Patricia Cornwell

[Cap'n Jack]

But maybe, Dan, in 14 years time Cornwell will be doing the same thing as Stewart does now, delivering us first class information and material that is totally factual and unconnected to any suspect based publication.
But Stewart wasn't doing it 14 years ago.
He was feeding us with a hodge podge of suspect based nonsense, to emphasise his book which had just been published.
Which Cornwell also did when her book was published.
We all grow up.
Stewart has.
And Cornwell will.
The trouble is that I don't grow up.
And many posters are stuck in the past.
Make no mistake here, I respect, love and admire Stewart as the finest researcher and writer in this field today, but that doesn't mean to say that I forget where he came from... the same place as Cornwell came from a few years back, with a couple of tacky suspect related novels.
I admire Stewart, greatly, but I have also seen him make untoward attacks on subjects that don't suit his purpose or situation, as in the 17th September letter fiasco, and I see no difference in Cornwell's attitude as discussed here.

[Jenni Shelden]

Ap,

you clearly have not grown up.

BTW
you've never promoted a suspect have you?

Stay off teh brandy they must have AA in Jersey

Jenni

[Jeff Leahy]

Then there's the whole watermark dating thing...yeah...a master of checking the facts FIRST.

Well yes that is exactly what this is about..not some childish PC tiff seven years ago...

Dan Norder has made a very serious statement about an internationally recognised expert...Peter Bower.

A man who I met at the tate a few years ago, and gave me the honour of some time and opinions...I beleive that his findings were sound..but I'm not an expert on paper

Calling into account his 'findings' questions the validity of his other work? which is extensive

You really dont get it do you Ally..you cant see the wood for the tree's..

This is a very Serious set of alligations that could destroy a mans career, however I beleive him to be totally incorrect..if it proves otherwise I shall apologuise publicly to Dan..

honour would suggest the same in return..

[Tom_Wescott]

How can you still believe Dan is incorrect? He showed you the photos. Did Bower show you photographic proof or were his word and paycheck enough? I think you're just being stubborn now because you didn't think Dan had the goods when he did.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

No Tom we need to know precisely what it is we are looking at. So please allow me the same courtesy of time..

either Dan or Peter has clearly made a major mistake

[JSchmidt]

Photos of the watermarks? Seems like I missed them. Were/Are they online?
I am quite interested in them, not just from the ripper angle but also from pure curiosity about the watermarks themselves.

[Tom_Wescott]

Schmidt,

It's a few pages back on this thread, a post of Dan Norder's.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Dan Norder]

But maybe, Dan, in 14 years time Cornwell will be doing the same thing as Stewart does now, delivering us first class information and material that is totally factual and unconnected to any suspect based publication.

It's certainly possible. I was honestly surprised that she even bothered to hire Keith Skinner to do any fact checking based upon her previous history. I do consider that to be a great step forward, and I've said as much on these boards in the past and at the Whitechapel Society meeting I was at last October. But it's certainly not enough to undo all of her past actions yet, especially not when we have yet to know what the end result will be. I doubt she has him trying to find evidence proving beyond a shadow of a doubt he was in France on the night of a key Ripper murder.

[Cap'n Jack]

Well, Dan, there are are several ways to Skin a Pat.

[Jeff Leahy]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3867853.ece

Well if Dans correct about Bower this throws the cat amoung the pigeons

[JSchmidt]

Bad case of oops on my part, I somehow managed to completely overlook Dan's post with the watermarks. No idea why but it was not on purpose.
Sorry Mr. Norder.
And thanks for providing the watermarks. Do you happen to have a complete image of the watermark? I'm just curious if it was all letters and numbers, or if it included a symbol like earlier watermarks.

[Stewart P Evans]

Opinion

I admire Stewart, greatly, but I have also seen him make untoward attacks on subjects that don't suit his purpose or situation, as in the 17th September letter fiasco, and I see no difference in Cornwell's attitude as discussed here.

I stick to my opinion A P. I saw and read the '17th Sept 1888' letter years ago whilst working on a project with the PRO. As an artefact it has, and had, no relevance whatsoever to any 'purpose or situation' of mine. I thought it was a modern (c. 1988) fake then and I still do now. I don't know anyone who has seen it who believes it to be genuine. Debate about it appears to be fruitless, divisive and unproductive and I'd rather not debate it. I gave my opinion on it when asked and anyone else is free to agree or disagree - I couldn't care less, it's up to them. I also thank you for your kind comments and hope that, perhaps, we may return to a more productive relationship.

[JSchmidt]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3867853.ece

Well if Dans correct about Bower this throws the cat amoung the pigeons

What exactly are you trying to say? That if he proved one thing a forgery he surely must be right about the other?

I could see sense in Mr. Bowers argument if he said the paper was cut in a very similar way regarding mechanical wear during the cutting process with the conclusion that the paper has the same origin/is from the same factory.
Or that he found paper fibres which fit together rather neatly.
Both papers are not pristine sheets, so the edge of the sheets was subject to at least some tear and wear. So the structure may have changed in the timespan between the cutting and our times which makes that method of comparison less reliable.
But to say that paper from two different years marked with a watermark that allows us to date it are from the same batch is hardly believable.
Even if we account for the turn of the year during a production run, refitting the wire frames to make paper would be a top priority as it is both trademark and advertisement for the paper manufacturer. So how would that work?

[Dan Norder]

BDo you happen to have a complete image of the watermark? I'm just curious if it was all letters and numbers, or if it included a symbol like earlier watermarks.

Unfortunately the only images I have access to are the ones Cornwell provided in the hardback version of her book. Other than a small section that was trimmed off while doing my quick scans, those are the only parts of the watermarks that her images show.

I may be mistaken, but I think at some time in the past someone else had posted a better image of the Openshaw letter watermark, but I don't have that. Perhaps someone else might provide that.

[The Grave Maurice]

Yankee

Good luck finding a definition that will fit all the various things people mean by it, though.

These fine distinctions may be relevant to people who live in the States but, believe me, in the rest of the world, "Yankee" or "Yank" is used to refer to all inhabitants of the U. S. of A., no matter where they happen to reside in that great republic.