Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Petticoat Parley: Women in Ripperology

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    I’m not usually an optimist Paul but I was hoping from for at least an acknowledgment from Harry that he was wrong. Or an apology for accusing me of lying when I clearly wasn’t.

    Sadly I was being too optimistic.

    Oh well.
    In the ordinary course of events, you'd have got an apology, but Harry never acknowledges when he's wrong or when he's been silly. He can say he doesn't want a court situation and in the next breath says he wants proof - proof, mark you - that would be acceptable to a court. And he says this despite being told over and over that the sort of proof he wants doesn't exist. He's clearly the sort who gets an idea in his head and repeats it over and over, sweeping aside everything anyone says until they leave him to believe whatever he wants to believe. Hoping for an apology was realistic, expecting to get one was optimistic, but you knew that.

    Comment


    • Is that another 10 to one sitution Paul.You turning this into a betting occasion.You are hilarious at times.I would relish Herlock accepting a court situation.I doubt our exchanges will continue without reference to what a court would decide.Now let Herlock answer the last question I put to him.He is capable of doing so I presume.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by harry View Post
        Is that another 10 to one sitution Paul.You turning this into a betting occasion.You are hilarious at times.I would relish Herlock accepting a court situation.I doubt our exchanges will continue without reference to what a court would decide.Now let Herlock answer the last question I put to him.He is capable of doing so I presume.
        Nope. No betting. I was just reminding Herlock that he was dealing with the sort of person who contradicts himself within a few words and probably wouldn't have the awareness to realise that they'd said anything wrong even when it was pointed out to them.

        And you didn't apologise. And you asked what you had to apologise for.

        I'm sure Herlock is very capable of answering your question, Harry. It's a pity you're incapable of answering his. Or anyone else's.

        Everything has been patiently explained to you several times over, you don't understand it and, far worse, you don't want to understand it. You have made up your mind and, as Ms Diddles said, you're not 'going to budge an inch'. Is there any reason why anyone should bother discussing this with you further?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by harry View Post
          Apology for what Herlock? Yes I have respect for Trevor.I beleve his suspect has more merit than Pauls,but both fall short of being convincing.Take Trevor's comment above,what were they waiting for alone on the streets at that time of the night.I do not know.Does anyone?Trevor doesn't say.How should I respond to comments so vague as that.Prostitution took place in daylight hours too.Should I suspect all women alone in the daylight hours to be prostitutes.
          You write Herlock,I can't be bothered to do the same reading as the rest of us.What reading and who ,are you referring to?You make a claim,omit any reference to that claim,then accuse me of not answering.How can I answer to things you do not state.Ms Diddles can assert all she wants,and be as confident as she wishes,it means nothing unless it is accmpanied by proof.I'll budge,Ms Diddles when someone gives me cause to.
          So Herlock,do you know the victims were prostitutes in the time leading up to their deaths and were soliciting the nights of their deaths,or do you just suspect they were? No long ramblings or references to the princes in the tower needed to answer that question.
          Firstly, and this is a distraction, Paul has no ‘suspect’ as far as I’m aware.

          Secondly, I have never said that it’s an issue that you have respect for Trevor.

          Thirdly, you refuse to accept any of the evidence that has been provided (including by Trevor) and you resort to repeatedly asking for it. So unless you’re expecting Trevor to go and remove any items from the files just so that he can provide them to you I fail to see what can be done.

          But worst of all Harry, you have blatantly avoided the point that I made. You just completely ignored it and this cannot be put down to error. It’s deliberate. I’ll try again.

          ​​​​​​……

          Ok Harry….. you said this:

          Herlock,you show the posters where I have said the term unfortuunate didn't mean prostitute but someone down on their luck.Unfortunately it is lies and misinformation such as Herlock posts,and is taken up by others,that shatters their case.
          How does the the murder of Eliza Grimwood prove or disprove that Polly Nichols was prostituting herself in Bucks Row.
          I'm waiting Herlock.
          Please read the above Harry. This is challenging me to show where you’ve said that ‘unfortunate’ didn’t mean ‘prostitute.’ You also accused me of lying about this.

          Have you read it Harry? It’s as clear as can be. No ambiguity here. You say at the end “I’m waiting Herlock.”

          So I then posted the proof that you demanded…

          . ,but the fact is there were thousands of women who were unfortunates and homeless(for those who wish to use statistics) who abstained from prostituting themselves.All or some of the five could have been among them.This obsession unfortuntes had to be prostitutes is akin to those who insisst a person who finds a body is automatically a suspect.Utterly futile reasoning
          Please read the above carefully Harry. There you are saying exactly what you denied saying. Saying what you accused me of lying about.

          ​​​​​​…..

          Now, I’ll say it again, are you going to continue avoiding what every single poster on here can see and understand? Or will you at the very least admit that you were wrong and that you shouldn’t have accused me of lying.

          Its impossible not to understand the above Harry. I can’t wait to hear how you try to continue avoiding acknowledging this.

          Im still waiting Harry.
          Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 12-08-2021, 10:47 AM.
          Regards

          Herlock Sholmes

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
            Firstly, and this is a distraction, Paul has no 'suspect' as far as I'm aware.
            Pretending not to know what he has to apologise and pretending it has something to do with Trevor is classic avoidance. Not apologising might be excusable if it wasn't for the fact that he also ignored my own demand that he justify a false accusation. In fact, Harry never responds to replies, he just moves on to something else. It's all diversionary tactics to avoid the embarrassment of admitting that he's wrong. Anyway, quite right, I have no suspect. In fact, although Trevor favoured Feigenbaum, I think I'm right in saying that he doesn't really have a suspect now either.

            Comment


            • https://photos.costume-works.com/ful...n_the_box4.jpg

              Comment


              • Yep! That's kinda how I see it!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by PaulB View Post

                  Pretending not to know what he has to apologise and pretending it has something to do with Trevor is classic avoidance. Not apologising might be excusable if it wasn't for the fact that he also ignored my own demand that he justify a false accusation. In fact, Harry never responds to replies, he just moves on to something else. It's all diversionary tactics to avoid the embarrassment of admitting that he's wrong. Anyway, quite right, I have no suspect. In fact, although Trevor favoured Feigenbaum, I think I'm right in saying that he doesn't really have a suspect now either.
                  I’ve pretty much given up hope that Harry will even acknowledge point Paul. But that appears to be the deliberate plan. It’s not possible that he can’t understand it as I’ve posted it 3 times now and in plain English.
                  Regards

                  Herlock Sholmes

                  Comment


                  • I have read the above Herlock,and I see no reason for an appolgy.Unfortunates were not neccessaily prostitues because they were unfortunates.Fact.You have been answered.
                    Now back to my question,which you are avoiding with your distractions.Do you have evidence the victims were prostitutes,or do you merely suspect they were?
                    The worst thing you can do Herlock is keep relying on Paul.It shows lack of confidence in yourself,as well as showing poor judgement.
                    I chose you ahead of Trevor and Paul for a one on one discussion, because I am of the opinion you would be more honest,and because I felt you had a better knowledge of the subject.Do'nt let posters down.
                    So do not give up hope,just choose better advisors.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by harry View Post
                      I have read the above Herlock,and I see no reason for an appolgy.Unfortunates were not neccessaily prostitues because they were unfortunates.Fact.You have been answered.
                      Now back to my question,which you are avoiding with your distractions.Do you have evidence the victims were prostitutes,or do you merely suspect they were?
                      The worst thing you can do Herlock is keep relying on Paul.It shows lack of confidence in yourself,as well as showing poor judgement.
                      I chose you ahead of Trevor and Paul for a one on one discussion, because I am of the opinion you would be more honest,and because I felt you had a better knowledge of the subject.Do'nt let posters down.
                      So do not give up hope,just choose better advisors.
                      Absolutely staggering!

                      Absolutely dishonest!

                      You called me a liar and asked me to PROVE that you indeed had said that Unfortunates were not specifically prostitutes. So you actually said that you HADN’T said it.

                      I proved that you HAD said it and I provided the quote.

                      And you still won’t acknowledge what every single poster on here can see with their own eyes.

                      Sorry Harry but that stinks. I expected better.

                      ​​​​​​…….



                      Regards

                      Herlock Sholmes

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by harry View Post
                        I have read the above Herlock,and I see no reason for an appolgy.Unfortunates were not neccessaily prostitues because they were unfortunates.Fact..
                        The only thing that’s clear Harry is that you are allergic to evidence. I provided one example which showed the point and Debra added how it was a regular thing for women at Inquests and court proceedings to call themselves ‘unfortunate.’ This was an accepted euphemism for prostitute. Just because you don’t like that doesn’t change the fact. But if you wish to go on with the ludicrous notion that those women were just commenting on their bad luck then your welcome to your delusion.

                        Regards

                        Herlock Sholmes

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by harry View Post
                          I have read the above Herlock,and I see no reason for an appolgy.Unfortunates were not neccessaily prostitues because they were unfortunates.Fact.You have been answered.
                          Now back to my question,which you are avoiding with your distractions.Do you have evidence the victims were prostitutes,or do you merely suspect they were?
                          The worst thing you can do Herlock is keep relying on Paul.It shows lack of confidence in yourself,as well as showing poor judgement.
                          I chose you ahead of Trevor and Paul for a one on one discussion, because I am of the opinion you would be more honest,and because I felt you had a better knowledge of the subject.Do'nt let posters down.
                          So do not give up hope,just choose better advisors.
                          You obviously have some kind of issue with Paul. The only one showing poor judgment Harry is you. In fact I’d say a complete lack of judgment. I rely on no one but you seem to have the arrogant view that it’s somehow belittling to agree with a man who is considered one of the foremost experts on the case in the world.

                          The ‘argument’ was won ages ago Harry because it only existed in the minds of 2 people bloody-minded posters who’s egos wouldn’t let them admit that they are wrong. Perhaps you should look around you Harry and realise that no one is agreeing with you. Why is that? Even The Baron has scarpered. You appear to respect Trevor’s opinion….yet he knows that you’re wrong too and has told you so.

                          There’s no point discussing this with you Harry. You just keep ducking and diving. It’s disappointed that you’ve taken this approach but if that’s how you debate then there’s simply no point.



                          Regards

                          Herlock Sholmes

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by harry View Post
                            I have read the above Herlock,and I see no reason for an appolgy.Unfortunates were not neccessaily prostitues because they were unfortunates.Fact.You have been answered.
                            Now back to my question,which you are avoiding with your distractions.Do you have evidence the victims were prostitutes,or do you merely suspect they were?
                            The worst thing you can do Herlock is keep relying on Paul.It shows lack of confidence in yourself,as well as showing poor judgement.
                            I chose you ahead of Trevor and Paul for a one on one discussion, because I am of the opinion you would be more honest,and because I felt you had a better knowledge of the subject.Do'nt let posters down.
                            So do not give up hope,just choose better advisors.
                            Talk about espionage being a wilderness of mirrors; if the security services want to generate real confusion they should recruit Harry. Maybe they did! Trying to unpack what Harry says is an art in itself.

                            Harry accused Herlock of lying and spreading misinformation. Herlock rightly and understandably objected to that and demanded an apology. Harry has refused, claiming that he has said nothing for which he should apologise. In this situation, Harry having made the accusation, the onus is on him to prove that Herlock has lied and spread misinformation. Harry has not done that.

                            Harry accused Herlock of lying and spreading misinformation when Herlock said that Harry had said that an unfortunate did NOT always mean prostitute. Harry demand that Herlock show where Harry had said this, then went on with the accusation of lying. Herlock showed where Harry had said it and asked for an apology. Harry claims he has nothing to apologise for because, as he expressed it, 'Unfortunates were not neccessaily prostitutes because they were unfortunates. Fact.' What Harry means by that sentence isn't entirely clear, but Harry seems to be defending his statement that 'an unfortunate' didn't always mean prostitute.

                            So, here's Harry, upset and calling Herlock a liar, because Herlock said Harry had said something which Harry had indeed said and which Harry believed!

                            Is that normal?

                            Is it more likely that Harry knew 'an unfortunate' meant a prostitute and, outraged that Herlock had accused him of saying differently, accused Herlock of being a liar and demanded that Herlock show him where he'd said it? When Herlock showed him, Harry switched horses midstream and has started arguing that 'an unfortunate' didn't always mean a prostitute.

                            Harry misses the point that he'd called Herlock a liar because Herlock had attributed to him something he didn't say and challenged him to show where Harry had said it. And that Herlock had responded to the challenge and shown him. That's what Harry should apologise for. If he won't, or if he won't show where Herlock has lied and spread misinformation, he should retire from Casebook.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                              The only thing that’s clear Harry is that you are allergic to evidence. I provided one example which showed the point and Debra added how it was a regular thing for women at Inquests and court proceedings to call themselves ‘unfortunate.’ This was an accepted euphemism for prostitute. Just because you don’t like that doesn’t change the fact. But if you wish to go on with the ludicrous notion that those women were just commenting on their bad luck then your welcome to your delusion.
                              I had in fact already commented on the subject of 'unfortunate' as prostitute in post #334, quoting Harry's post about not all unfortunates engaging in prostitution. I assumed Harry wasn't as interested in discussing the topic as me.

                              Comment


                              • I have no issues with anyone Herlock,experts included,but neither am I overawed by them.They haven't solved the case.I look around the internet Herlock and find there are untold numbers that do agree with my view .Ask Rubenhold and her supporters.I look around these boards and notice only a small group expressing dissaproval.I'm satisfied.
                                Proof.Evidence that reveals the truth.That is all I am asking for Herlock.In this case evidence that the JTR victims were prostitutes,soliciting the day they were killed.
                                Don't you want the truth Herlock?Do you know the truth?
                                If there is no point in discussing it with me,why do you persist.You say unfortunate was an euphemism for prostitute.Every unfortunate?Where outside of your claim,is that stated?
                                Why do you cite Trevor,in particular.what is it about him that makes his claims more valued than mine.
                                You see your fault Herlock.So many claims ,with nohing to support those claims.
                                You are the one that is ducking and diving,and by your latest rants,losing the plot.
                                Is what Dedra said ,evidence that the five victims were prostitutes?Please do inform us,I'm all agog.
                                I eagerly await your next load of rubbish.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X