Lawende was silenced

[Elamarna]

I thought we were discussing a murder that occurred on a street in London.

The same way I thought we were earlier discussing a report in 1888 written by Swanson, but it seems we were discussing private comments he made many years later, and comments by a man who was not in the police at the time.

It seems the focus changes every time the temperature gets hot.


I raised many points in post # 558 about misleading comments in post #554.

These issues have of course been ignored.


steve

[Pierre]

I thought we were discussing a murder that occurred on a street in London.

No. We were discussing hats and uniforms.

[David Orsam]

Pierre, if it helps I will re-phrase the question:

Would a uniformed police officer in either London or South Africa wearing a cloth cap with a cloth peak in the street in 1888 have been incorrectly dressed according to police regulations?

[David Orsam]

A British police force in South Africa.

I thought we were discussing a murder that occurred on a street in London.

[Pierre]

Which force? Metropolitan Police or City of London would you say Pierre?

A British police force in South Africa.

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

Is it X-mas again?

Regards, Pierre

Sorry that is not how academics behave in any discipline.

You expose your true self every time you reply in this manner.


steve

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;391576]

And with all due respect I hope that is the only reason why you seem upset.

Regards, Pierre

Actually Pierre what upsets me is the hypocrisy of this debate.

The double standards employed.

We may not morally name a suspect without proof, but it is permissible to accuse others of a conspiracy with NO evidence.

Do not just say that certain people were involved in one.


If there was a conspiracy, provide evidence to support and expose it!

However it seems that you do not wish to address this point; not that I am surprised.


steve

[David Orsam]

Would a uniformed police officer wearing a cloth cap with a cloth peak in the street in 1888 have been incorrectly dressed according to police regulations?

[David Orsam]

British police, David.

Which force? Metropolitan Police or City of London would you say Pierre?

[David Orsam]

That is your attempt to write history. But it is written on silence.

Lawende was not "(wrongly) saying...". He was not saying at all.

You don't seem to be following Pierre.

I am adopting your argument that Lawende might have mistaken in what he saw because he didn't have a camera with him and wasn't able to physically touch the man he saw.

Given that he might have been mistaken, his description of the man could have been completely wrong. That actually could have been if he thought the man was a police officer as much as a sailor.

So what I'm saying is that Mr Crawford might have stopped him from giving his evidence because it might have been wrong and he might have wrongly identified the killer in court as a sailor or a police officer or a Jewish man. This might have prejudiced the chances of securing a conviction if the police arrested someone who did not look anything like the man seen by Lawende.

Do you understand the point?

[Pierre]

What is the photograph supposed to show Pierre?

British police, David.

[David Orsam]

If you did not, I will help you with an example:

What is the photograph supposed to show Pierre?

[Pierre]

Pierre

I have some simple questions for you:

Apart from the reports of what Lawende saw, which you do not accept:

1. Do you have or have you seen a source in which Lawende gives any other description.

2. What independent source( that is other than your secret ones) suggests that description given by Swanson is wrong?

The only persons who would know what the man seen by Lawende was wearing are the 2 friends with lawende and that man himself.

Therefore are you suggesting that an individual has written:

a. That he was the person seen by Lawende.

b. Reported what he was wearing.

c. Claimed to be the killer.

S

Hi Steve,

Is it X-mas again?

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

That is your attempt to write history. But it is written on silence.

Lawende was not "(wrongly) saying...". He was not saying at all.

Did you manage step 2, David?

If you did not, I will help you with an example:

[Elamarna]

Pierre

I have some simple questions for you:

Apart from the reports of what Lawende saw, which you do not accept:

1. Do you have or have you seen a source in which Lawende gives any other description.

2. What independent source( that is other than your secret ones) suggests that description given by Swanson is wrong?

The only persons who would know what the man seen by Lawende was wearing are the 2 friends with lawende and that man himself.

Therefore are you suggesting that an individual has written:

a. That he was the person seen by Lawende.

b. Reported what he was wearing.

c. Claimed to be the killer.

S