Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Trevor Marriott 1 hour and 22 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by harry 2 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Abby Normal 4 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by harry 9 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by caz 16 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by caz 17 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (39 posts)
General Police Discussion: City of London Precincts and Divisions involved in the Investigation - (1 posts)
General Discussion: Mary Kelly Jack the Ripper celebrity ghost box session interview - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Witnesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #71  
Old 06-25-2018, 07:20 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,427
Default

To save on time the last two posts #69 & 70 will be answered togeather.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
But it is not a question of you having said something is probably true, it is a question of you claiming that you lean against factual evidene whereas I do not.
Not at all what I claim or suggest, indeed it's the exact opposite.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
And all along, it is instead a question of you suggesting alternative innocent explanations that have nothing at all in the way of evidence going for them
If I have no source support, I clearly say so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
That´s what I dislike. When somebody gets on his high horses and calims factual superiority, then that someone needs to be a lot better equipped for that trip than you are.
I am fully prepared for any eventuality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Example: Lechmere disagreed with Mizen about what he had said on the murder night. If Mizen was right, it furthermore applies that what Lechmere said, was a perfectly shaped phrasing to take him past the police unsearched.
Does that fact go away because you come up with the idea that Mizen could have lied? No. That is speculation only, which tells it apart from the facts of the case. It is of very limited value until proven.
No it is not speculation, it is based on source evidence, including that of Mizen himself.
Nor does not rely on Lechmere or Paul.
There is far more evidence to support the theory that Mizen lied, than there is to accept that his account is truthful.(which basically amounts to accepting what he says at the inquest).
Sorry the wait is so long.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
See what I mean?
Not at all, not surprisingly as the arguments are basically flawed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Well, it´s good to have it established that you entered this part of the debate with the prejudice that I am deceiving myself if I think I an be honest. After that, it is up to others to say whether that is a fair stance to work from or not, and if it has any influence on this particular debate, where - incidentally - you claim that I have said that the DT and the DN support me on the blood issue, although I have quoted in full exactly what they said so that anybody can check for themselves.
That is what your debating amounts to.
The debating ensures that facts are kept to, and that inaccuracies be they intentional or unintentionally are fully exposed and discussed.

The quotes given are indeed there, although they lack detail and are really only partial reports.
Many would of course just look at the summary where you list the order of events for each paper, rather than read every word of a quote.

However that in no way negates the point that the post clearly said that the DN and DS reported that Mizen had described bleeding.

Neither paper as you acknowledge said any such thing, in addition your order for both papers was 1-3-2. That is description after going for ambulance and thus in no way support your interpretation of the Echo.

Steve

Last edited by Elamarna : 06-25-2018 at 07:43 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 06-25-2018, 07:25 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,681
Default

Quote:
. That´s what I dislike. When somebody gets on his high horses and calims factual superiority,
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 06-25-2018, 11:13 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
Herlock, when I write that it is in no way certain that the Eastenders would have helped the police, since there was much disliking about them in the district, you claim that I have said that not a single Eastender would help the police.

If you need the point further proven, I can list a fair few other examples of the exact same thing where you misrepresent me very badly.

Working from those kinds of misrepresentations, I think you may want to be a bit more careful about judging who is factually sound.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 06-25-2018, 11:19 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
To save on time the last two posts #69 & 70 will be answered togeather.



Not at all what I claim or suggest, indeed it's the exact opposite.



If I have no source support, I clearly say so.



I am fully prepared for any eventuality.



No it is not speculation, it is based on source evidence, including that of Mizen himself.
Nor does not rely on Lechmere or Paul.
There is far more evidence to support the theory that Mizen lied, than there is to accept that his account is truthful.(which basically amounts to accepting what he says at the inquest).
Sorry the wait is so long.




Not at all, not surprisingly as the arguments are basically flawed.




The debating ensures that facts are kept to, and that inaccuracies be they intentional or unintentionally are fully exposed and discussed.

The quotes given are indeed there, although they lack detail and are really only partial reports.
Many would of course just look at the summary where you list the order of events for each paper, rather than read every word of a quote.

However that in no way negates the point that the post clearly said that the DN and DS reported that Mizen had described bleeding.

Neither paper as you acknowledge said any such thing, in addition your order for both papers was 1-3-2. That is description after going for ambulance and thus in no way support your interpretation of the Echo.

Steve
You are welcome to provide a basis for your misgivings about the honesty of Jonas Mizen.

You are not equally welcome to say that my "post clearly said that the DN and DS reported that Mizen had described bleeding."

I never worded it like that, did I? I said that point 2 was placed in a certain spot, and I have explained to you that post 2 to me is the moment when Mizen found Neil by the body.

That is what my post says - and why. Admittedly, I should have worded point 2 better since it would have voided having you calling me untruthful, but there you are. Nowhere did I actually say "the DN nd the DT (not DS) reported that Mizen had described bleeding".

Make a meal of it or accept what I say.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 06-26-2018, 02:56 AM
John Wheat John Wheat is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,815
Default

Charles Cross was a witness not a suspect.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 06-26-2018, 03:07 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,681
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Herlock, when I write that it is in no way certain that the Eastenders would have helped the police, since there was much disliking about them in the district, you claim that I have said that not a single Eastender would help the police.

If you need the point further proven, I can list a fair few other examples of the exact same thing where you misrepresent me very badly.

Working from those kinds of misrepresentations, I think you may want to be a bit more careful about judging who is factually sound.
More misrepresentation.

If you go back to that specific point.

You made the above claim previously and at the time I pointed out to you that in one of my previous posts I had listed the possible outcomes of CL calling Paul’s attention to the body. One of those points was in fact that Paul might not have suggested going for a Constable.

I was also stressing that we couldn’t stereotype all Eastender’s and assume that they wouldn’t want anything to do with the law.

And so, as anyone can see, this shows that I looked at all possibilities (or at least all that I could think of) and presented a 100% unbiased opinion.

This facts show that I am correct. Therefore Fish, you must be.......
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

Last edited by Herlock Sholmes : 06-26-2018 at 03:09 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 06-26-2018, 03:19 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
More misrepresentation.

If you go back to that specific point.

You made the above claim previously and at the time I pointed out to you that in one of my previous posts I had listed the possible outcomes of CL calling Paul’s attention to the body. One of those points was in fact that Paul might not have suggested going for a Constable.

I was also stressing that we couldn’t stereotype all Eastender’s and assume that they wouldn’t want anything to do with the law.

And so, as anyone can see, this shows that I looked at all possibilities (or at least all that I could think of) and presented a 100% unbiased opinion.

This facts show that I am correct. Therefore Fish, you must be.......
Why would you stress that we cannot stereotype all Eastenders - when I did no such thing? And do you deny that you started your post by claiming that I had stated that no Eastender would help the police?

Shall I fetch the post up and quote it? Is that what you are asking for?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 06-26-2018, 04:08 AM
Herlock Sholmes Herlock Sholmes is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: The West Midlands
Posts: 2,681
Default

You can either quote it or give me the post number as I can’t find it.
__________________
Regards

Herlock






"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 06-26-2018, 04:18 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 4,427
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
You are welcome to provide a basis for your misgivings about the honesty of Jonas Mizen.

You are not equally welcome to say that my "post clearly said that the DN and DS reported that Mizen had described bleeding."

I never worded it like that, did I? I said that point 2 was placed in a certain spot, and I have explained to you that post 2 to me is the moment when Mizen found Neil by the body.

That is what my post says - and why. Admittedly, I should have worded point 2 better since it would have voided having you calling me untruthful, but there you are. Nowhere did I actually say "the DN nd the DT (not DS) reported that Mizen had described bleeding".

Make a meal of it or accept what I say.
When are you going to stop this semantic nonsense?

In Post #6 you listed 4 points. The second of which was Mizen saw blood.
You then listed that point in the accounts of the two papers.

Therefore. It is very clear, that at that point you claimed both papers mentioned that.

That since that posting a U turn has been carried out, and you say that was not what you meant is neither here nor there.
The fact remains the post said clearly that both papers mentioned the bleeding in their reports when they did not.

Its that simple, that clear


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 06-26-2018, 04:33 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 18,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
You can either quote it or give me the post number as I can’t find it.
I am through with this for some time - I can stand only so much crap over a period of time, and so I´m off.

This post will be my last for some time. Here is the material you ask for.

You wrote:

This option for a guilty CL surely would be preferable to calling someone over who would undoubtedly suggest that they find a constable with CL in possession of the murder weapon and ‘possibly’ with Nichols blood on him (in the dark he couldn’t be certain of being completely blood-free.)


This post arrived after I had explained carefully that there were Eastenders who disliked the police and distrusted them. There was talk of a hatred of the police here. So I grew somewhat tired and posted this in response:

In your world, any person in the copper-hating East End would "undoubtedly suggest" that they go searching for a constable, in spite of how they did not even know that there was a crime involved.


To which you responded :

And now, in your utter desperation, you are seeking to claim that all Eastenders were such heartless, uncaring b%^**@*s, that they wouldn’t have informed a police officer.


So this is it - I point out that the East End was not police-friendly, and that we could not work from an assumption that any Eastender would "doubtlessly" contact the police, whereupon you said that I was seeking to claim that all Eaastenders were so heartless and uncaring that they would not have contacted the police.

An important factual marker was thus turned into a lie about me that painted me out as totally inept to make a fair and balanced call.

This incidentally came two pages after where you had said
"Only you could consider getting away scot free 'reckless and stupid'".

As if I had ever said anything at all even remotely like that. Which I of course had not.

So I answered you:

So all we have is one more example of you misrepresenting me.

You need to stop now, it´s running over the brim.

Maybe you can now see what I mean? Regardless of how perceptive you are in that area, I wish you the fairest of luck with your efforts out here in the future.

Me, I will do something else for a while.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.