The Complete Jack the Ripper A-Z

[Jeff Leahy]

I offered Begg a bunch of info and because of some politics brewing at the time he told me where to stick it.

Don’t try and squirm out of it by pretending I don't understand your grammar.

Is the above statement true? Or have you just made it up?

Because if it is true you should be able to prove exactly what information you passed to Paul…and a reply saying

‘You can stick it’

There’s no complicated grammar involved in that.

Pirate

[Tom_Wescott]

I hope that someday you know the love of a woman.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

So the whole story about you supplying information to Paul Begg for the New, A to Z and Paul telling you to ‘stick it’,

IS A COMPLETE AND UTTER LIE IS IT WESCOTT?

Because as far as I can see you can provide nothing to substantiate your pathetic twisted claims.

I think everyone on casebook should be aware that Tom Wescott’s claim and his whole story is a total fabrication.

As are most of his posts, childish personal vendettas, best ignored.

There is absolutely no substance in the claim he has made. None what so ever.

Pirate

[Tom_Wescott]

Nice try, Pirate. But if you want to hurt my reputation, you'll need to hire someone with credibility to post this kind of stuff. Your only achievement here has been to keep me mildly amused on a slow day at work. Keep it up. Let's talk more about my claims to have 'sent' Paul Begg information and how I quoted him unequivocably as telling me where to 'stick it'. Let's also talk about my steadfast conviction that Tumblety was the Ripper, which you've stated 3 times previously. Since everyone else reads the same posts that you do, they might be as amused as I am in trying to figure out how you reach the conclusions that you do.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

Oh no you don’t get off the hook that quickly Wescott.

The above thread is clearly marked: ‘The Complete Jack the Ripper A-Z’

And I intend to stay on topic. You have made a serious and potentially damaging claim about one of the authors, Paul Begg.

Now either you have deliberately told a LIE or there is a serious charge to be answered.

Now do you actually have the backbone to admit you were WRONG and APOLOGIZE or are you going to carry on trying to change the subject? And slither out of your responcibility.

Because of all the claims that can be laid at the Pirates Door failing to apologize is certainly not one of them…I would and have done so on frequent occasions..

Now it’s your turn Wescott…are you a gentleman Sir? or a Cad?

Pirate

[Tom_Wescott]

Pirate, I've pretty much said my peace pending the publication of the book. I don't respond to you simply because I don't have to. You are an island unto yourself and you're impressing no one. I've said nothing at all damaging about Paul Begg. Having someone like yourself PRETENDING to be his friend and spokesperson is potentially far more damaging to his reputation than anything I've said. Your second-rate AP Wolf impersonation is now getting tiresome, so I'll leave you to talk to yourself and make up whatever fantasies you choose.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

Well that really is pathetic Tom.

The fact of the matter is that you got caught with your metaphoric pants down telling LIES on casebook. You have made an outrageous and potentially damaging claim about a respected authority and author on the subject of Jack the Ripper namely Paul Begg…yet when challenged you have been totally unable to defend or substantiate your claim.

As for a person who is slowly becoming marginalized, let me give you a little advice, if you constantly float about the boards cooking up vendetta’s and making trouble where it does not exist you are going to get your figures burned. People are already noticing that you appear to have gone a little DOO-ally in recent mouths and perhaps its time to take a long hard look at yourself.

It’s clear that you are not gentleman enough to apologize for making this stuff up. Your huffy and sulky response suggests that you intend to do what you usually do when you loose an argument and storm off crying to mummy.

I think that is the end of the matter. So for the record lets just say that there was NO truth what so ever in your weasel post about the new complete A to Z ..

I call you Sir…a CAD.

Pirate

PS. Game set and match to the Pirate I believe....

[Tom_Wescott]

Challenging me is one thing, Pirate, but blatantly threatening me with physical violence is quite another. I believe that's a TOSable offence here.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Jeff Leahy]

That’s OK Tom, you needn’t pooh your pants, there was no physical violence expressed or intended, only concern for your general mental well being.

We’ll let your fibbing reincarnated sole sleep free from physical punishment and eternal damnation…

Pirate

PS I thought you didn’t want to play anymore? Or are you still up for further punishment? And being shown for the fraud you are?

It could be miss-construed

[Cap'n Jack]

I don't know about this entrenched view that seems to prevail concerning the A to Z, as I've had some very fair exchanges with the authors concerned where they have written to me for an expansion of areas of the research I do.
Whether they use that material or not is absolutely impartial to me.

[Stephen Thomas]

If I may be allowed to drag this thread back to its original point, can I say that the new, post internet, 21st century, and soon to be available A-Z promises to be quite something and not just another Ripper book. Along with the Sourcebook and Sugden it was always the best and no doubt now it will be better and even more entertaining and useful.

[Robert]

Stephen, I'll be buying it but do you know if there'll be a long wait for the paperback edition? I believe if you take care of the pennies, the moats, tennis courts and plasma TVs will take care of themselves.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Capin’

Yes that’s pretty much the way I understand it. The authors certain try to include as much information as possible, which is collated over a long period of time. As I understand there is a limit to the size of the book, so anything added means that something else has to be dropped. I don’t think ‘not enough information’ is ever a problem. But I think any research offered is taken very seriously.

I know having spoken at length with Paul that he is keen to be as balanced as possible, and despite Tom’s comments I understand that the New A to Z is very much a team project with hefty debating on what is and is not included between the three.

I think that’s why Paul believes that a good general balance reflecting the individual’s areas of interest is achieved. But to please everyone on every detail is never going to be possible. Certainly when I helped Paul out by driving him and manuscript to the publishers, I was sat out side his house for 45 minutes while last minute entries were still being penned and the book kept as up to date as possible.

Any suggestion of deliberate bias or some sort of political vendetta is simply unfair and untrue and I don’t intend to let people like Tom get away with creating trouble. My understanding is that a decision was made to exclude authors that are not dead because there simply wasn’t enough space.

I must admit that my rather old and battered copy is still the one book that sits by my side at all times and I am very much looking forward to a fresh new copy.

I believe that Paul has mentioned the A to Z in previous podcasts but I gather from Jonathon that he is hoping to do one on the new A to Z. It’s unlikely that Keith will appear but Paul and Martin always make excellent entertainment together if Martin is available.

All best

Pirate

PS. Robert, as far as I can see a copy of the A to Z is a legitamate business expense and I will be billing the VAT man.

[Natalie Severn]

Variations on a theme

-----and this time will Kosminski be dug up maybe for a bone scan and Robert Anderson be due for canonisation ?

[Jeff Leahy]

I think digging up poor old Aaron is a bit to much to expect but I will be pushing for your second option

Pirate