Private sale

[Trevor Marriott]

On an on we go

What it may or may not suggest is a matter of opinion. As a matter of fact, the letter simply does not say what Trevor Marriott claimed.

He had no writing impairments in 1910 when he is purported to have written the marginalia.

Personally I think it's clear that the statement concerns the reliability of DSS's memory, and has nothing at all to do with the quality of his handwriting.

There you go again offering a personal opinion in an attempt to deflect away from the fact if it were a fact that he didnt have shaky hands then it goes back to proving or disproving the authenticity of the marginalia


.

[Observer]

Observer
I used the term ‘secrete’ with respect to unused News of the World article and Memo as they appeared out of the blue – without explanation - when Keith Skinner was sorting through paperwork during a Crime Museum reorganisation in July 2011. Also at one time it was first said (by Adam Wood incidentally) that they were found down the back of a filing cabinet.
I think using the word ‘secrete’ is fair in those circumstances, but does not in itself imply that the documents were forged. It suggests suspicious circumstances (given that they are important documents so far as the Marginalia is concerned - vital so far as Ally is concerned) that should demand further investigation. That is my whole ‘point’

Hi Lechmere

That's all well and good, however, putting all things aside, you have no faith in the marginalia's authenticity have you?

[Chris]

On an on we go

Well, let's clear up this simple factual issue before you do start going "on and on" again.

The letter you referred to does not say that "Donald Swanson was not suffering from any signs of shaky writing" as you claimed, does it? It doesn't even mention his handwriting.

You're not a little child. You're a former police officer. You must realise you can't go around saying things that aren't true in order to implicate people in faking documents - even if they aren't alive to defend themselves any more.

[Jenni Shelden]

On an on we go

Hi Trevor,
if you write your opinion in other people's quotes it makes it incredibly difficult to follow....

[Jenni Shelden]

Is it me or are people starting to argue against things people said in response to one thing as though it were in response to another?

Whoever it was was arguing that DSS shaky hand was not a sign that he was congintively impared as someone else stated, isn't that all they were saying?

In regards to this specific point, my Gt Grandmother, now deceased, wrote with a shaky hand which she had due to a tremor. She was in no way cognitively impared from the moment this happened, nor did she have Parkinsons, but her handwriting did become more shaky (still recognisably hers).

Writing in a 'shaky hand' does not equal = far gone senile dementia

Jenni

ps I'm addressing points one at a time to avoid confusion about what is being said

[Trevor Marriott]

Well, let's clear up this simple factual issue before you do start going "on and on" again.

The letter you referred to does not say that "Donald Swanson was not suffering from any signs of shaky writing" as you claimed, does it? It doesn't even mention his handwriting.

You're not a little child. You're a former police officer. You must realise you can't go around saying things that aren't true in order to implicate people in faking documents - even if they aren't alive to defend themselves any more.

From memory the quote appeared in Adams article and I dont think it was in the form of the letter you refer to. Whenever I read it and it was some months ago I made a note of it at the time because of its importance.

“My Grandfather was a highly intelligent man. He was in complete command of all his faculties at the time of his death in 1924 at the age of 76. My Grandfather’s notes were made in 1910 when he was 62.”

Not a mention of any afflictions which might cause shaky handwriting

[Jenni Shelden]

It should also be noted that when he made the above quote he also stated that at that time Donald Swanson was not suffering from any signs of shaky writing or any illness which might have caused such and affliction.

So all in all Jim Swansons actions, and comments do not help to prove or disprove the issues in question regarding the authenticity of the marginalia.

Again, what we were actually talking about was whether or not the items such as Daily express letter, NOtW draft article and etc showed the line Kosminski was the suspect was there in 1981 when JS offered the doc to the papers mentioned. The idea they weren't was being used as an implication JS forged the line onto marginalia in 1987. I think from the correspondence and etc, it can be shown that this is not the case.

[Observer]

Anti Movement Device Mark 3

Here is a picture of DSS which -judging by the clothes and hair of the woman- dates from the early 1920s. Note that he is holding something very small in his right hand. He doesn't look as if he has any sign of Parkinsons or even difficulty grasping something so fine. His hand is not blurred more than the rest of the picture.
[ATTACH]15591[/ATTACH]

An Anti Motion Device is used.

If you look very very closely Superintendent Swanson is holding on to a metal pin. This is attached to a very fine wire (you can just see the blur as the wire moves) which is attached to the following device. As you can see the photographer in the illustration is just about to attach a similar wire to a subject. The assistant pedals the device, ensuring tension at all times.

[Jenni Shelden]

From memory the quote appeared in Adams article and I dont think it was in the form of the letter you refer to. Whenever I read it and it was some months ago I made a note of it at the time because of its importance.

“My Grandfather was a highly intelligent man. He was in complete command of all his faculties at the time of his death in 1924 at the age of 76. My Grandfather’s notes were made in 1910 when he was 62.”

In other words when Chris said it didn't mention his handwriting, he was write.

As an aside we don't actual know when DSS made the notes, 1910 seems the most likely scenrio, but who's to saying it wasn't 1924?

Jenni

[Rob Clack]

I have that Rumbelow book, thank you. You haven't explained what difference that would make.

Well, when I see a little evidence that the marginallia is faked instead the rubbish that has been presented on this thread then I might do. And it would be nice not to have peoples name being dragged through the mud and their charachter assinated by people who don't know any better.

Rob

[Chris]

From memory the quote appeared in Adams article and I dont think it was in the form of the letter you refer to. Whenever I read it and it was some months ago I made a note of it at the time because of its importance.

“My Grandfather was a highly intelligent man. He was in complete command of all his faculties at the time of his death in 1924 at the age of 76. My Grandfather’s notes were made in 1910 when he was 62.”

Not a mention of any afflictions which might cause shaky handwriting

No. No mention of handwriting at all, in fact.

But what you claimed was "he also stated that at that time Donald Swanson was not suffering from any signs of shaky writing".

You surely understand the difference between "he stated that he was not" and "he did not state whether he was or not"? If not, God help us!

[Trevor Marriott]

In other words when Chris said it didn't mention his handwriting, he was write.

As an aside we don't actual know when DSS made the notes, 1910 seems the most likely scenrio, but who's to saying it wasn't 1924?

Jenni

So Swanson was lying when he made that statement ? because he is quite specific !

Again another pointer to his credibilty !

[Monty]

Well, when I see a little evidence that the marginallia is faked instead the rubbish that has been presented on this thread then I might do. And it would be nice not to have peoples name being dragged through the mud and their charachter assinated by people who don't know any better.

Rob

Sad reality of todays Ripperology Rob,

No morals, no sense of decency and now no evidence is required to accuse. However when evidence is there, it is called a witch hunt and bullying.

Its a mad crazy f@cked up world my friend.

Monty

[Chris]

So Swanson was lying when he made that statement ? because he is quite specific !

How utterly ludicrous. Jim Swanson wasn't born until 1912. No one knows when the annotations were made. You know perfectly well that he was making an assumption based on the date of the book's publication.

Lying is what you do when you say something which you know to be untrue.

This really is like trying to hold a debate in a kindergarten.

[Jenni Shelden]

So Swanson was lying when he made that statement ? because he is quite specific !

Again another pointer to his credibilty !

No Trevor, that was my opinion.

I have no reason to doubt it was written in 1910, I assume JS felt that was the most likely date, which seems to also be what you feel, I am merely saying if it was written in the time period 1910-1924 is all that actuall matters for it being genuine.

Was JS born in 1910, did he sit over his grandfather as he wrote it?

I don't think that is a pointer against his credibilty.

But your right, lying is a point against someone's credibilty, which is why its intersting I'm still listening to you, when you admitted, you lied about the test you had Dr Simpson, a self proclaimed unqualified person on the document.

You also clearly made up the idea that Chris was close to the Swansons, as you have been asked three times to back it up and failed every time.

You do seem to like to make grandiose statements. What a shame the only thing you have to back it up is what you want to believe

Jenni