Kosminski and Victim DNA Match on Shawl - Part 2

[PaulB]

Not that it should matter to anyone, but John is moving flats and has no internet connection. He is also very busy preparing to get married in Spain. God knows what Laura sees in him, lovely girl that she is, but I hope they will be very happy together.

[Trevor Marriott]

I would have thought you would have avoided describing yourself as a worm, but I suppose if the category fits...

I have a fairly good track record in this field, Trevor, which is something you can only aspire to, and I don't try to destroy anything nor do I try to keep my own work intact, whatever you mean by that.

So scrutinise away.

As far as Russell Edwards book is concerned, for your Information I didn't write it. Unlike you, my name appears on the covers of books with my words in them. I didn't contribute to it is any way and I have never met Mr Edwards or exchanged communications of any sort with him. I would have been happy to have helped him, however, as I have been happy to help a lot of people over the years, none of whom had theories I shared.

Doesn't it bother you and all the others to think that you all have been involved in a book which the press hype on it alone has resulted in god knows how many people buying his book and being bamboozled into thinking that the case had been solved.

If you didn't meet him, or talk to him, why has he given you an acknowledgment?

Question added
Did you have any contact with him then ?

[Robert]

I once knew a man who married a radiographer, and I didn't know what she saw in him.

[Chris]

Doesn't it bother you and all the others to think that you all have been involved in a book which the press hype on it alone has resulted in god knows how many people buying his book and being bamboozled into thinking that the case had been solved.

If you didn't meet him, or talk to him, why has he given you an acknowledgment?

Don't take it so hard. One day someone will give you an acknowledgment, I'm sure.

[Trevor Marriott]

Don't take it so hard. One day someone will give you an acknowledgment, I'm sure.

I already have a drawfull going back 30 years

[Monty]

Doesn't it bother you and all the others to think that you all have been involved in a book which the press hype on it alone has resulted in god knows how many people buying his book and being bamboozled into thinking that the case had been solved.

If you didn't meet him, or talk to him, why has he given you an acknowledgment?

Nick Connell is acknowledged in my book. Never met him but I have read his work, and know the in depth research he conducts, so I acknowledged that.

I'm sure Paul, Stewart et el have been noted in a similar way.

Monty

[Trevor Marriott]

Nick Connell is acknowledged in my book. Never met him but I have read his work, and know the in depth research he conducts, so I acknowledged that.

I'm sure Paul, Stewart et el have been noted in a similar way.

Monty

I am sure they have but the questions were simple to those whose names appear in the book, what was their involvement with Edwards and the subject matter of the book.

Why the secrecy ?

No one is suggesting they acted wrongly. I would simply like to know if any advice was given to Edwards with regards to the subject matter of the book.

Its as I said yesterday if you or I had been told by Edwards what he was planning to do I am sure we would have put things to him in the correct perspective.

[Hercule Poirot]

Innuendos and insinuations

With all due respect, I keep asking myself why Casebook's administrators/moderators tolerate these innuendos and insinuations coming from some members who, after being incapable of making their point on a topic/comment, attack the credibility/integrity of those who expressing a different opinion.

I'm a member of many forums covering other domains and this behaviour is not accepted at all. They closely follow a topic to make sure none of this 'cheap' way of exchanging happens and often suppress comments made after warning the concerned individuals either directly or through a PM.

Grow up people. Attack the problem with serious arguments, not the person because all you're proving is that you're immature.

[Tom_Wescott]

Nick Connell is acknowledged in my book. Never met him but I have read his work, and know the in depth research he conducts, so I acknowledged that.

I'm sure Paul, Stewart et el have been noted in a similar way.

Monty

Gene Simmons and Paul Stanley of KISS are acknowledged in my book.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Monty]

I am sure they have but the questions were simple to those whose names appear in the book, what was their involvement with Edwards and the subject matter of the book.

Why the secrecy ?

No one is suggesting they acted wrongly. I would simply like to know if any advice was given to Edwards with regards to the subject matter of the book.

Its as I said yesterday if you or I had been told by Edwards what he was planning to do I am sure we would have put things to him in the correct perspective.

I wouldn't be so arrogant as to enforce my opinion. If asked, I shall give it, if not, I shall still support. I am able to engage with those whose views oppose mine.

Monty

[PaulB]

Doesn't it bother you and all the others to think that you all have been involved in a book which the press hype on it alone has resulted in god knows how many people buying his book and being bamboozled into thinking that the case had been solved.

If you didn't meet him, or talk to him, why has he given you an acknowledgment?

Question added
Did you have any contact with him then ?

I haven't been involved with the book. I rather thought I'd made this clear in my previous message.

Had I been involved with it and I believed Russell Edwards sincerely believed what he was putting forth then I would have had no qualms about helping ensure that he got his facts right. I may not have agreed with what he said, but I would defend his right to say it. That's free speech, you see. If, on the other hand, I didn't believe him to be sincere, but just trying to make a spurious reputation for himself, as I believe you are, then obviously I would not help.

I believe Russell Edwards acknowledged me because he made use of my books.

Why do you require repeated reassurance? No, I had no contact with him. I am looking forward to meeting him next month.

[Hercule Poirot]

No one is suggesting they acted wrongly. I would simply like to know if any advice was given to Edwards with regards to the subject matter of the book.

Its as I said yesterday if you or I had been told by Edwards what he was planning to do I am sure we would have put things to him in the correct perspective.

If one of the persons targeted by this question answers "No". I'll bet my shirt he'll get a "You should have" response hence acted wrongly.

You see this one of the subtle ways some have of creating innuendos.

[PaulB]

I already have a drawfull going back 30 years

Are you sure they're not rejection slips?

[PaulB]

If one of the persons targeted by this question answers "No". I'll bet my shirt he'll get a "You should have" response hence acted wrongly.

You see this one of the subtle ways some have of creating innuendos.

your posts are appreciated.

[Fantasio]

I keep asking myself why Casebook's administrators/moderators tolerate these innuendos and insinuations

I'm asking myself that, too.