiting for someone?” They would be morons for asking such an unutterably ludicrous question. Reasonable people accepted then – just as they accept now – that human beings are quite capable of communicating through their body language that they are watching and waiting for someone. If I am not capable of conveying this impression myself, then I’ll cut up my Equity card tomorrow.

Now, for goodness’ sake, if you still disagree after all this, leave it.

Resign yourself to my differing opinion, and adopt a “life’s too short for going round in circles in arguments about serial killers” approach to message board discussion.

“...meaning that Hutch was checked out, yes.”

As a witness, yes.

Not as a suspect.

“Say what ...?”

Any more Americanisms you want to include in your posts?

Extraordinary.

“And of course that means that Maxwell could not have seen her at that stage. BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT SHE MUST HAVE CONFUSED THE DATES!!!”

Not “must have”. We don’t do those.

It is clear that according to Dew, Maxwell confused the date, hence his reference to the impossibility of her being alive at that late stage “that morning”, i.e. as opposed to any other previous “morning”. It could well be a language issue here, but I still don’t think you’ve properly understood Garry’s point.

All the best,
Ben

P.S. No evidence for non-stop continuous rainfall, though, Lechmere.

[Lechmere]

Mr Ben - check the Met Office report

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"that human beings are quite capable of communicating through their body language that they are watching and waiting for someone. If I am not capable of conveying this impression myself, then I’ll cut up my Equity card tomorrow."

Bon appétit!

"Now, for goodness’ sake, if you still disagree after all this, leave it."

Why. I donīt see you leaving it?

"Resign yourself to my differing opinion, and adopt a “life’s too short for going round in circles in arguments about serial killers” approach to message board discussion."

I know you differ. You often do. I have no problems with that. The problems I have are with you asserting things that are unassertable. Lifeīs too short not to remark on that. You either do it in this life or you donīt do it at all.

"As a witness, yes.

Not as a suspect."

That would be about right. I donīt think he ever made it to suspect land.

"Any more Americanisms you want to include in your posts?"

Get a life...?

"It is clear that according to Dew, Maxwell confused the date"

See? Thatīs exactly what I meant when I said that I dislike you asserting unassertable things.

The best,
Fisherman

[Jane Coram]

Hi,

No problems Fish. We East Enders have a very unique sense of humour.

I really don't have anything more to add to the thread, I've said my piece for what it was worth.

I've edited this because I've just seen your reply to Jen. I appreciate the compliments Fish, but these threads do seem to get over heated sometimes. Maybe we should all try and put up with each other's foibles and learn to rub along together?

Hugs

Janie

[Ben]

“Bon appétit!”

I said I would cut it up, Fisherman, not eat it.

“Lifeīs too short not to remark on that”

But you have remarked on it, Fisherman, many, many times. I get it. I’m astonished at your views on the subject, but I have at least resigned myself to the fact that you harbour those views. You should do the same for me, rather than going round in silly circles, which life should be considered too short for.

“Get a life...?”

Ouch, Fisherman.

Very ouch.

[harry]

Jane,
Your one post contained a more detailed and plausible explanation than all the posts subscribing to the laughable contention that Hutchinson forgot the date.The joke is on those who took Dew,s statement,twisted it's meaning,and made a laughing stock of themselves.Music hall comedy at it's best.

[Fisherman]

Jane:

"No problems Fish. We East Enders have a very unique sense of humour.

I really don't have anything more to add to the thread, I've said my piece for what it was worth.

I've edited this because I've just seen your reply to Jen. I appreciate the compliments Fish, but these threads do seem to get over heated sometimes. Maybe we should all try and put up with each other's foibles and learn to rub along together?""

Agreed all around, Jane. I have expressed the same wish a number of times, but nothing good has come from it. In fact, the last time I suggested it, it rendered me a verdict of being sanctimonious for doing so.

Others too have expressed their hope to have a less heated debate, some of them from the camp that sees Hutchinson as anything but a killer, and some from the so called Hutchinsonian camp. The results, as you have noted, have been meagre, and this has meant that perhaps ten, twenty per cent of this thread has concerned itself with the question it set out to answer, whereas the rest has been a mixture of peripherally interesting questions that have been blown out of proportion, allegations that do not belong here and - the way I see it - argumentation for lost causes.

I hope this post of yours can help to get things back on track again. To be perfectly honest, I will not be in any way surprised if one or two of the posters that represent the Hutchinsonians instead will choose to regard your post as not a general call to all parties involved for a better tone but instead as a call directed to me personally, giving me the blame for the current state of affairs. If I am wrong - and I sincerely hope that I am - about that, nobody could be happier than me.

Many thanks, at the very least, for giving your true reasons for leaving the thread. Very much appreciated, Jane!

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"I said I would cut it up, Fisherman, not eat it."

Aha. Mind your fingers, then! Because I fail to see anybody conveying anything but an interest as such in an archway. I have but the fewest of insights into acting and the ability to portray different sentiments, but that does not hinder me from drawing the conclusion that it would be impossible to find a way to bodylanguagewise convey "waiting for somebody to come out."

"But you have remarked on it, Fisherman, many, many times. I get it. I’m astonished at your views on the subject, but I have at least resigned myself to the fact that you harbour those views. You should do the same for me, rather than going round in silly circles, which life should be considered too short for."

That is a very wise stance, Ben. How come you donīt live up to it yourself? Why do you, each and every time I say A, say B, if you harbour such a hot wish not to have things repeated? And when I tell you that there is nothing hindering you to drop it, you just answer that you enjoy it too much to consider such a thing.
What, Ben, is there to prove that you are any less stubborn than me, and any more willing to quit repeating - or as you sometimes put it "copy and paste" - your arguments? And if there is no such thing, then why do YOU tell ME not to repeat MY arguments? I find that somewhat strange.

"Ouch, Fisherman."

Well, you DID ask whether I had further americanisms to offer. And I DID consider that utterly irrelevant to the topic of the thread. You may have noticed that the one thing we are NOT discussing is whether Hutch got the day wrong or not.

The best,
Fisherman

[The Good Michael]

To be perfectly honest, I will not be in any way surprised if one or two of the posters that represent the Hutchinsonians instead will choose to regard your post ...

But there are only one or two... not counting the parrots.

Mike

[Rubyretro]

[QUOTE]but that does not hinder me from drawing the conclusion that it would be impossible to find a way to bodylanguagewise convey "waiting for somebody to come out." [/QUOTE

Fisherman -may I direct you to Post 1520....

[Ben]

“Because I fail to see anybody conveying anything but an interest as such in an archway.”

Well, you go ahead and carry on “failing” to see it, Fisherman, and I’ll carry on considering this failure completely ridiculous. Nobody in 1888 had any problems with Lewis’ impression that the man in the street was looking up the court as though waiting for someone to come out. If you really have “the fewest of insights into acting and the ability to portray different sentiments”, then perhaps it might be sensible for you to take some advice from someone who does.

So, time to agree to disagree and move on?

Impasse? Or not?

We’ll see.

“Why do you, each and every time I say A, say B, if you harbour such a hot wish not to have things repeated?”

Because you’ve said A, I’ve said B, and we’ve been back and forth a few times on the issue. I merely suggested that now might be the time to resign ourselves to the fact that we both have differing opinions on the subject. But if you’re hell bent on repeating “A” again as though it were never addressed, repeat away, and use as many Americanisms you want when doing so, dude.

Bit depressing, though.

“But there are only one or two”

As opposed to the “legions” of Toppyites, Mike.

Best regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

Ruby:

"may I direct you to Post 1520"

Been there, Ruby. Last time over there was a rather elaborate desription that made no sense to me.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"you go ahead and carry on “failing” to see it, Fisherman, and I’ll carry on considering this failure completely ridiculous"

...but you wonīt post on it since you donīt like repetitions, right?

"Nobody in 1888 had any problems with Lewis’ impression that the man in the street was looking up the court as though waiting for someone to come out."

And that means that they all knew that there was a way to convey this, that has sadly gone lost to modern man. A pity, that.

"If you really have “the fewest of insights into acting and the ability to portray different sentiments”, then perhaps it might be sensible for you to take some advice from someone who does."

It would probably help immensely. I will make sure to choose a discerning, unbiased, honest woman or man when doing so.

"Because you’ve said A, I’ve said B, and we’ve been back and forth a few times on the issue."

Oh, Iīve noticed THAT, Ben.

"I merely suggested that now might be the time to resign ourselves to the fact that we both have differing opinions on the subject."

Well, then you may have worded it slightly sloppy, since it came out as a direct advice to ME to resign MYSELF to this fact. You, on the other hand, were not mentioned at all in that post:"Resign yourself to my differing opinion" is how it came out, byt the looks of things.
Anyway, Ben, when you claim things like for example the bit about "as if waiting for someone", I really cannot let such a thing stand unchallenged. It was wrong the first time you suggested it, and that hasnīt changed since. By the way, when are you going to stop speaking about how convinced the listeners were back in 1888 that such a thing could be portrayed, and instead tell us exactly HOW it is done? Iīve been waiting for the longest time now, and if all of them people AND you really know how easily it is conveyed at a relatively quick glance in a relatively dark street, it really should not be too hard to share, should it?

"use as many Americanisms you want when doing so, dude."

Thanks, Ben. I will.

...and there went another post that did not discuss the topic of the thread.

The best,
Fisherman