Originally posted by Paul Sutton
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
John Richardson
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
Don't you remember reading that I asked if you were sure those quotes were attributed to you, as I don't know which post they came from?
Ok, we got out hairs crossed, lets just drop it and carry on with the case?
Yes.
I do remember and I think perhaps the misunderstanding arose because the first time you saw what I had written, it was in italics.
I still have no idea what press report I was supposed to have misrepresented, but am also willing to move on to other controversies.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1 View Post
Chief Inspector Henry Moore and Sir Robert Anderson, both from Scotland Yard, thought that the graffito was the work of the murderer (Sugden, p. 254).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goulst...o#cite_note-16
"That a crime of this kind should have been committed without any clue being supplied by the criminal, is unusual, but that five successive murders should have been committed without our having the slightest clue of any kind is extraordinary, if not unique, in the annals of crime."
Maybe... he was able to process information in a rational manner and after more deliberation... changed his mind?
Bare in mind that that statement is made before Kelly's death, and when Tabram was still considered a victim of the same hand. So Eddowes was still the most recent victim.
But that statement... it's not exactly awash with ambiguity.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View Post1) It is highly unlikely that a serial killer would murder in that location at that time of the day.
2) Witnesses such as Albert Cadosche, are prone to recollecting events that did not actually happen that way in their entirety.
2) All of your examples are about the inaccuracy of eyewitness descriptions of suspects. Neither Cadosch nor Richardson gave an eyewitness description of a suspect. You can't just handwave away their testimony - you need to establish credible reasons that they were several hours off on their time estimates or that they would have deliberately lied."The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren
"Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View PostWhat do these studies suggest in relation to the accuracy of Albert's recollection of events?
"The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren
"Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paul Sutton View Post
Touchy!
No one asked you to post a tedious link to some article on risk, or deliver lectures, yet you do - and for free!
The word is 'maths' - not 'math'.
Now, one can tolerate some tourist spluttering and barging around, claiming ownership, acting like some Overlord. But there's a limit!
You've slated some ex-British cop, but scream when put in your place. I think his ideas are wrong, but you have constantly insulted him, whilst acting like John-Boy Walton in piety. Your attacks on him are ad-hom and nasty.
One can only imagine how some blustering countryman of yours would react, if some Limey were laying down the law, lecturing some NY ex-cop.
I think many of the best Ripperologists have been American/non-British. Why not study them and follow their lead? Don't misunderstand British reserve for acceptance. We put up with a lot of patronisation, but tend to have the last laugh.
SMILEY FACE!
I think you are going for arch and withering here, but it's actually just coming across as kinda hysterical and extremely rude.
Just sayin'!
SMILEY FACE
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Fleetwood Mac View PostVarious forms of information have been put forward to suggest Annie was not alive at a quarter past five in the morning.
* A period doctor's opinion about the time of death. As has been repeatedly shown, modern forensic studies show thatVictorian time of death estimates could be wildly inaccurate.
* Some posters offering unsupported opinions about digestion rates with no evidence to back those opinions.
"The full picture always needs to be given. When this does not happen, we are left to make decisions on insufficient information." - Christer Holmgren
"Unfortunately, when one becomes obsessed by a theory, truth and logic rarely matter." - Steven Blomer
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
Sounds plausible AP. But it would be good to hear a medical opinion.
If I pile into either her or the Mrs for professional opinions right now, I'm likely to get my head kicked in.
Once I have delivered a selection of Mr Dominoe's fine Italian Pies in front of them, I will gauge the temperature and maybe bring up the matter of severed intestinal deposits over dinner...
Or maybe wait till tomorrow.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by A P Tomlinson View Post
Then why did Anderson say on the 23rd October 1888 that:
"That a crime of this kind should have been committed without any clue being supplied by the criminal, is unusual, but that five successive murders should have been committed without our having the slightest clue of any kind is extraordinary, if not unique, in the annals of crime."
Bare in mind that that statement is made before Kelly's death, and when Tabram was still considered a victim of the same hand. So Eddowes was still the most recent victim.
Bear in mind also that Anderson was furious that Warren had, so he claimed, destroyed possibly vital evidence which, he claimed, could have enabled the police to identify the murderer.
That contradicts his statement about being clueless - although he personally obviously was.
Neither statement of his supports his much later contention that it had been quite obvious that the murderer had to be a Polish Jew.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paul Sutton View Post
Touchy!
No one asked you to post a tedious link to some article on risk, or deliver lectures, yet you do - and for free!
The word is 'maths' - not 'math'.
Now, one can tolerate some tourist spluttering and barging around, claiming ownership, acting like some Overlord. But there's a limit!
You've slated some ex-British cop, but scream when put in your place. I think his ideas are wrong, but you have constantly insulted him, whilst acting like John-Boy Walton in piety. Your attacks on him are ad-hom and nasty.
One can only imagine how some blustering countryman of yours would react, if some Limey were laying down the law, lecturing some NY ex-cop.
I think many of the best Ripperologists have been American/non-British. Why not study them and follow their lead? Don't misunderstand British reserve for acceptance. We put up with a lot of patronisation, but tend to have the last laugh.
SMILEY FACE!
When you started that with "Touchy" was it an expression of how you felt by any chance?
- Likes 3
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paul Sutton View Post
Touchy!
No one asked you to post a tedious link to some article on risk, or deliver lectures, yet you do - and for free!
The word is 'maths' - not 'math'.
The technical and more widely accepted abbreviation for the mass noun mathematics is “math” in both America and Canada, and “maths” is used in the United Kingdom, Australia, etc. But those are just preferences. Both versions of the word are accepted anywhere because they're both correct.
You need to get out more young man....
Confessing a lack of education is hardly something to brag about.....
Anytime you feel like returning to the point of the thread, just holler....
Regards, Jon S.
- Likes 3
Comment
Comment