John Richardson

[Paul Sutton]

I think most people, upon reading what you wrote above, may be wondering what is wrong with you.

You write that the matter was being politely discussed, as though my making a comment somehow constitutes an act of rudeness.

You then accuse me of half-reading instead of reading - what is that other than an assumption or supposition?

You then claim that I decided "I've not had MY say on this matter... here goes!".

Is that not a peculiar reaction?

All I did was quote from Wikipedia, which cited Sugden on Anderson's views about the very subject - the graffito - being politely discussed.

The point I made was relevant.

I then made the further point that Anderson considered the graffito to have been vital evidence.

That point is highly relevant.

Instead of acknowledging that, you launched a personal attack on me.

Of course, Anderson's statements at the time about being clueless do not support his later claim that it was obvious that a Polish Jew was the murderer.

I am entitled to point that out too.

He's another of these long-time contributors who lays down the law and imagines people are quaking. His posts are always dull. His hypocrisy was breath-taking.

Keep up your good work. We disagreed about the anti-Semitism (in fact I agree with him on this) but it was a good conversation.

Yes, he personally attacked you. Worried probably.

Don't EVER respond on claims by those who act as overseers, on their claims of one's wrong doing. On the other hand, don't let them hide their mistakes behind such bluster.

I'm sure you don't need such advice, but it may be reassuring.

They're always time-wasters, always guilty of what they chastise in others.

I was wrong, in an earlier response to this Wickerman - and fully acknowledged it (I misread his wordy reply on binary). In many years of reading here, I've yet to see him do this - though he makes many mistakes.

As an example, he's now claiming 'Math' is accepted in the UK, for 'maths'. It's not - and most of us positively bridle at it. In the same way, we never call football 'soccer'. He can wiki that too, and show it's 'correct'. Not a single English fan ever calls it soccer.

Trivial, but an example of how some feel they cannot admit to the slightest error. When one has intellectual confidence, then it costs nothing to say: 'I was wrong'.

But to the panicked auto-didact, it's death.

I realise this will annoy many! But I have been appointed by Fred Abberline's great-niece to fight for British justice.

(Queue Wikerman and AP googling and going aha...).

A plea - if any of them reply, please make it other than an utterly predictable one.

[Paul Sutton]

You might want to stop digging...

Oh no, I've been buckled.

[Lewis C]

If she had been given a meal by her murderer - such as the fish and chips some have suggested he gave Kelly - then would you not expect something more substantial in the post-mortem report?

Yes, I would think so, but it might not have been a full meal. It may be that the other 2 possibilities that I mentioned are more likely.

[Paul Sutton]

I've been called worse by better....

Just like in your last post, you raised three issues; math, Westinghouse, and that I'm American - and you were wrong on all three counts.
You struck out again above.
How's that for embarrassing yourself!

Your best way out of this is to just return to the topic and behave yourself, no more talk about professions.
No-one is interested in personal jabs & one-upmanship.

Math is universally known not to be used in this country - not something a tourist would know. Idiom is the term for you to Google next.

Westinghouse is not a household name - and why is it a proud-boast to have worked for them?

Being an American is something to be proud of; sadly you're not!

Your posts are constant one-upmanship. I understand you've bored on here for decades - I've read your stuff for some time - but why is it so shocking to observe this?

I've removed more difficult - and demanding - material from the base of my shoes.

[A P Tomlinson]

You're Canadian? Oh god.

You might want to stop digging...

[Wickerman]

Where on earth did you acquire the skill to Google? Was it at Westerhose College, Pallookaville?

No one in England (indeed the UK) uses 'math'. The femtosecond it's used, we think 'Oh God, an American. Here comes a lecture on our history.'

I've noticed with you an acute ignorance of idiom. Not surprising, but worth considering. One needs to be English - possibly even a Londoner - to fully get JtR.

Sadly for you, this is decided at birth. No amount of tourism can help. I can - so it's lucky you found me - but it won't be cheap.

As said, I think many of the best Ripperologists aren't British - Christer and Tim W for example. Study them at length and learn.

I'm fascinated why so many Americans are JtR obsessives. You live in the world's leading producer of serial killers - and abductors. It's arguably your main cultural activity.

Surely you could show more patriotism and crack some of those? Turn on the news now, there's probably another uncovered.

Be a good American!

In fact, I think I can claim to be one, and help. I lived for a year in Pittsburgh, and presumably encountered dozens of them.

I've been called worse by better....

Just like in your last post, you raised three issues; math, Westinghouse, and that I'm American - and you were wrong on all three counts.
You struck out again above.
How's that for embarrassing yourself!

Your best way out of this is to just return to the topic and behave yourself, no more talk about professions.
No-one is interested in personal jabs & one-upmanship.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

What are you talking about?

You chimned in to lay the facts down, on a matter that was being politely discussed that you clearly half read and decided "I've not had MY say on this matter... here goes!". I pointed out the actual thing we were talking about (i.e Anderson saying they had no clues) and rather than saying, "Oh, right... I misunderstood what you were talking about." and leaving it at that you have to go off on one about Anderson being clueless and swinging hard about to return to the subject of Polish Jews.

What is wrong with you?

I think most people, upon reading what you wrote above, may be wondering what is wrong with you.

You write that the matter was being politely discussed, as though my making a comment somehow constitutes an act of rudeness.

You then accuse me of half-reading instead of reading - what is that other than an assumption or supposition?

You then claim that I decided "I've not had MY say on this matter... here goes!".

Is that not a peculiar reaction?

All I did was quote from Wikipedia, which cited Sugden on Anderson's views about the very subject - the graffito - being politely discussed.

The point I made was relevant.

I then made the further point that Anderson considered the graffito to have been vital evidence.

That point is highly relevant.

Instead of acknowledging that, you launched a personal attack on me.

Of course, Anderson's statements at the time about being clueless do not support his later claim that it was obvious that a Polish Jew was the murderer.

I am entitled to point that out too.

[A P Tomlinson]

You make it sound as if people are suggesting Chapman was killed at noonday in the middle of Spitalfield's market.

A later TOD means Chapman was killed in a fenced backyard in the early morning twilight on an overcast night of the New Moon. Even shortly after sunrise, it would have still been overcast and the buildings and fences would have cast long shadows.

People seem to be confused about the difference between Night time, Dawn, Sunrise and "Broad Daylight" which I've seen thrown around a few times on this thread... (I;d like to say it was thrown inaccurately, but it does seem to land in certain targets.)

Sunrise was somewhere between (I've found conflicting sources) 5:12 and 5:25 in London that day, it would have been Dawn for the preceding 35 or so minutes.
But as you mention, it was pretty overcast.
If he had begun the hunt and found her around or before 4.45 it would still have been pretty much night JUST starting to throw a little ambiant light that wold break the blackness.
Is he really going to stop once it begins to brighten a little?
Maybe?
But if he has gone to all that troube is he going to throw another chance away because it's getting a little lighter? He's driven by a pretty strong compulsion at this point in the case.

If Chapman knows the place, and has pointed out that once Richardson has left it will be clear till the rest get up, (assuming that they are going down there for a shag...) I suppose the question becomes "How much of a risk taker IS he?"

[Paul Sutton]

I didn't know what he meant by 'not you're language', and all that drivel about colonialism, he thinks I'm an American.

It was transformers over here in the 1980's Hamilton, Ontario, was practically owned by Westinghouse. Huge, huge, world-wide company back then.
Trimmed down a lot now.

You're Canadian? Oh god.

[Paul Sutton]

Hmmmmm!

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

Excellent.

[Wickerman]

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.

Sounds good

[Wickerman]

I used to work for a company that did work for Westinghouse Brakes. A long established company.

I didn't know what he meant by 'not you're language', and all that drivel about colonialism, he thinks I'm an American.

It was transformers over here in the 1980's Hamilton, Ontario, was practically owned by Westinghouse. Huge, huge, world-wide company back then.
Trimmed down a lot now.

[Paul Sutton]

Where on earth did you acquire the skill to Google? Was it at Westerhose College, Pallookaville?

No one in England (indeed the UK) uses 'math'. The femtosecond it's used, we think 'Oh God, an American. Here comes a lecture on our history.'

I've noticed with you an acute ignorance of idiom. Not surprising, but worth considering. One needs to be English - possibly even a Londoner - to fully get JtR.

Sadly for you, this is decided at birth. No amount of tourism can help. I can - so it's lucky you found me - but it won't be cheap.

As said, I think many of the best Ripperologists aren't British - Christer and Tim W for example. Study them at length and learn.

I'm fascinated why so many Americans are JtR obsessives. You live in the world's leading producer of serial killers - and abductors. It's arguably your main cultural activity.

Surely you could show more patriotism and crack some of those? Turn on the news now, there's probably another uncovered.

Be a good American!

In fact, I think I can claim to be one, and help. I lived for a year in Pittsburgh, and presumably encountered dozens of them.

Edited when I found out you're Canadian:

It's no one's fault where they're born - so bad luck and make the most of it.

[Fiver]

Experience tells us that it is unusual for a serial killer to commit a murder outdoors in daylight, and when the community is active nearby.

You make it sound as if people are suggesting Chapman was killed at noonday in the middle of Spitalfield's market.

A later TOD means Chapman was killed in a fenced backyard in the early morning twilight on an overcast night of the New Moon. Even shortly after sunrise, it would have still been overcast and the buildings and fences would have cast long shadows.

[A P Tomlinson]

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.

What are you talking about?

You chimned in to lay the facts down, on a matter that was being politely discussed that you clearly half read and decided "I've not had MY say on this matter... here goes!". I pointed out the actual thing we were talking about (i.e Anderson saying they had no clues) and rather than saying, "Oh, right... I misunderstood what you were talking about." and leaving it at that you have to go off on one about Anderson being clueless and swinging hard about to return to the subject of Polish Jews.

What is wrong with you?