Casebook Examiner Number 5

[Garry Wroe]

Since the night of 8/9 November was punctuated by heavy showers rather than continual rainfall, I fail to understand the underlying logic of Fisherman's 'wrong night' argument.

Regards.

Garry Wroe.

[mariab]

Garza wrote:
lol I feckin knew it maria
Schwartz's testimony always seemed out of place for me. Will look forward to your research.
Actually I'm not too happy to have discovered this, as it throws the pack of cards into the air. It might be that we need to retrace Stride's steps for the evening of September 30, 1888 from scratch.
What truly infuriates me is the godamn sloppy French spies. They were so lazy, they didn't even think of including the freaking first names of the people they spied on. Darn French...
Debra Arif was so nice and generous as to start researching a Schwartz anarchist orator in socialist documents. No finds so far, but she found something else she might post in the Albert Bachert thread.

[corey123]

Apologies for the bad typing, was at work using my phone, and please, not so many questions at once. Really. Heh-heh.

Yours truly

[Ben]

Hi Tom,

I'd certainly value and appreciate your thoughts with regard to my article, and I very much look forward to reading yours.

On a separate note, I clearly failed, most spectacularly, and to my eternal embarrassment, to acknowledge the constant source of advice and encouragement that was Garry Wroe during the course of researching and writing the article. He contributed a great deal to the finished product, for which I am extremely grateful.

Hi Lynn,

I see. Could you follow up on this? Which ones, particularly?

Well, perhaps the most striking is the sheer extent of observation and memorization that culminated in Hutchinson’s description. It’s just impossible to accept that he was so meticulous when it came to such fiddly details and yet completely bollocksed up the minor detail of the correct day – misjudging it by three whole days. But as I’ve mentioned, the “coincidence” with Lewis’ evidence really should dispense with the suggestion completely, in my view.

All the best,
Ben

[lynn cates]

recall

Hello Ben. Yes, I think the consensus is that his recall is a bit too good. Not sure if that equates to culpability.

Then to miss a detail? Well, that's pretty common in my line of work. I may ramble on about Descartes and the theory of self-identity for an hour but forget the day of the week.

Cheers.
LC

[corey123]

Hello Tom,

In response to:

Having already read Corey's article, I'm curious to see what others think

However, seeing as much people seem interesting in my piece(Catch the sarcasm?), I hope for at least some. I am curious, but not I don't really expect much.

Of course, I think I shot myself in the foot in the Bio.

Oh well, we will see.

[Ben]

Hi Lynn,

If you get a chance to read my article on the Hutchinson affair, I hope it will become apparent that the argument for his potential "culpability" does not rest solely on his alleged witness description. I don't think it's common in your line of work - or any line of work - to miss a particularly memorable day by three days, Lynn!

Hi all,

It's reassuring to see objective praise and criticism of the articles being the focus here, in the main, as opposed to people expressing feigned, unthinking agreement out of misplaced solidarity with individuals with whom they'd previously chummed up on other topics.

All the best,

Ben

[Fi Saint]

Tom,

Having now read your very interesting article a couple of times, out of the five bohemians discussed, and please correct me if I'm wrong, you seem to make the strongest case that Mary Kelly may have associated with the poet Ernest Dowson., You mention that Dowson died aged 30 at the house of RT Sherard in Catford.

Robert Harborough Sherard was at the age of 22 one of Oscar Wilde's conquests. According to David Sweetman in his book 'Explosive Acts' the two men met in 1883 in Paris, where Sherard had many mistresses and was "making a precarious living as a correspondent for various foreign newspapers".

Mary Kelly could have met Dowson in London and merely heard tales of the Paris scene. But if she did spend time in Paris, it is possible she would have visited the famous Bar Bullier, frequented by Sherard's circle in 1883, and she may have attended the art school of Maria Zambaca, friend of Wilde and former mistress/model of the pre-Raphaelite Burne-Jones, at whose house Wilde and Sherard met. Also present at that dinner in 1883, was the artist John Singer Sargent.


Best,
Fi

[Fisherman]

Tom W:

"Seems Fish's essay is winning a lot of favor, so congrats there. Hard to imagine he'd make more sense than Ben, but stranger things have happened..."

I´ll take a chance here: thanks, Tom!

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"Exactly, Lynn, which means that Hutchinson simply didn't think through that aspect of the fabrication"

But if he WAS there on the night, Ben, he would have KNOWN that it was pouring down, and thus, even if he was telling porkies, he would have told WET porkies! The same applies if he had been at the inquest - then he would have had it from Cox that it rained cats and dogs.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Garry Wroe:

"Since the night of 8/9 November was punctuated by heavy showers rather than continual rainfall, I fail to understand the underlying logic of Fisherman's 'wrong night' argument."

It lies, to some extent, in the fact that Hutchinson chose to walk the streets through the night in spite of the conditions, Garry. That, if nothing else, points to a very irrational behaviour. Plus, of course, when I contacted the meteorological services in London, they stated that it rained throughout the night, more or less. Of course, it could have been a case of less dense rain, varying with heavy showers (few rains are very constant throughout), but no matter what, walking the streets would have been a very strange thing to do. And, in accordance with that, it would be a strange suggestion even if Hutchinson was telling porkies, since he would have been on safer ground if he claimed that he spent the night sheltering in a doorway on some street he could not name more exactly.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"Well, perhaps the most striking is the sheer extent of observation and memorization that culminated in Hutchinson’s description. It’s just impossible to accept that he was so meticulous when it came to such fiddly details and yet completely bollocksed up the minor detail of the correct day".

But I have before explained to you that sequential memory and detail memory are two different things, Ben. You can have an excellent memory for details and a lousy one for timing. The two are not connected, I´m afraid.

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Lynn:

"Then to miss a detail? Well, that's pretty common in my line of work. I may ramble on about Descartes and the theory of self-identity for an hour but forget the day of the week."

...and there you are, Ben - a very good example of what I just said; Lynn seems to have that excellent memory for details, but not for timing!

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"It's reassuring to see objective praise and criticism of the articles being the focus here, in the main, as opposed to people expressing feigned, unthinking agreement out of misplaced solidarity with individuals with whom they'd previously chummed up on other topics."

In the main? Are you seeing any exceptions here, Ben? Is that what you are saying? Could you please expand on this, if that is the case?

The best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

Ben:

"I don't think it's common in your line of work - or any line of work - to miss a particularly memorable day by three days, Lynn!"

He missed it by one (1) day, Ben, not by three.

The best,
Fisherman