Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Innocent, By George!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Stephen Thomas View Post
    Yes indeed. What fun .

    A small unsolicited note for non-Brits......

    'Fairclough' is pronounced 'Fair-cluff'.
    is that anywhere close to "cloth"?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by curious View Post
      is that anywhere close to "cloth"?
      Hi

      No it's not. In the UK 'clough' is pronounced 'cluff'.

      I've heard a couple of Americans pronouncing it as 'clo'

      Like Melvyn Fairclo instead of Melvyn Faircluff.

      Neither here nor there really, but I just thought I'd mention that.
      allisvanityandvexationofspirit

      Comment


      • pronunciation

        Hello Stephen. Thanks for that.

        Believe it or not, that is PRECISELY how I have been pronouncing it. Do I win anything?

        Now, what about Southwark and Chiswick? (heh-heh)

        Cheers.
        LC

        Comment


        • Musn't bluff cluff...

          'Fairclough' is pronounced 'Fair-cluff'.
          Thanks Stephen, as an American I will admit I would have said 'clo' also.....

          don't forget to ask him how much he paid Reginald for his contribution.
          Yes indeed DVV, unless of course you are being sarcastic...

          Further questions are welcome............I guess I should contact his publisher before I get too confident I can get any info about "cluff"....



          Greg

          Comment


          • Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
            Believe it or not, that is PRECISELY how I have been pronouncing it. Do I win anything?

            Now, what about Southwark and Chiswick? (heh-heh)
            Hi Lynn

            Sutherk and Chissick

            You want Marylebone?

            All the best
            allisvanityandvexationofspirit

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Stephen Thomas View Post
              Hi Lynn

              Sutherk and Chissick

              You want Marylebone?

              All the best
              Thanks, Stephen, for the education.

              Comment


              • Norman Polevaulter

                Hello Stephen. Very well. But I shall hold St. John in reserve.

                Cheers.
                LC

                Comment


                • Actually Suvuk

                  Comment


                  • Or praps Suvook
                    (as in hook)

                    Comment


                    • [QUOTE]
                      Originally posted by Lechmere View Post
                      Or praps Suvook
                      (as in hook)
                      Sarth-ark, you yob..
                      http://youtu.be/GcBr3rosvNQ

                      Comment


                      • Greg -I have PM'd you some info on Fairclough.

                        Interestingly, this is what Fairclough said in an interview in 1993, referring to the 'Maybrick' diary:

                        "Melvyn Fairclough, who wrote The Ripper and The Royals, which suggested a link with the monarchy, said: "Having read the diary, I accept despite my earlier theories and writings, that this was written by Jack the Ripper."

                        He seems to be a very credulous man !
                        Last edited by Rubyretro; 01-09-2012, 10:41 AM.
                        http://youtu.be/GcBr3rosvNQ

                        Comment


                        • Greg -I don't know if this is the same Melvyn Fairclough, but someone by that name participates in a site called 'Mysterious Britain', devoted to
                          Hauntings, the Occult, Cryptozoology (aquatic monsters and big cats) and UFOs amongst other things. I think that it is very
                          likely to be the same man (if so, he's even more credulous than even I
                          first thought).

                          I'm afraid that Reg is beginning to look as credible as Nessie to me..

                          At the end of an article devoted to Radcliffe Tower, he has posted a comment beginning "....Fifty years ago I was in the same class at school as the boy whose father farmed the land upon which Radcliffe Tower stands.." So he would probably be in his 60s.
                          Last edited by Rubyretro; 01-09-2012, 11:08 AM.
                          http://youtu.be/GcBr3rosvNQ

                          Comment


                          • Hi,
                            I hate to keep playing the same old record over and over, but all the time the accusations against Fairclough and Reg are flying about, I simply have to.
                            I am not defending the authors ''theories'', I am not praising up Reg as ''Mr perfect'', I am just being practical.
                            I will state [ with hand on heart] that Reg's comments in the Ripper and the Royals published in 1992, were aired on radio in the mid 70s, making it a near certainty that the tale was not invented by Melvyn for spicing up his book.
                            That is a fact...
                            With regards to that Radio times programme, for those who wish to attempt to dismiss my claims, feel free to check the rear pages, left hand side, of every edition from 1971-may 75, and look for it......it does exist.
                            As for believing every 'word' the Hutchinson's say ..I refute this.
                            J.D Hutchinson attempted to clarify a few years ago the tale was known by the family, but like Fiona Kendall [previous to that] was shunned by many .
                            I attempted to contact her via a home address, [albeit possibly a old one] but received no reply..and quite frankly who can blame her...
                            I do know that Reg was a ex costermonger, a regular guy, whose knowledge of the case was extremely limited, he even had to borrow a book from a younger member of the family to get a insight, all he knew was the term 'Jack the Ripper'.
                            Fairclough did say to Reg that if the book sold well , he would get a backhander for his contribution., which Reg was looking forward to.
                            There was no conspiracy by MF to put words into Reg's mouth, he simply repeated to the author the tale that he had known since a young man , given to him from his proven father GWTH, a tale which was given to the BBC some 18 years prior to the books publication.
                            So now you understand, why I remain so adamant, I am the only Casebook member that heard[ or remembers] the broadcast.therefore my approach is different to everyone else.
                            I Cannot say for certain that Topping relayed the truth to his son/ sons[ Regs brother also was aware] but the wheeling article is hard to dismiss, and also the argument. that only the real Hutchinson. would know of a payment, and its amount.
                            When I mentioned this a few years back. Sam/Gareth commented' That I should be congratulated for my resolution.
                            Fisherman showed great debating form with Dear Bob Hinton, [who dismissed the obvious conclusion]
                            This really should be the''year of the article''..lets find the darn thing [ie the Radio times edition,] lets end this year. calling Hutchinson Topping, and try to put more faith into his 1888 statement, which I believe was given with honesty.
                            Regards Richard.

                            Comment


                            • Hi Ruby

                              Originally posted by Rubyretro View Post
                              "Melvyn Fairclough, who wrote The Ripper and The Royals, which suggested a link with the monarchy, said: "Having read the diary, I accept despite my earlier theories and writings, that this was written by Jack the Ripper."
                              Oh, but still flatly convinced his Toppy's pic is genuine and beyond question ?
                              Last edited by DVV; 01-09-2012, 02:25 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Hi Richard

                                Originally posted by richardnunweek View Post
                                With regards to that Radio times programme, for those who wish to attempt to dismiss my claims, feel free to check the rear pages, left hand side, of every edition from 1971-may 75, and look for it......it does exist.
                                Regards Richard.
                                With respect - and as you know I've ever trusted you about the programme - you are the one to look for it.
                                Just do it if it is so easy.

                                Dvvvv

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X