Tweet
Link to Post Number 4. Interesting who posted it.
-
Link to Post Number 4. Interesting who posted it. -
The great thing about being human is that one can learn new things, have new insights and develop one’s mind.
To do so is admirable, not deplorable. -
Quite. The fact that Christer freely acknowledges how much his opinion has changed over the 12 years since posting that is to his credit. Wouldn't it be terrible if we all clung tightly to a belief, never willing to learn new things or uncover new perspectives?
I will add though, it is kind of funny seeing those vintage posts when there so at odds with current ideas.Thems the Vagaries.....Comment
-
I can't believe I've missed this all these years. Here Christer himself uses one of (the many) issues I and so many others have used to argue against his "suspect". Of course, now he will say that his man stowed the knife and accosted Paul as part-and-parcel of the absurd, regrettable, ill-conceived, and it seems now - dishonest - "Mizen Scam". Yet, in 2008 even Christer himself couldn't conceive of a killer, unobserved, under cover of darkness, deciding the only option upon hearing the footfalls of a stranger 40 yards off, was to "bluff his way out"... when it's clear all that was necessary was simply to have walked away. Perhaps this was before Christer decided that Cross/Lechmere was a psychopath and that this is, of course, what a psychopath would do. He likes the action, you know.Originally posted by Sleuth1888 View Post
Thank you for this, Sleuth1888! I shall grab a pint or five tonight and rewatch Chris and Ed's "internationally send" documentary with this post in mind.... and allow hilarity to ensue.
Comment
-
-
I agree. Although, when one reads the vitriol that Christer has written over the years, directed at those who've simply presented him - nearly verbatim - with what he himself presented in his post from 2008..... one's admiration may be tempered... somewhat.Originally posted by Kattrup View Post
In all honesty, I go back to something Christer wrote on these boards, to me, some five, six years back... when I was open to his theory but took issue with just this aspect of it, along with the "Mizen Scam" itself. He told me to "view Cross/Lechmere's (proposed) actions - remaining on the scene Buck's Row, engaging Paul, finding Mizen, reporting what he'd seen, the knife on his person all the while.. his voluntary appearance at the inquiry - "with the idea that he (Cross/Lechmere) was guilty".
THIS must be what Christer decided to do. And, obviously, THAT point-of-view can only provide one conclusion.Comment
-
This only applies if you change your mind to a more sensible point of view and you do it with good grace. Neither is applicable here.Originally posted by Kattrup View PostComment
Comment