THE JACK THE RIPPER LOCATION PHOTOGRAPHS : Dutfield's Yard and the Whitby Collection

[Monty]

Ok John,

Fair enough.

Monty

[Ally]

Hi All,

Research appears to be demonstrating that AP is not quite so far off the mark as first imagined.

Simon

Actually there is no amount of research that would demonstrate that. Even on the off chance that research somehow shows the photo is not Dutfield's, AP is not just claiming that it is not Dutfield's, he's also implying and has stated publicly that Phil deliberately hoaxed it and Rob, et. al. are in collusion. Which is flat out BS and completely off the mark by a distance of several miles.

[Monty]

Thats why Im so vemonous Ally.

The insinuation we are part of a conspiracy in a hoax.

Baseless accusations.

If he said youre wrong, here is why, and presented evidence then hey, Id be the first to say Im wrong and say yep, youre right AP. I have done before.

However is accusation is baseless, its pure poison. Which seems to be, to me anyway, pretty much everything he touches.

Believe me, there is research out there which will not find its way here. This because of people like AP who accuse rather than debate.

So in a way, the main reason why his utopia of free shared information will never see the light of day is because of the man himself and senseless idiots like him.

Its the reason SPE doesnt post regularly, the reason Philip Sugden walked from the case and why Don Rumbelow has never shown his face here.

Its just not worth the hassle and bollocks that comes with it.

Its a shame but hey, aint my fault.

Monty

[Ally]

Thats why Im so vemonous Ally.

The insinuation we are part of a conspiracy in a hoax.

Baseless accusations.

Well against Rob anyway. He's an angel...you could be a hoaxer. I've always said you have shifty eyes. I've never actually SEEN your eyes myself of course, but since when do we actually need to have first hand knowledge of something before making an accusation.

Believe me, there is research out there which will not find its way here. This because of people like AP who accuse rather than debate.

So in a way, the main reason why his utopia of free shared information will never see the light of day is because of the man himself and senseless idiots like him.

I agree with you to some extent but I also know the flip side. Casebook tends to be fairly hands off when it comes to freedom of speech and then the minute they decide something has gone too far and step in, asshats like Leahy jump in whining about freedom of speech. Casebook is in a damned if they do, damned if they don't situation. The thing that really pisses me off is that people think I am the one in charge of the boards and believe me if I were, dickheads who make unwarranted accusations would be banned right out of the gate. But again, I am not paying the bill so I don't get to make the call. I also know that Casebook relies on its members to tell it when something has crossed a line, and for the most part, no one reports anything. If the members won't use the tools available to help police themselves, then busy people will assume everything is okay.

I have no problem with rigorous, even vicious debate, but dammit if you make a claim you better have the evidence to back it up.

I would love to make a special board that only people who have proven intellect and reason would be able to post on, that merit (not academic credentials or NAME recognition, but actual debate merit) would be the key in....maybe I should pitch it to admin.

[Monty]

I wouldnt be allowed in then Ally.

Im not criticising casebook or the way its run. Im very aware that its the contributors responsibilty to debate correctly and uphold standards.

Theres to many who see this place as theirs instead of Stephens. We forget we are guests.

Anyway, thats for a different thread.

Philips book is very good, its up to the reader to analyse the data and the attempts to undermind the photo is down to pure ego. Not for the cause of truth. For if it were the evidence would have been presented and the accusations wouldnt have been needed.

End of.

Monty


PS My eyes would mezmerise you. They did Adam and his leather pants.

[Natalie Severn]

Quite a few of us like and enjoy Ap.His wit and turn of phrase can be a lot of fun.And just for the record I have had at least 6 emails saying just that and others saying how people would miss him if he were forced off the site , plus 3 pms on t"othersite and 4 pm"s on this site---these just in last few days.I wish some of these folk would speak out now actually. So if you above think that somehow Ap is universally disliked/despised you are so wrong!

That is not to say I want to go on and on with this Berner Street battle.I have seen the picture now,think it looks authentic and of the period and actually is a great picture!
Also for the record I never have thought Philip had doctored the picture for goodness sake!---well apart from what he said he had to do to make it presentable which is completely reasonable in my opinion.Its a great addition,as is the Whitby collection.

[Ally]

Sorry Natalie, but this is not a popularity contest and it is not about how witty AP is. I don't give a rat's butt if every single person on the site loves AP or hates him or what their personal opinion is of his wit and humor. A lying sack of crap is a lying sack of crap. And quite frankly, AP's propensity to lie and hurl accusations at people without a shred of proof is not compensated by his perceived wit. If he gets booted and people miss him, too damn bad. Maybe instead of posting here how much they adore him ,they ought to be PMing him and telling him how accusations without evidence is a deceitful, despicable and downright disgusting thing to do.

Wit and a sparkling personality is no excuse for his constant attacks on every single person he perceives as having status and making crap up to smear them. If he doesn't have evidence, then he needs to keep his "theories" (read delusions of drunken fantasy) to himself.

[Monty]

Norma,

So because AP is such a wit, it gives him grace to accuse Philip of forgery and the rest of us of deciet?

I see.

To be honest I personally think his work, his research, to be extremely beneficial to the field. However his crusading damages simply because he has the inability to present his case without an accusation of shenanigans.

Do you think that Rob, John, Jake, Colin and myself would group together deliberately decieve?

Maybe if you were on the recieving end of these lies then you would see more to AP than a jolly old wit who can be a tad annoying when pi$$ed.

He has slurred reputations. And to be honest, Im not prepared to shake my head and look away anymore.

Its damaging....very damaging.

Monty


The

[Cap'n Jack]

Thanks Natalie, you are a good one.
For the record, I have never claimed that there is some kind of 'conspiracy' in regard to this illustration; and I have also never claimed that it is a fake.
What I have said, and I'll say it again, is that I do not believe this to be an illustration of Dutfield's Yard, and I believe it to have been taken some twenty or thirty years after the date claimed.
Now that is my personal opinion, and I'm entitled to it.

[Natalie Severn]

Ally,
Do you have to use such abusive language? Ap is a friend of mine.I dont like people being this offensive about someone I like.If you would rather I didnt post on here fine.
But I cant stand by and listen to all this BS,

Norma

[Ally]

Oh and one more thing. I am not saying that no one is entitled to argue that the photo is not of Dutfield's yard. If AP wants to come on here and apologize wholeheartedly and retract his baseless accusation that there was a deliberately perpetrated hoax, then I would be willing to listen to what he has to say about it not being the Yard.

But as long as his argument is coming from the completely groundless position that several fine researchers (and several others as well) are involved in some sort of hoax, then as far as I am concerned, I will treat him and his argument with the contempt it deserves.

So if he wants people to actually LISTEN to him for a change and take him seriously, he could start with a retraction and an apology since there is not a single shred of evidence (or even basic common sense) that supports his premise of a hoax.

[Ally]

Thanks Natalie, you are a good one.
For the record, I have never claimed that there is some kind of 'conspiracy' in regard to this illustration; and I have also never claimed that it is a fake.
What I have said, and I'll say it again, is that I do not believe this to be an illustration of Dutfield's Yard, and I believe it to have been taken some twenty or thirty years after the date claimed.
Now that is my personal opinion, and I'm entitled to it.

That is yet another flat out lie. You said on the first dutfield's photo thread that it had been Photoshopped and the background "inserted" by Phil.

[Ally]

Ally,
Do you have to use such abusive language? Ap is a friend of mine.I dont like people being this offensive about someone I like.If you would rather I didnt post on here fine.
But I cant stand by and listen to all this BS,

Norma

There is no BS and you are welcome to post where you see fit, even in defense of AP. However, AP lies. He just lied two minutes ago on this thread. I find it offensive when people make baseless accusations without proof and then claim it never happened.

It's not the first time it's happened either and I can't stand by and listen to him make up BS and slur people undeservedly.

I am glad AP is your friend. Philip is not my friend, but I am still not going to stand by and listen to him be slandered by someone who has been proven time and time again to make up facts to suit his "theories".

[Natalie Severn]

Ally,
I do remember Ap saying the picture had been photoshopped .However,this was discussed,with Philip as I recall and
Philip explained he had had to photoshop bits of it as some bits had faded and presumably he had had to "insert" or "strengthen" bits [probably a better word], to present an image that was not tatty and therefore easier on the eye.To me,this is totally acceptable.
I have met all the people named above and would never dream of accusing any of them of hoaxing----or lying.It has never entered my thinking.
I am aware Ap can be provocative and that in this case in particular it caused a great deal of vitriol.
The JtR case HAS ,ofcourse, been dogged by numerous deceptions,fantasies nonsense,lies and hoaxes,starting with those disappearing police files and artefacts!I was astonished for example to learn that George Sims first saw the Jack the Ripper " Dear Boss"letter in the house of Sir Melville Machnaghten![I think it was George Sims who saw it but anyway somepne did and recorded it!]
However,let me state clearly and unequivocally,that I dont believe for one second that Philip or any one of the other people mentioned would have ever involved themselves in any kind of hoax--- not ever!

[Cap'n Jack]

For the record again, I have said that the illustration has been through photoshop, simply because it has; and I have said that the background does not match the original line of sight placement, simply because at that time it did not. Since then the author has revised his line of sight placement.