|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 285
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 12:09 pm: |       |
Robert, Alan,
Robert- thats exactly what Im saying...in a way.
Just sometimes he scores, other times not so "lucky".
As you know Ive put a little thought into Moores experiment. Before I give you the works Id like to make it clear that a) Im not advocating Mitre square as the place where Moore conducted his obs and b) I really do see no point in doing such an act after the event. But what the heck ?
Anyway, lets get started. How I would conduct surveillance on Mitre sq ?
I guess there are many ways to do this and many people would have different views. Me? Well Id be very reluctant to have people static in the square. Id have 2 people posted St James sq with a good view of the passage entrance (I would not need to see into the sq, only the exits). During the day this spot would be ideal due to the orange market in flow. A stall set up would not only provide excellent street furniture to operate behind but also provide an excuse for other observers to rotate, move and pass on information during the exercise. It would be my information collection point.
At Duke st end of church passage Id operate a drunk/homeless/beggar (possibly 2). This person would be set alongside the entrance noting who enters and who exits. They would be supported by a another body across Duke st opposite the passage entry. I would use them as a vendor (newspaper, ect).
My final fixed post had me thinking the longest. I suppose utilising the empty house in the square could be an option but I really wouldnt want anyone that close. Im leaning towards having work men situated in Mitre st just south or north of the junction. A group of three.
As an add on I would have 2 other vendors to take over from the stall in orange market and the news vendor in Duke st. I was thinking of a coffee stall and potato or other hot food merchant.
Finally I would have a group of mobile observers, passing through the square a various intervals. These would rotate between the fixed sights, passing information between each other but more importantly to the info collection point in St James sq (Fruit stall during the day. Coffee stall at night).....oh for a good two way radio !!!!
To be honest I dont know how many men (yes, I did think of women but I was trying to keep with the times)Id need in total. The fewer the better to avoid confusion. I reckon to between 15 and 20. 5 in reserve.
There, thats it. The objection of this exercise would be....er, well, I dont know but if Moore wanted to keep a log of all that entered the square and asked my views....
One thing is for certain though. If this was to happen on the morning of September 30th 1888 Jack wouldnt have ventured withing 500 yards of that square.
Monty
|
Alan Sharp
Sergeant
Username: Ash
Post Number: 43
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 12:37 pm: | |
Monty, regarding that, it does occur to me that at half past one that morning you have:
- Lawende and his two friends
- Your two unidentified witnesses
- Blenkinsop's well dressed man
- Blenkinsop told the well dressed man he had seen some other people but hadn't paid attention to them. Not specified if these people were one or more groups
So that's at least four individuals or groups hanging around in the immediate vicinity that we know about. Plus Watkin patrolling through the square every 14 minutes.
People (myself included) have been saying that Dutfield's Yard was an unlikely place for the Ripper to strike. I would say that this demonstrates that he was either amazingly cool or amazingly reckless to strike in Mitre Square! |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 887
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 3:09 pm: | |
Monty, Alan
Thanks for that, Monty. Re the purpose, maybe the police wanted to assure themselves that there were only the three exits. For instance, maybe one of the PCs did see a man - not a "suspicious" man, because said PC hadn't yet found out about the crime - but perhaps a man whose face or description stuck in the mind. The police might have been trying to see how much importance to place on this sighting.
I can't help wondering whether the Stephen White story is some sort of garbled memory, not of a murder, but of a police exercise after a murder - with a murder tacked on to it by the editor to make it more interesting.
Of course, it's also quite possible that all this has nothing whatsoever to do with Mitre Square.
Re Lawende's description, maybe the police took it so seriously, despite the poor lighting, because of the other two witnesses. And/or maybe the same man was passed in the street by a PC afterwards?
Alan, it looks as if our man was either super-cool or a complete shambles - I just wish I knew which of these he was!
Robert |
Robert Charles Linford
Chief Inspector
Username: Robert
Post Number: 890
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 6:20 pm: | |
PS I wouldn't have wanted to be JTR with Inspector Monty masterminding police operations!
Robert |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 289
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, October 03, 2003 - 9:19 am: | |
Alan, Robert,
Alan,
Aye, fair comment that. I agree.
The thing is that the square is quite a private little area. High sided. The only views into this murder site from nearby streets are along St James & Church passages (you cannot actually see the corner from Mitre st).The only persons that we know actually ventured into the square were Morris, Watkins and eventually Kate along with her killer.
Going back to the cool calm collected versus couldnt give a damn who spots me arguement then Im all for both. Why not ? Ive behaved in such a way myself at times, though not to the same degree I hasten to add.
Robert,
I wouldn't have wanted to be JTR with Inspector Monty masterminding police operations!
I wouldnt have wanted to be an Inspector whilst Jack was masterminding police, and his own, operations !
Monty
|
Michael Blayne Raney
Police Constable
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 2
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 08, 2003 - 3:21 pm: | |
Gang, sorry that I never got back to posting. My partner got into a serious auto accident on 21 Sep and I have spent my time at home taking care of him. It seems that the thread has changed a little since my last visit.
Mikey |
Leanne Perry
Chief Inspector
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 859
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 08, 2003 - 4:32 pm: | |
G'day Mikey,
'Serious auto accidents' can be overcome with time, with help from friends. I was in one 16 years ago.
LEANNE |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 1198
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, November 08, 2003 - 5:58 pm: | |
Hi Mikey
Hope your partner continues his recovery.
This thread will also have to recover - from the fact that one of its main contributors has just gone into semi-retirement! Where are you, Monty?
Robert |
Neale Carter
Sergeant
Username: Ncarter
Post Number: 32
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, November 10, 2003 - 9:28 pm: | |
G'day Mikey - also hope all goes well.
Hi all,
While waiting for this fascinating thread to continue, I was wondering why the Mylett murder didn't seem to generate even a tiny bit of the now habitual JtR hysteria. It seemed to get just a couple of non-sensational pars in a few papers. Is it just that the hallmark ripping was not evident? Wouldn't the press have been almost desperate, or certainly waiting for, another murder after the Kelly circus? Still trying to get my head into a Victorian London space.
Regards
Neale |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 353
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 11, 2003 - 11:42 am: | |
Mikey,
Best wishes to your guy.
Neale,
To be honest there seems to be a bit of a, well I dont know what to call it but the first phrase that comes to me is 'cover up', on this case by the police. Perhaps Im being too dramatic but you see what I mean ?
Anderson seems to bust a gut trying to prove accidental death. The scene is just to neat and tidy. Scarf placed 'neatly' (polices words not mine) around her neck. If Rose did this then surely it would have been disturbed as she fell. It doesnt make any sense to me.
Whether Rose is a victim of Jack Im not sure but I do believe that she was murdered.
Monty
|
Michael Blayne Raney
Police Constable
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 4
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 12:57 pm: | |
Thanks to all of you for your concern. As of yesterday, he is up and walking around.....at least for a few minutes at a time. We now have live-in help and I am able to be at work and have a little free time in the evenings. The Doc says he may even be able to work again after Christmas, at least in a light duty capacity.
Now, back to the thread. I believe Rose was murdered, by JTR. I believe that all victims of JTR had some new item of some sort from him. I believe that they all went to meet him, not one was a crime of convenience. I believe that he lived in the center of his crimes and my personal opinion is the he was affiliated wtih Law Enforcement in some way.
Anyone care to agree or disagree?
Mikey |
Neale C
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 12, 2003 - 7:51 am: | |
Monty,
I agree there are several aspects to this death which don't add up. The crime scene does have a whiff of being stage managed but that is nigh on impossible to discern from here. Were the papers and public so appalled by the Kelly atrocity that they were willing to ignore anything resembling a ripper murder? Anderson's behaviour is consistent with someone desperately wanting the whole thing to be over.
In a more general sense do we have a feel for how long after Kelly life tended to get back to normal for Whitechapel residents and JtR was no longer at the forefront of everyone's minds. I suppose we can only judge by the papers - it seems to have died down very quickly after the inquest.
Any thoughts.
Neale |
Monty
Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 359
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 11:21 am: | |
Neale, Mikey,
Neale,
I have a feeling that the 'damping down' in the papers has something to do with the authorities. Maybe Anderson has had a word in some editors shell like...maybe its a change of tact with co-operation the name of the game. You work with us on this and we will supply that for you on the other. Rose may have been taken to far away from what is percieved to be his territory....perhaps another reason.
I have the impression that though life may have settled down (with the other option being what?) Jack was always there. Any murder that happend after that Autumn was thought to be Jacks until some High ranker wades in with a "no-no-no-no, not one of his, it was natural causes, see our Doctors say it is so it must be. We do know what we are doing you know !". What Im saying is that someone was telling the masses its all over and why should those that seem to know whats going on ever be doubted ?
A conscious desicion to control the hysteria ? It does make sense to me. A sort of WE are in control now.
Mikey,
I agree. My own favorite for these crimes was indeed involved with the hunt. The neat and tidy aspects of the crime at Chapmans (muslin, combs, ect) Eddowes (buttons), Kellys (clothing) and Myletts scarf jump out at me.
Im not so sure about the meetings though.
Monty
|
Michael Blayne Raney
Police Constable
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 7
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, November 13, 2003 - 1:23 pm: | |
Monty,
There are a couple of areas you and I don't see eye to eye on, but I think we mutually agree on most everything involving this case. Thanks for the boost in my confidence in myself. It is always a pleasure having discussions with you. If I get to go home to Eire next year I will have to pop over so we can have a pint.
Mikey |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1892
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 9:33 am: | |
To Monty
(continuing from the Tabram thread)
Hey Monty!
I have no idea how -- according to some of the doctors and officers at the time -- Mylett is supposed to have strangled himself.
What I do know, is that the opinions differed amongst the doctors. Some said she was murdered, and noted white marks after a cord, while others saw no signs whatsoever. And even if she was murdered, the face didn't show any signs of being swollen or the tongue protruding, as in most cases of strangulation.
So ... murder or not... I have no idea.
And I sure don't know what the loose scarf means.
Regarding the neatness, we don't know how the loose scarf got there, so I think it's somewhat of a stretch to make the connection with the Ripper in that regard. It could just mean nothing.
However, if she was murdered I have a lot of problems with her as a Ripper victim. To me she is irrelevant in this context. It is of course possible that the killer in such case was interrupted, but she did not have her throat cut and she was not mutilated. That is mainly why I rather safely discount her as a Ripper victim.
1. The important parts of the Ripper's actions lay in the mutilations, not the actual killing -- if Mylett was killed, she was just a victim of strangulation. And if she was strangled with a cord, there is no signs of a cord in any of the other victims.
2. She was prior to the murder(?) seen with two seamen (looking like "yanks"), and is -- according to a witness -- supposed to have cried out "No, no, no!". My bet is that those in such case are the responsible for the crime -- if there was a crimes committed.
So, in my book she is less relevant for the Ripper context than Tabram, Coles, McKenzie and Millwood (although I don't really consider any of those to be Ripper victims either, in my very personal opinion).
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 125
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 10:39 am: | |
Hi Glenn & Monty.
Yes Monty, I had no intent of starting up a Mylett discussion on the Tabram board but I am always intrigued in anyone's opinion on her death.
And I had not realized I contributed to this here, I thought it was on the old CD Casebook, I'll take a look later.
Glenn, you wrote:
"1. The important parts of the Ripper's actions lay in the mutilations, not the actual killing -- if Mylett was killed, she was just a victim of strangulation. And if she was strangled with a cord, there is no signs of a cord in any of the other victims."
Now, I cannot get to my Ripper files, they are boxed away, so I'm going on memory here. I believe it was Dr Phillips who considered that Mylett "may" have been murdered by the same hand as before (JtR).
He suggested, I think, that the use of a cord in many of the previous murders would answer a great many questions about the swiftness and 'silence' of the other murders.
And, if he was correct, I suspect the puzzling suggestion that JtR attempted to remove the heads of some of his victims could then be corrected in that Jack was slicing through the mark on the neck to obliterate evidence of the use of a cord.
Fancyfull?, I don't know.
I do remember going over this before, it is a bit speculatory but I don't think we can easily rule it out.
If 'Jack' thought it necessary to obliterate the mark of the garotte, it must have been because he believed it could finger him, or something about him, his background, nationality maybe. I find it a facinating epilogue to the series of murders.
Regards, Jon
(Message edited by Jon on July 23, 2004) |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1894
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 11:11 am: | |
Hi there, Jon.
As I recall, the doctors who spoke in favour of the death of Mylett being a Ripper murder was Brownfield, Phillips, Harris, Hibberd and McKellar.
Those who disagreed -- and meant that there were no signs of violence or murder in connection with the suffocation -- were Bond and Baxter. According to Ass. Com. Robert Anderson there was no injure on the neck whatsoever apart from a few abrasions.
The doctor who apparently introduced the idea of the Ripper using a "four-strand" cord (whose marks would be destroyed by the incision on the throats of the Ripper victims) was originally Dr. Brownfield of Poplar. Dr. Phillips then concurs with this idea and that the Mylett "murder" was the work of the same man as the others.
I personally think they were both wrong.
OK, because of the fact that he slit their throats, it is hard to tell how he suffocated them, but I don't think their reasoning and arguments for the Ripper being involved in the Poplar case (Mylett) are strong enough.
The Ripper probably just slit their throats to kill them; the real satisfaction lay in the mutilation and I really can't see no evident reason why Mylett should be included. Neither could James Monro and Robert Anderson.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1275
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 11:26 am: | |
Glenn,
All fair comment that. You have put forward nothing which I wholeheartedly disagree with.....and I wont insult your intelligence by trying to do so.
But, just for jolly,
1) True. But MO changes....signature not so. But that said, Im more in agreement with your views the my own Devils advocates.
2) At 7.55pm she was spotted with 2 men. You forget she was also spotted around 2am-ish with probably the same guys. Myletts body was found at around 4am (I think, Im working from memory here so dont be too harsh). This leaves enough time to get picked up. After all, 10 minutes was enough for Stride to get picked up again according to some.
I cannot see how you can neatly fold a handkerchief around your neck after you have died.
Unlike you I cannot safely discount her but cannot say for certain she should be included in the series.....and this fence has splinters !
One thing does strike me though....there seems to be a lot of killers around in the Eastend of 1888.
If you (or anyone else) posts this weekend expecting a reply from me then please forgive me because I wont be able to. But I will get back to you next week. Im off for my weekend now !
Have a gud un yourself,
Monty
PS The area of Myletts death interests me also.
PPS I can think of many very good reasons why Monro and Anderson preferred Mylett to be a natural death rather than a murder.
(Message edited by monty on July 23, 2004)
(Message edited by monty on July 23, 2004)
No, you cant have one extra on the leg side...but you can have five ! |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 608
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 12:24 pm: | |
Hi,
I don't really know a lot about the Mylett case, but from what you guys have said, the idea that she could have died by accidental death seems highly unlikely. Whether this makes her a Ripper victim i don't know. After all none of the tell tale signs of knife wounds seem to be present in this case, is that correct?
Jennifer
ps Monty what are these reasons you hint at?
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 126
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 1:03 pm: | |
Glenn.
Yes I agree (re: Mylett), I don't "include" her for lack of complementary evidence.
I just label her death, and the Brownfield/Phillips speculation as "intriguing".
I just happen to hold the opinions of Phillips in high regard in this series of murders. Each murder had it's own doctor and of course his individual opinions, but Phillips was involved across several murders and was in a better position to study the work of this individual.
If there is/was anyone at all who 'knew' the most about the Whitechapel murderer, it was Dr Phillips, more than any of the other doctors, more than the police.
If it is true that you can learn much about a murderer from his 'work', then Phillips is the one who came closest to 'knowing' this killer.
My own objective/subjective opinion.
Regards, Jon |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1897
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 1:14 pm: | |
Jon,
That is absolutely true, and we must also remember that he saw the body himself (I think) -- we haven't.
Still (and I've said this in connection with another thread as well), just because they were medical doctors and police surgeons doesen't automatically mean that we can rely on their deductions in the criminal area -- we can't even totally rely on the police for that matter.
Just look at Abberline (who probably had the best knowledge of the case) and his 1903 suggestion of Klosowski as the killer.
I can very much see why the Mylett case could be considered murder (I agree with Jennifer and Monty as well on this point -- accidental death seems a bit... erh... far-fetched), but what I can't understand why Phillips or anyone else would connect it with the Ripper. I do think Phillips & Brownfield had any real basis for their deduction in this case. Even high acclaimed doctors and policemen can get it wrong.
But, to get back to the main issue, I can see why her death could be labeled as murder an I can certanly acknowledge that possibility . But I don't think the Ripper had anything to do with it.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 127
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 1:42 pm: | |
Hi Glenn.
"just because they were medical doctors and police surgeons doesen't automatically mean that we can rely on their deductions in the criminal area -- we can't even totally rely on the police for that matter."
Absolutely, and that is the caveat in my opinion, which is why I said Phillips was "in a better position" to 'know' this killer.
I accept my position is a modern perspective because today the observation is certainly true. But, in the late 19th century we do not know if they had the savvy to deduce such details from a crime scene.
Building a picture up of the killer from crime scene & medical evidence borders on forensics, and so even though Phillips was in a better position his experience because of the times he lived in may not have been sufficient.
Regardless, Phillips and his opinions stand head and shoulders above his collegues in my opinion.
Is a little biase slipping out
Regards, Jon |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1898
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 23, 2004 - 2:41 pm: | |
I hear you, Jon.
All the best
from a suddenly very warm and sunny Sweden --
a real summer evening finally -- out of the blue! Out of the blue!
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1280
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 12:06 pm: | |
Glenn, Jon, Jenni,
Guys, after going through Myletts case again I have to mention (just so I establish my stance on this) that I feel whilst Myletts death is suspicious I cannot state it should be included in the series.
Jenni,
Look at my posts on this thread dated Tuesday 11th Nov 03 and Thursday 13th Nov 03 (hey thats my daughters birthday ! What the hell was I doing on here with you Guys ??).
Hope they answer your query.
Monty
No, you cant have one extra on the leg side...but you can have five ! |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 610
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:55 am: | |
Monty,
i can't remember where I left my brian but I think they answer my question! Thanks
Jenni
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 611
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 11:56 am: | |
Monty,
i can't remember where I left my brain but I think they answer my question! Thanks
Jenni
ps or how to spell!
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 142
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:29 pm: | |
Hi Monty.
Whether Rose Mylett, or any of the other dozen or so Whitechapel victims, not including the 4 Torso victims, are victims of Jack the Ripper, really depends on how you define his 'victims'.
The most basic definition we tend to use is the similarity of the technique used on each victim, for want of anything better.
This tends to suggest that only three victims were 'dispatched' by the same hand, that is Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes.
Based on that criteria Mylett cannot be included.
We can always question the criteria though.
I think Glenn did a terrific job on summing up the reason's why Kelly cannot be automatically included on the list.
A position I have held for several years but have never put into words adequately enough, there's no need now, Glenn did an admirable job.
Regards, Jon |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1964
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, July 31, 2004 - 10:48 pm: | |
Hi Jon,
"The most basic definition we tend to use is the similarity of the technique used on each victim, for want of anything better.
This tends to suggest that only three victims were 'dispatched' by the same hand, that is Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes.
Based on that criteria Mylett cannot be included."
Exactly, Jon.
"We can always question the criteria though."
That is also true and correct.
The technique is the criteria and approach I've chosen for the moment to reach other conclusions than the common one, but one can probably come to other conclusions while going in other directions. That's the beauty with this case. A real mindbender.
Regarding Kelly... thanks, Jon. It's very much appreciated.
I first read about those thoughts in a piece by Alex Chisholm and from thoughts by Stewart P Evans and they sure made me think and put everything I once had taken for granted upside down.
It's still quite controversial, though, since people are so attached to the thought of Kelly as the final "canonical five"...
Still, it could be completely wrong in the end, but I can't get it out of my head (to paraphrase Electric Light Orchestra)...
Thanks again for the nice words, Jon.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Nina Thomas
Detective Sergeant
Username: Nina
Post Number: 143
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, December 06, 2004 - 11:59 pm: | |
I don’t see Mylett as a JTR victim.
When Mylett was found there was an empty phial in her dress pocket. She could have taken her own life, lied down, neatly arranged her scarf, and simply drifted away.
Five doctors on the case suggested strangulation due to the fact that the left side of her heart contained black fluid blood and her lungs were gorged with black blood, symptoms of heart failure.
Doctor bond opted for accidental strangulation, the suggestion that when she laid down her dress compressed her larynx and caused her suffocation.
The only problems I have with this case are the two soldiers who were seen with Mylett earlier and the missing earring.
Nina  |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page