Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Special Announcement

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by Observer View Post

    At last. I always believed you thought that Maybrick was JTR
    Eh? Because I pointed out that someone was very good at making JM's signature look like JM's signature?

    That's just a fact, Observer. It's not up for debate.

    Keep up.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by Observer View Post
    Right, but Dundas did service Mr Stewart's watch, and Dundas did say he very rarely serviced Verity watches. He still couldn't remember either of the Verity watches having inscriptions though, or he would have said as much
    No, Dundas may have got more than one of Mr Murphy's watches going, but if Dundas didn't remember the large ornate JO inscribed on the back cover of the Maybrick watch, or the clear H 9/3 inside it [engraved after the Jack/Maybrick scratch marks], and then described another watch entirely when asked about it, I'd say he had no chance at all of identifying and remembering a few barely visible scratch marks as 'inscriptions', and was even less observant than someone whose chosen pseudonym is Observer.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post



    All I know is that whoever scratched JM's signature in it was very good at scratching JM's signature in it.
    At last. I always believed you thought that Maybrick was JTR

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post

    Have you actually read Mike's handwritten work, as posted by Ike,

    And have you even read the diary facsimile, in order to make a fair and balanced comparison regarding the spelling?
    Yes I have and there are spelling mistakes

    Read postings from Ike? Are you serious?

    Originally posted by caz View Post
    Trevor's a former cop and Columbo would like to have been a gumshoe. That's worrying enough, so please don't tell me you hold literacy classes or I think I will have the screaming abdabs and have to lie down in a darkened room.
    I believe you'd look quite attractive in a darkened room



    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by Observer View Post

    Is there any of that fluorescent trifle left, I'd much prefer that?

    And the watch. Do you think it's genuine?
    I'll save some trifle for you after the LOBSTER is served up, Observer.

    If you don't swallow your lobster, how can you have any pudding?

    Oh yes, it's a genuine gold watch. No flies on me.

    All I know is that whoever scratched JM's signature in it was very good at scratching JM's signature in it.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post

    And why on earth do you suppose any jeweller would have done that, with people like you in the world, waiting to describe such a claim as 'absurd'?

    Love,

    Caz
    X
    It's pointless, I can only think he had a taste of that fluorescent trifle you dish out at tea time before he would do so.

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post

    No, the watch repairer was Timothy Dundas, who claimed there were no such scratch marks in the watch he serviced. Unfortunately, his description of this watch bore no resemblance to the Maybrick watch, which led Feldman to believe there were two watches in the story, while back in the real world it was obvious that Dundas was simply describing the wrong watch.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Right, but Dundas did service Mr Stewart's watch, and Dundas did say he very rarely serviced Verity watches. He still couldn't remember either of the Verity watches having inscriptions though, or he would have said as much

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by MrBarnett View Post

    Ike,

    I hope you’re not having lunch with Jane Mansfield. (See Derek and Clive)

    Gary
    I keep thinking of Lobsterissimus Bumbakissimus Gary. Worst job I never had!

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by Observer View Post
    By the way Murphy was the watch repairer was he not? He said he didn't notice any inscriptions to the watch. So who are you saying it is who tried to polish them out?
    No, the watch repairer was Timothy Dundas, who claimed there were no such scratch marks in the watch he serviced. Unfortunately, his description of this watch bore no resemblance to the Maybrick watch, which led Feldman to believe there were two watches in the story, while back in the real world it was obvious that Dundas was simply describing the wrong watch.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post



    Now open wide... when the meds kick in you should be able to answer my watch query.
    Is there any of that fluorescent trifle left, I'd much prefer that?

    And the watch. Do you think it's genuine?

    Leave a comment:


  • MrBarnett
    replied
    Originally posted by Iconoclast View Post

    Hi Abe,

    Great post - I loved it! (Could we get some lobster GIFs in there next time, I wonder?)

    Just a quick note of clarification before The Switchblade parks outside your gaff in the dead of night, Inside Story is definitely not a pro-Maybrick text in the sense that it doesn't have a pro-Maybrick agenda. If it reads like a pro-Maybrick text, that will be because there is a natural pro-Maybrick narrative within the Ripper history which is rarely (if ever) contradicted by the existing evidence, so Messrs Morris, Skinner, and Linder simply reported what was on the record via research and interviews and - if that caused the eventual book to feel more pro- than anti-Maybrick - that would be because that was where the evidence took them.

    We know Morris is on Interpol's Dangerous Persons list, and Skinner (who favours Druitt, by the way) and Linder look to me like a right pair of bruisers (probably recruited by Morris way back when for some of her nefarious activities) so - unless you correct yourself - I suspect that your dystopian nightmare is going to be even more dystopian than mine.

    Now, what shall I have for lunch? Oh - I know!

    Cheers,

    Ike
    Ike,

    I hope you’re not having lunch with Jane Mansfield. (See Derek and Clive)

    Gary

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by Observer View Post

    Oh I have plenty of time at the moment, the obligatory straight jacket when entering this thread has slipped somewhat, and I can just manage to type. I can't for the life of me think why any experienced jeweler would attempt such a thing can you? Rubbing out insignificant scratches from the inside back cover to enhance the watches appearance? It's absurd. I can only think he was going along with the report, and for some strange reason he said he was the one who tried to polish out the inscriptions.
    And why on earth do you suppose any jeweller would have done that, with people like you in the world, waiting to describe such a claim as 'absurd'?

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by Observer View Post

    Of course there are no spelling mistakes in the DAirY (bejabbers they've got me doing it now) are TrEhE, damn? Never the less, the Triple F's (Floor Board Faithful) insistence that Mike Barrett had nothing to do with the creation of the Diary (that's better) is in tact. I've all ways thought it a fake
    Have you actually read Mike's handwritten work, as posted by Ike, which was supposedly copied faithfully from ten 'missing pages' removed from the diary and kept in a bank vault in case of future need?

    And have you even read the diary facsimile, in order to make a fair and balanced comparison regarding the spelling?

    Trevor's a former cop and Columbo would like to have been a gumshoe. That's worrying enough, so please don't tell me you hold literacy classes or I think I will have the screaming abdabs and have to lie down in a darkened room.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    By the way Murphy was the watch repairer was he not? He said he didn't notice any inscriptions to the watch. So who are you saying it is who tried to polish them out?

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post

    Hi Observer,

    It wasn't erobitha's explanation; it was Mr Stewart [sorry, Mr Murphy, as erobitha says], who sold Albert the watch! He said he noticed the scratch marks [which to the naked eye just look like random scratch marks at most, not engravings] and tried to make them less obvious before putting the watch on sale. Now, he may have been trying to do the impossible, but it was what he said he did, and I see no reason why he would lie about it, can you?

    Logically, he should now be your prime suspect for making the scratch marks, so I'm looking forward to hearing how this lets him off in your opinion, while still leaving the Johnsons guilty.

    In your own time.

    Love,

    Caz
    X
    Oh I have plenty of time at the moment, the obligatory straight jacket when entering this thread has slipped somewhat, and I can just manage to type. I can't for the life of me think why any experienced jeweler would attempt such a thing can you? Rubbing out insignificant scratches from the inside back cover to enhance the watches appearance? It's absurd. I can only think he was going along with the report, and for some strange reason he said he was the one who tried to polish out the inscriptions.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X