Innocent, By George!

[Lechmere]

For the sake of completeness it should be remembered that there is some doubt as to what Toppy certificate Sue Iremonger used as a basis to compare against the police statement. There is one marriage certificate which seems to have been completed by the Church clerk (or curate perhaps) and as such did not feature Toppy's signature.
I seem to remember that she also felt the three police statement signatures were not all completed by the same hand.

[lynn cates]

resolution

Hello Lechmere. Can you recall where her results were published?

How's that for a New Year's resolution--settle the Toppy business for all time?

Cheers.
LC

[babybird67]

For the sake of completeness it should be remembered that there is some doubt as to what Toppy certificate Sue Iremonger used as a basis to compare against the police statement.
.

Is there?

As far as I am aware, Lechmere, it was the marriage certificate signed by Toppy. I doubt very much whether a professional document examiner would be fooled by a clerk's copy.

Hoping for a resolution to the issue is a fond one im afraid Lynn. Not everybody will be pleased, and will always try to undermine the opinion they dont agree with , as the toppyites do with Iremonger.

[lynn cates]

good thought

Hello Baby Bird. Well, let's keep a good thought.

Think I'll look about for examiners.

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Another examiner won't solve the case, imo. Better check how Toppy's relatives got involved in ripperology and how Astrakhan Man became Sir Randolph.

Now, please remember how the big thread started : it was about another Hutch (not Toppy) having a similar signature to that of the witness, hence the discussions about how low class people used to learn at school, etc etc. We thus need an expert well aware of that, or we should have to provide him with various samples of signatures from the same period first.

[lynn cates]

instinctive/taught

Hello David. Not sure why another examiner could not at least throw some light upon this enigma.

When children in any era are taught to write, of course letter formation is emphasised. But a truly competent examiner looks more closely at slope, slant, margins, spacings, etc. These things come instinctively to the writer rather than being taught. Moreover, they are usually disregarded when we write, being spontaneous. Hence, these items are most difficult to forge.

Cheers.
LC

[Lechmere]

Babybird
Oh yes there is...
You cannot realistically or rationally be aware what version of Toppy’s marriage certificate Sue Iremonger used as a basis for comparison.
It is not a question of Sue Iremonger being fooled by a clerk’s copy. It is a question of which copy she obtained. When someone got married they signed several certificates – one was kept in the parish records and one was forwarded to the register office.
Clearly in Toppy’s case, Toppy neglected to sign the version which was sent to the register office and the blank bits were filled in by the church clerk. This was unusual and we only know this happened by comparing that version to the one held in the parish records and to other authentic Toppy signatures.
It is very unlikely that Sue Iremonger had access to all these different certificates. The most easily accessible version of Toppy’s marriage certificate would have been the register office version which just happens by chance not to bear Toppy’s actual signature.
Of course there is a chance that Sue Iremonger obtained the parish record. But there has to be considerable doubt. It is no reflection on Sue Iremonger’s competence to suggest that she may have used the wrong signature as the basis for comparison. There is no such thing as a 'clerk's copy'.

[lynn cates]

2 quickies

Hello Lechmere. 2 quick questions about Hutch/Toppy's signature.

1. Are there any signatures that you and the anti-toppyites agree on?

2. If yes, how many can we use for comparison?

I have been looking over examiners and would like to move on this.

Cheers.
LC

[Garry Wroe]

Thanks, Jen. Here's hoping for a healthy and prosperous new year for yourself.

And don't mention the peas!

[Garry Wroe]

Sorry for the late response, Lynn. Up to my eyes in it, I'm afraid.

As for the signature examinations, neither really cuts the mustard as far as I'm concerned. Jen has already outlined some of the problems relating to the Leander analysis, and since Sue Iremonger's work has not been published we can only hazard a guess as to what her precise conclusions and methodology might have been. Despite many claims to the contrary, the reality is that we have nothing in the way of real evidence - that is to say, nothing that would conform with even the most basic emprical standards.

[lynn cates]

next step

Hello Garry. Thanks. Then there are insufficient number of signatures for comparison? Pity.

I have been pricing examiners and, if a core of signatures from both people were to be had, I could move to the next step.

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

Hello David. Not sure why another examiner could not at least throw some light upon this enigma.

When children in any era are taught to write, of course letter formation is emphasised. But a truly competent examiner looks more closely at slope, slant, margins, spacings, etc. These things come instinctively to the writer rather than being taught. Moreover, they are usually disregarded when we write, being spontaneous. Hence, these items are most difficult to forge.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn, yep, could throw some light, at best, that's what I'm saying.
In any case, we should first comment extensively on SI report.

[lynn cates]

suggestions

Hello David. You are suggesting getting a report of:

1. Which signatures Iremonger used?

and

2. What precisely she had to say?

Sounds good to me.

Cheers.
LC

[Debra A]

When someone got married they signed several certificates – one was kept in the parish records and one was forwarded to the register office.
Clearly in Toppy’s case, Toppy neglected to sign the version which was sent to the register office and the blank bits were filled in by the church clerk. This was unusual and we only know this happened by comparing that version to the one held in the parish records and to other authentic Toppy signatures.

I found out a little while ago that when people got married (then as now) they sign the marriage register and also a marriage certificate which is given to the married couple as proof of marriage.
The church marriage registers containing the couples signatures then stayed at the church (most microfilmed in later years), and the curate made a handwritten copy of these registers annually to send to the GRO, which was a legal requirement. It was normal practice for the curate to copy the entries in his own hand, signatures and all.
When you obtain a copy of a historic marriage certificate you can either look at the original register or microfilm of it to see the original signatures, or order a copy from the GRO and get a likely curates copy.
If the marriage was in a register office and you go to the same local register office for a copy from the registers they hold , you get a handwritten copy done by the current registrar....which is crap sometimes as having beautiful handwriting doesn't seem to be a requirement for being a registrar anymore.

[Debra A]

Hello David. You are suggesting getting a report of:

1. Which signatures Iremonger used?

and

2. What precisely she had to say?

Sounds good to me.

Cheers.
LC

Good luck with all this, Lynn.