Tweet
whatever remains, however inprobable, must be the truth!
Remember that guys.
Remember that guys.
-
-
Or it must be something called "undecided", "undetermined", etc...~ Khanada
I laugh in the face of danger. Then I run and hide until it goes away. -
The obvious answer here would be that it was impossible to prove Maybrick was the Ripper. Therefore, that he was not must be the truth
B.Comment
-
You could also say it has been impossible to disprove Maybrick was the Ripper. Therefore, he was and it must be the truth.
Comment
-
But what have you first eliminated as "impossible" to end up with Maybrick, Cotty?Comment
-
By which logic... it is impossible to prove that the vast majority of people alive in 1888 weren't the Ripper. And therefore they all were.Originally posted by cotty View PostYou could also say it has been impossible to disprove Maybrick was the Ripper. Therefore, he was and it must be the truth.
B.Comment
-
True, but Maybrick had a beautiful hat. Not to mention his watch!
Amitiés,
DavidComment
-
His ladies watch!Originally posted by DVV View PostTruth is female, since truth is beauty rather than handsomeness; this [...] would certainly explain the saying that a lie could run around the world before Truth has got its, correction, her boots on, since she would have to chose which pair - the idea that any woman in a position to choose would have just one pair of boots being beyond rational belief.
Unseen Academicals - Terry Pratchett.Comment
-
Well. Im pretty sure you all didnt do it. I know I didnt do it. So that narrows it down right there!Comment
-
Hi Mitch;
The quote from Donald Rumblelow, (which goes something like this); 'when I get to the Pearly Gates and ask Saint Peter who JtR was, my answer will be 'who'?, is all I know and I agree with him completely. I'm paraphrasing like mad btw.
JFJJustForJolly
Après moi, le délugeComment
-
And don't forget the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.Originally posted by cotty View Post
JFJJustForJolly
Après moi, le délugeComment
-
Boy, someone sure doesn't understand simple English if they are trying to suggest that the pithy statement in th title of the thread has any bearing on advancing Maybrick as a suspect.
By the Holmesian logic expressed in that sentiment, the only way for it to have to have been Maybrick is if you establish that all other suspects -- and all the people who could be suspects but have just not been named as such yet -- are all impossible. Not just unlikely, impossible!
You're only about a million or so people away from supporting Maybrick in any way. Good luck on that. Why don't you take a break on posting here until you get the first, say, 100,000 people proven impossible and then report back on your progress.
Dan Norder
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Web site: www.RipperNotes.com - Email: dannorder@gmail.comComment
-
Cotty,
Had not the so-called 'Diary' identified the Whitechapel Killer as James Maybrick, there is not one single, solitary piece of evidence which connects that sad gent to the Ripper killings. In fairness, there is also not one single, solitary piece of evidence to connect many of the other suggested culprits, either. I could pick out of a hat the name of any male alive in 1888 and between the ages of, say 25 and 50 and make as good a case for him being the Ripper as the author of the 'Diary' makes for Maybrick. Simple as that.
Except....James Maybrick did have London connections. His wife did say that he had told her something which she said was 'intended to frighten her'. And he does look the part....
Cheers,
GrahamWe are suffering from a plethora of surmise, conjecture and hypothesis. - Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure Of Silver BlazeComment
-
Cotty:Originally posted by Graham View Post
The only thing is... the handwriting of the real James Maybrick does not remotely look like the handwriting in the diary. And that is one of the fatal mistakes the forger has done, he never imagined that investigators would take the trouble in searching for documents written by the real James Maybrick´s hand to compare them both. If the two handwritings had been identical...then that would have proven that the diary was genuine. The fact that they are not, has proven its undoing. A forger has to do only one mistake to be caught. In this case, the forger did more than one.
I have no idea why you are trying to promote this hoax Graham and why you are so hostile to me.
A mi tampoco me importa un bledo lo que tu pienses de mi.
MariaLast edited by Maria; 10-06-2008, 01:02 AM.Comment
-
Comment