Lord Orsam's Blog

[Chris Phillips]

In what way then was his research or conclusions inaccurate.

Of course, that is always the right question to ask, about anyone's research.

[Trevor Marriott]

So hes only a good researcher when its the diary or something else?

Hes a poor researcher when its your stuff hes poking at?

Now I get it
.........

P

You are clearly another who is biased. I stood up to him which is more than you and others seem to want to do and I wonder why that is?

I have said all that need to be said on this thread now so I will withdraw and wait to read all the rebuttals to what he has said over the past few months. But I wont hold my breath

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Mr. Poster]

You are clearly another who is biased. I stood up to him which is more than you and others seem to want to do and I wonder why that is?

I have said all that need to be said on this thread now so I will withdraw and wait to read all the rebuttals to what he has said over the past few months. But I wont hold my breath

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

To be fair Trevor, I wouldnt expect any less of you.

Given that you are the de facto face of Ripperology, having painfully, persistently and publically represented the entire field of interest as a bunch of misogynistic dildo obsessed wimmin haters, I feel you are just the man to take his lordship to task.

p

[Gary Barnett]

You are clearly another who is biased. I stood up to him which is more than you and others seem to want to do and I wonder why that is?

I have said all that need to be said on this thread now so I will withdraw and wait to read all the rebuttals to what he has said over the past few months. But I wont hold my breath

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Trev,

Please don’t leave without retracting your misleading statement that no one has challenged O’s research on here.

Major Clanger

[Gary Barnett]

To be fair Trevor, I wouldnt expect any less of you.

Given that you are the de facto face of Ripperology, having painfully, persistently and publically represented the entire field of interest as a bunch of misogynistic dildo obsessed wimmin haters, I feel you are just the man to take his lordship to task.

p

O took me to task for pointing out the flaws in HR’s Waterstones blog, but for some reason hasn’t mentioned Trevor’s performance as her pet misogynist. I wonder why? Perhaps he’s scared of Trevor.

[Mr. Poster]

O took me to task for pointing out the flaws in HR?s Waterstones blog, but for some reason hasn?t mentioned Trevor?s performance as her pet misogynist. I wonder why? Perhaps he?s scared of Trevor.

From what I remember...he has a soft spot for Trev as Trev had a go at Caroline at some point.

Thats enoogh to get in Orsams good books.

Or maybe he is in awe of Trev as he was the only one (apparently) who had the gunption to stand up to him and point out his problematical research?

or maybe Trev is a die hard Spandau Ballet fan?

Who knows!!!

P

[Caroline Brown]

Sadly, personal attacks on both sides have been par for the course as far as discussion of the Diary have been concerned. It has been utterly poisonous, and I think it would have been far better for Ripper research if the Diary had never existed. I wish it could be totally ignored. I wish everyone - including David - would stop discussing it.

Well it hasn't been discussed for a while on the message boards, Chris, and I for one am in no great hurry to go back - unless of course I read of any evidence that finally identifies the hoaxer or hoaxers. That is all that really interests me these days, and I think it's a pity if others don't share that interest, but prefer to put their energies into attacking certain diary authors and researchers at every opportunity, which only serves to make it more difficult for people to sift through the dirt for any genuine nuggets of fresh insight or material. I can't see how that helps anyone's cause, unless it's chiefly to cause trouble.

But if people are still interested in discussing it, it's obvious why people would want to read David's contributions. Because the quality of his research is high and because - if people must carry on discussing the Diary - they will find new and relevant information there.

As I said, I'd only want to read about his contributions if he was going to identify the hoaxer or hoaxers. I'm not sufficiently interested in his musings about the diary itself, or its content, if it involves wading through all the nastiness to find them. There's enough of that in the world already right now.

I can understand why people feel hostile to him, because he has no hesitation in ridiculing people on the other side of the argumemt. But if someone provided new information on the Mattan case, for example, of course I would want to read it - even if they criticised me, ridiculed me, and generally dragged me through the dirt.

Well that's very noble of you, Chris, and you must be made of sterner stuff. But my need for new diary information coming from that particular source would have to be great indeed for me to put myself through it. He can criticise me, ridicule me, and drag me through the dirt to his little heart's content, while I'm not there to watch.

If others, like Trev, find it entertaining, they can fill their boots. But I'm really not that important.

Love,

Caz
X

[Scott Nelson]

So, Scott, what?s your opinion of notorious Jack McCarthy now? It seems he handed responsibility for running his hovels over to his mad, blind brother-in-law - presumably so he could concentrate on his charity work.

Can you please point me to where it can be conclusively determined that the Miller's Court McCarthy was the same one who attended Abberline's dinner in 1892? I don't care who Kitty Roman's landlord was.

[Chris Phillips]

As I said, I'd only want to read about his contributions if he was going to identify the hoaxer or hoaxers.

I think that will have to remain one of the world's great unsolved mysteries, along with "Who shot JFK?" and "Who murdered Julia Wallace?"

[Scott Nelson]

While 2020 will probably not be viewed as a vintage year for many, for me personally I view it as the year I was reborn - enlightened as to the back story of Spandau Ballet and the better man for it.

Why didn't he write a book about Wang Chung instead?

Everyone knows they were ten times better than Spandau Ballet.

[Mr. Poster]

Why didn't he write a book about Wang Chung instead?

Everyone knows they were ten times better than Spandau Ballet.

Heretic........

P

[Gary Barnett]

Can you please point me to where it can be conclusively determined that the Miller's Court McCarthy was the same one who attended Abberline's dinner in 1892? I don't care who Kitty Roman's landlord was.

I can’t, but I can provide cartloads of circumstantial evidence that makes him the no. 1 candidate.

What have you got to prove he wasn’t? Apart from the inappropriateness of his having the three letters e s q added to his name.

[Scott Nelson]

...and a son named Steve

[Gary Barnett]

...and a son named Steve

That’s the one. McCarthy Jr, the entertainer.

[Trevor Marriott]

Can you please point me to where it can be conclusively determined that the Miller's Court McCarthy was the same one who attended Abberline's dinner in 1892? I don't care who Kitty Roman's landlord was.

It is quite possible that it was Jack McCarthy who attended Abberlines dinner, they were both masons it seems

Abberline was a member of The Zetland 511 Lodge, and McCarthy a member of the King?s Head lodge.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk