LeGrand conspiracy

[mariab]

Well, people tend to get a bit shorter (or even a bit taller) over 30 years, depending on age.
An eye colour between “blue“ and “grey“ is not a significant discrepancy. Now, if it were between “blue“ and “brown“...

[Chris]

Well, people tend to get a bit shorter (or even a bit taller) over 30 years, depending on age.

I think if you look at the dates it's nothing like 30 years - and not being much younger than Le Grand was in 1907 I'm a bit disturbed by the implication that I may have shrunk to 5' 9'' without noticing it. Maybe I'd better check.

Obviously it would be nice if that entry had more significance than appeared initially, so I'm probably a bit biased, but would they have missed out quite so many scars in the second description?

[mariab]

I know it's nothing like 30 years, the “30 years“ part referred to 1877-1907, from Le Grand's first known incarceration to his last known release.

The one and a half inch discrepancy can simply be explained through hasty measuring. Or it might have occurred really to Le Grand. I gained 1'' in my 20s, and I recently met my cousin who used to be much taller than me and now she has shrunk to almost being shorter. People can get a bit taller through lifestyle choices, such as lifting weights, frequent surfing (all that paddling). No idea if men in the Victorian era lifted weights.
Malnutrition and a long incarceration might lead to people slightly “shrinking“, be it through having lost significant weight or simply through starting hunching/slouching from depression.

As for the scars on his face having disappeared, they might have been fresh scars, and have fainted with time.

[Tom_Wescott]

Oh dear - some people are never satisfied ...

Is this pick on Tom month or something? I'm sorry if you feel that way, I've judged cringed at the name of this thread ever since it was created. However, if Debs is going to pursue yet another fringe Le Grand idea, and suggest minor differences in description actually lend credence to the idea that they were really two people (Nelson and Le Grand), then perhaps the title should stay.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

- and not being much younger than Le Grand was in 1907

You're joking, right? I thought you were around my age. Le Grand would have been around 54 to 59 in 1907.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Debra A]

However, if Debs is going to pursue yet another fringe Le Grand idea, and suggest minor differences in description actually lend credence to the idea that they were really two people (Nelson and Le Grand), then perhaps the title should stay.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

It's a fact that I am just pointing out for others to make their own judgement on. It's hardly anything I haven't mentioned before, I first mentioned Le Grand being found not guilty of being Christian Nelson back in early 2007.
For the first time we now have a description of Le Grand to compare the Nelson description with that's all, and there are differences...
As I have said many times, personally I feel that the Reynold's sketch of Le Grand in 1891 is very similar to the police picture of Nelson...enough to be the same man.
However, the facial scars not being mentioned on Le Grand in 1907 is interesting.

[Chris]

You're joking, right? I thought you were around my age. Le Grand would have been around 54 to 59 in 1907.

I was going by the date of birth in the register, but I'm not that much younger than that.

That's probably the explanation for my picking on you - I've gone from being a Superannuated Angry Young Man to a Grumpy Old Man In Training with nothing in between ...

[mariab]

However, the facial scars not being mentioned on Le Grand in 1907 is interesting.

So sorry to interfere here again, just wanted to point out that scars, even significant ones, and particularly on the face/nose, can heal and fade already in one year, if not several years.
(I've seen it on other people and I've seen it on my own face from when I got a pretty deep cut on my nose ridge 2 years ago, which left a scar for about 6-8 months, then, one day, it was simply gone, no trace left.)

[Debra A]

Perhaps...
Perhaps even faded enough for Le Grand to have more the appearance of a respectable gentleman than a ruffian in prison?

[Debra A]

One point that Rob mentioned to me, which I thought was a good one but can't answer myself-were the distinguishing marks sections for prisoners filled in on the first entry to prison, say in Le Grand's case in 1891 and just retained within a file and referred to for future use, should the need arise, like having to give out a description?

[mariab]

I think this practice makes sense, Debs, since photographs were rare in the Victorian era? And the police certainly were intending to use these “distinguished marks“ descriptions predominantly in a time frame of a couple years (as in when people failed to appear for parole) vs. a couple decades anyway? In this case descriptions of scars make sense.

[Debra A]

I think you misunderstand me, Maria.
I was wondering if the description of distinguishing marks was taken in 1891 on Le Grand's entry to prison and never updated-seeing as distinguishing marks are usually things that don't usually change over short periods of time?

[Chris]

One point that Rob mentioned to me, which I thought was a good one but can't answer myself-were the distinguishing marks sections for prisoners filled in on the first entry to prison, say in Le Grand's case in 1891 and just retained within a file and referred to for future use, should the need arise, like having to give out a description?

That's an interesting question. My guess (but it is only a guess) would be that they were updated on release, together with the descriptions. I can certainly imagine extra scars could be acquired during a term in prison.

I couldn't resist posting this description of the "Marks" on another man who had been convicted of horsestealing. Was it considered unusual to show one's teeth when smiling a century ago?

[mariab]

Oh, you referred to the police updating the “distinguished marks“ descriptions, Debs?
Like Chris, I can imagine them updating them on release, otherwise it might have been too time-consuming? I assume Monty might know about such practices?

[Debra A]

I couldn't resist posting this description of the "Marks" on another man who had been convicted of horsestealing. Was it considered unusual to show one's teeth when smiling a century ago?
[ATTACH]12273[/ATTACH]

That's hilarious! All he had to do remain incognito was to keep his mouth shut then?..and if he happened to sprout an overnight mole as well, they would have no chance of ever recognising him again.