|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Phil Hill
Chief Inspector
Username: Phil
Post Number: 854
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 07, 2005 - 1:39 pm: | 
|
Steve and Rodney - nice to meet you too.
When you learn to discern irony, maybe we'll have the basis for a discussion. On evidence - I set out my meaning of the word in this context at least twice in the last few days. In brief, when putting forward an argument. it is helpful for that to be supported by "evidence" - cross reference to known facts, citations of other works, or of newspapers and other material of the time; or as a last resort, to other pubished theories. If you actually take the time to look at the thrust of the posts in question, you'll see my point was in objection to posts simply setting out a "belief" or an "opinion" without any idication as to how it was arrived at.
I make no apology for my aspiration for higher standards of debate.
I for one have never dismissed Macnaghten's views as expressed in his memorandum - see my numerous posts on that subject. I have also the closest interest in the way that his and Anderson's views mesh together.
As to MJK, I am not an advocate of the Barnett theory, but I do not rule it out, and have beenmore convinced by posters on casebook than I used to be. But it is not impossible that the Kelly killing WAS a "domestic". Then and now the the majority of murders are committed by someone who new the victim - probably a family member. I am 60:40 in favour of Stride as the victim of Kidney.
On Cutbush, again, as I think about the case and play with ideas, I do not dismiss the idea as completely as I once did.
I don't know how long you have ben around Casebook, but AP is one of the posters who contributes most in terms of fresh research to the site. Her work on court records produces many interesting and useful side-lights on the JtR case. I think your personal attack on her book and by implication her, very ill-judged and lacking in perception. But then you have no high opinion of me. But questioning and opening new vistas in this case is important IMHO.
Unrepentently,
phil |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1367
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 08, 2005 - 4:48 pm: |
|
Dan Norder, Editor, wrote:
If you'd bother to check ... your entire point would crumble to pieces and you'd look more than a little foolish.
Talking of which, any luck with verifying your claim that "straight jacket" is the "more preferred" [sic] spelling of straitjacket? And that "straitjacket" is just some quaint British eccentricity that you would have "corrected" if it had crossed your august editorial desk, before this week?
But I suppose you realise now that the garment in question isn't actually so named because it is "straight" (!), but because it is "strait" (i.e. narrow or confined).
Or are you just the kind of Casebook contributor who makes a lot of strident but ill-founded claims, and then vanishes into the ether when asked to back them up? (Perhaps I shouldn't say "vanishes", as I see you're haranguing fresh people, in fresh fields, now.)
Chris Phillips
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 884
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, September 08, 2005 - 5:58 pm: |
|
Hi Chris,
You really don't know when to give up, do you? (And I apologize to everyone else for this tangent here.)
You started this by trying to correct someone for a mistake that was not a mistake. Now that your mistake was proven and undeniable, you unfortunately just won't admit you were wrong and apologize for being obnoxious for no reason. Instead you decide to lash out and attack other things I said as if showing me wrong on them somehow excuses your bad behavior and your proven error. That's not how things work at all. But since you asked...
Yes, I believe straight jacket is now the preferred spelling instead of just an acceptable alternate (as compared to your incorrect claim that it was a misspelling). I know it's what we used in the psych classes I took in the late 1980s. It's also what we used when we would order them from costume supply houses (though we found it was cheaper to get real ones direct from medical supply stores). A Google search on the two variants has "straight jacket" used more than twice as often as "strait jacket," and if you add in the variants of the terms without the space, straight still has the clear lead. So, from the evidence I've seen I'd say it's now the preferred spelling. The dictionary Howard cited said it was a secondary acceptable spelling, but that edition came out in the 1980s (I know I received a copy of Webster's 9th Collegiate edition when I went to college) so perhaps the newer edition has it differently. Or perhaps it doesn't... who knows. That's not even really relevant.
You see, even if it's not the official preferred spelling it wouldn't change the fact that it's a widely accepted spelling and you were in error (on top of being quite rude) to attack Caz's use of the term... Not to mention as pointed out she was only using that particular perfectly acceptable spelling because someone else had already used it.
After Howard posted more than enough evidence to prove you wrong before I had a chance to respond, I was willing to let it drop so you could save some face. Apparently you have no self-respect and want to try to distract people from the fact that you were acting like a total putz by lashing out instead of apologizing or just crawling away. And if you think you can mischaracterize a couple of my replies to the notoriously ill-mannered David Radka (who has been here since 1996 or so) as if I were "haranguing fresh people," you are sadly mistaken.
If you're whole point was that what Caz was doing was rude and that she shouldn't be doing it, you've gone well above and beyond that yourself. It'd be nice if you let the conversation get back on track instead of insisting upon carrying on your pathetic little personal vendettas.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Martin Anderson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scouse
Post Number: 80
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 08, 2005 - 6:58 pm: |
|
Guys, calm down.
Can I suggest that it's yet another American spelling which varies from the English? Yet again the Atlantic divide strikes!
Martin Anderson
Analyst
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1369
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 08, 2005 - 7:01 pm: |
|
Dan Norder, Editor
Thanks for clarifying that when you said "straight jacket" was the "more preferred" spelling, all you had done was use Google to compare the two incorrect spellings "straight jacket" and "strait jacket".
I suppose I should find this degree of naivete endearing, but instead I find myself yearning for the good old days when editors would use dictionaries to decide these sort of questions.
And when you continued attacking me and advised me sarcastically to consult Webster's dictionary, I suppose you knew that Webster showed the precise opposite of your previous claim. Though you chose to suppress that fact. (Though judging by your comment "who knows?", you hadn't even bothered to check Webster yourself.)
So despite the fact that, as I've explained, "straight jacket" is clearly an error - the jacket being "strait", not "straight" - your opinion seems to be that so many people have repeated the error that Google indicates it is now "preferred". Not Webster's, not the OED, but Google's index of the magnificent unregulated Internet.
And woe betide anyone who disagrees with you - they are "obnoxious", a total "putz" (whatever that means), and "pathetic". (Aren't we suppose to avoid insults on these boards?)
The worrying question is this. Are you planning to apply the same criterion of "preferability" to Ripperology? If Google tells you that there are more Internet pages on Prince Albert Victor, or Maybrick, or Lewis Carroll, as Jack the Ripper, will you be telling us that these candidates are the "more preferred" ones, and hurling insults at anyone with the temerity to contradict you?
I have to agree with R. J. Palmer, that Ripperology is a very strange little field, and its gods are strange gods indeed!
Chris Phillips
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1370
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 08, 2005 - 7:09 pm: |
|
Martin
The thing is, though, it isn't an American/British divide, although Dan did try to portray it as one.
"Straitjacket" - the spelling Dan had never heard of before this week - is the correct American spelling, just as it's the correct British one.
Or do Americans now refer to the "Bering Straight"?
Chris Phillips
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2421
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 08, 2005 - 7:20 pm: |
|
Rodney peters,
AP"s book hardly comparible to"the giants...."
you are joking?
It may read more like cinematic montage than a formal reference book on the ripper but if you read it carefully AP will show you links and correspondences where no connection had previously been suspected.
Oh and AP can "write"----and there is a distinction between AP"s prose and the straightforward citing of information.
Natalie |
Robert W. House
Inspector
Username: Robhouse
Post Number: 271
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 10:30 am: |
|
Here's from Wikipedia:
"Although straitjacket is the most common form, strait-jacket is also frequently used, and, in England, strait-waistcoat (archaic). The spellings straightjacket and straight-jacket are now valid alternatives, although the original term came from strait meaning narrow or confined; thus straitjacket is preferable." |
Sarah Long
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 1340
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 11:47 am: |
|
I see the intellectual debates are still ongoing since I left here. Good good. Just for the record, Chris you are being immature. Drop it! You have no right to attack Caz like that, at least straight-jacket is a valid alternative, if not the most popular version. Good grief! I've been reading these posts and you seem to be purely antagonising the other posters for no real reason. Get over it and move on.
Ah, now Joe Barnett, he's interesting. What was this thread talking about before? For the record, I'm still in favour of him being my most popular choice for JTR.
By the way, hellooooo everyone!! 
Smile and the world will wonder what you've been up to 
Smile too much and the world will guess 
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4008
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 11:51 am: |
|
Hello Sarah,
Welcome back! 
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Sarah Long
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 1342
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 11:56 am: |
|
*Hugs Glenn*
Sorry just had to do that!
Smile and the world will wonder what you've been up to
Smile too much and the world will guess
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2422
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 12:34 pm: |
|
Sarah!!!Moi!Moi!
and MOI!!!
but seriously its good to see you posting again!
Best
Nats
x |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1371
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 12:51 pm: |
|
Sarah
You have no right to attack Caz like that
Attack? Me?
Far from it. Just trying to lend her a little helping hand, as she has helped so many others herself, with their little typos and misplaced apostrophes...
Chris Phillips
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2489
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 4:58 pm: |
|
Talking about copy cat killers.
There is a case from October 2nd 1888 involving the family Lawrence, tried in Dalston - which I believe is a district of London, perhaps in the East End - where the husband asks the wife:
'How would you like to be done like the Whitechapel Murderer?'
Then stabs, kicks, smacks and bites her.
She lives.
But the case does show that violent men did very much have Jack in mind when they attacked women.
This was October.
November yet to come. |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1373
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 6:03 pm: |
|
AP
Dalston - which I believe is a district of London, perhaps in the East End
Yes, I would call it the East End - in Hackney close to Victoria Park. Though probably those intent on minimising the number of parallel incidents will claim it's not close enough to Whitechapel (or rather Spitalfields).
Chris Phillips
|
Julie
Detective Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 129
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 9:15 pm: |
|
Chris Phillips
I have read so many posts re the spelling of Straight Jacket as opposed to straitjacket.
Is it really that important? What on earth does it have to do with evidence pro and anti, re Jack the ripper.
I have been amazed that such talented people would spend so much time arguing about such a nonessential piece of information.
These posts are nothing but total pettiness.
Please put it to bed,if you cannot please call in an unbiased person to settle it once and for all.
Your expertise can surely be put to better use.
regards
Julie
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1375
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 3:55 am: |
|
Julie
Thanks for adding one more post on the subject!
(And feel free to contribute something to the Ripper discussion any time you want to ...)
Chris Phillips
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1378
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 11:50 am: |
|
"Rodney Peters" wrote:
Isn't this being taken for granted that Schwartz saw Stride ??
Not really "taken for granted".
Schwartz formally identified Stride's body as the woman he had seen.
And if you don't believe that, there's his statement to the Star that "The Hungarian saw him put his hand on her shoulder and push her back into the passageway", which certainly matches the evidence from Stride's body:
There were, however, bluish discolourations over both shoulders. They were under the collar-bones and in front of the chest. They were neither bruises nor abrasions but pressure marks, apparently caused by the pressure of two hands upon the shoulders.
Chris Phillips
PS Why not register, so that we don't have to wait several days for your posts to appear? It's a painless process - unless you've already been banned from posting under a different name, of course.
(Message edited by cgp100 on September 10, 2005) |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 885
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 3:54 pm: |
|
Hi Chris,
"So despite the fact that, as I've explained, "straight jacket" is clearly an error "
But it's clearly not in error, as the quote from Webster's and other dictionaries clearly show, and as were already posted to this thread before you made the above comment. And your characterization of the rest of my statements are equally deceptive.
You either have extremely poor reading comprehension skills or you are knowingly trying to twist facts to cover up your mistakes (or possibly a bit of both).
And of course it's ludicrous for you to be claiming that personal insults should be avoided on these boards when that's all you've been doing.
If you had any decency you would have already apologized for your obnoxious behavior. If your ego prevents you from doing so, I'd have hoped common sense would have led you to change the topic (like, say, to what the thread is supposed to be about) instead of proving your ignorance and utter lack of respect for other posters over and over again.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1381
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 4:59 pm: |
|
Dan Norder, Editor
You really are pathologically incapable of admitting you made a mistake, aren't you?
Chris Phillips
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1382
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 5:21 pm: |
|
Dan Norder, Editor
I was going to leave it there, but as you seem determined to pursue the matter, please can you give us a straight answer? Have you been able to find "straight jacket" in any published dictionary, British, American or otherwise?
Let's have a little more evidence, and a lot less insults, please.
Chris Phillips
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1045
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 5:41 pm: |
|
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate dictionary, copyright and published 1989:
Straitjacket or Straightjacket
Can you end this absolutely retarded argument now?
|
Julie
Detective Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 131
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 5:59 pm: |
|
Chris Phillips
I hope you did not take any offense to my comments, however I have read several of your contributions to Ripper Notes as well as Casebook, and I do indeed consider you a talented person, as well as Dan.
Tks for the comments.
regards
Julie
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1383
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 6:02 pm: |
|
Howard wrote:
Not in an attempt to exacerbate the issue, but in the Websters Collegiate [ Ninth New ]Edition, under "strait-jacket", it says..."strait-jacket OR straight-jacket"....page 1164
Ally wrote:
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate dictionary, copyright and published 1989:
Straitjacket or Straightjacket
Thanks to you both. Although we do seem to have a certain conflict of evidence. I'll let you discuss that among yourselves.
Anyhow, "straight jacket" doesn't even appear, does it? So far from being the "more preferred" spelling, as Dan Norder, Editor, claimed.
Sorry to those who wanted the discussion ended last week, but thanks to Howard and Ally for helping to end it now!
Chris Phillips
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1046
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 6:13 pm: |
|
There is no conflict of evidence. Howard included a - to delineate where webster's puts a dot to separate syllables. There isn't a comparitive punctuation on the keyboard without going into formatting that would just be ridiculous. I chose not to show syllable separation because it was unnecessary to the argument.
Now if you are arguing that "straight jacket" is incorrect because the two words should not be separated, then you should have said that. You never have. If you are saying that "straight" is incorrect, you are wrong. Suck it up and move on.
(Message edited by Ally on September 10, 2005)
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1384
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 6:16 pm: |
|
Julie
No offence taken (though I don't remember contributing to Ripper Notes!).
I am very tired of the discussion myself - and quite amazed that anyone should be arguing that "straight jacket" is not a misspelling - let alone that it's the "more preferred" spelling (based on a Google comparison of two misspellings).
However, I'm sure you'll understand that when I'm accused of being "deceptive", "ignorant", of having "poor reading comprehension skills", of being "obnoxious", "ignorant" and having a "lack of respect for other posters" - not to mention being "rude", "in error", having "no self-respect", "acting like a total putz" and being "pathetic" - well, I'm going to respond (wouldn't you?).
And on top of all that, Dan Norder says that personal insults is "all I've been doing", when in fact I've been responding in an extremely restrained way to his verbal onslaught.
Ah well! I suppose, Editors will be Editors ...
Chris Phillips
(Message edited by cgp100 on September 10, 2005) |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1385
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 6:23 pm: |
|
Ally
Thanks for confirming that Webster's doesn't actually list "straight-jacket", let alone "straight jacket". (I must admit I was a bit surprised by what Howard posted, as I'd been unable to find "straight-jacket" listed by any online dictionaries.)
And of course "straight" is an error. The jacket is "strait", not "straight". Surely you can tell the difference? It's just one of those errors that are so prevalent that it's found its way into some American dictionaries...
Chris Phillips
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1386
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 6:26 pm: |
|
Ally
By the way, I notice that none of your strenuous efforts are directed towards getting Dan Norder, Editor, to withdraw his blatantly false claim about "Straight jacket" being the preferred American spelling.
Par for the course, I suppose.
Chris Phillips
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1047
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 6:30 pm: |
|
Chris,
Straight is not an error. Webster's agrees with it, deal with it.
|
Rodney Peters
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 11:08 am: |
|
Martin Anderson.
Hey Martin, have you ever thought of a career in comedy. No, I'm not being sarcastic in any way.
That bit about "You pulling me up, for pulling Phil up" etc., really had me laughing. You've obviously got a good sense of humour, and I think it's much needed here. Keep it up.
Seriously though, believe it or not, I think that Phil Hill is among the very best JtR students on these boards, and I'm a great admirer of his knowledge. I just believe that you can make a point to someone, or correct them, with a little more tolerance, and not leave a bad taste in their mouths.
No offence Phil.
Chris & Dan
I've got the Oxford dictionary right here. and the only spelling in it is "Strait" Jacket.
True, it's not the latest edition, but it's the only spelling I've ever seen in my lifetime.
By the way, I'm English.
Rod
|
c.d.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 9:32 pm: |
|
Julie,
You are right on. You go girl!
c.d. |
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 6:01 pm: |
|
AP,
... the case does show that violent men did very much have Jack in mind when they attacked women
Interesting find and, it's may also be significant that this ruffian's idea of "doing" someone like the Whitechapel Murderer didn't involve anything like the structured viciousness perpetrated on Mary Kelly or her predecessors.
Now, this is hardly strong evidence to rule out the Miller's Court murder as a "copycat" killing - this chap's threat could just have been a figure of speech rather than a statement of intent after all.
On the other hand if stabbing, smacking, biting and a good kicking where what one man thought would be a fair imitation of Jack's MO then it seems, to me at least, to weaken further the "copycat" argument in respect of the killer's motive in Mary's death.
|
Steve Swift
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, September 09, 2005 - 10:42 am: |
|
Glenn,
I did NOT say these killings were carried out by two people.....
How do we know that this killer was indeed a lone stalker? The fact of the matter is...if we assume for a second that this killer did not work alone, it does actually account for quite a few things.
The descriptions of men seen with the victims.
The two men seen assaulting Stride.
The differing opinion of the Doctors as to the killer being left or right handed.
The man seen by a witness stood watching Mary Kellys room (Hutchinson?)
If the killer did indeed have a lookout it goes a long way to explaining his 'daring'.
TWO killers would have been largely invisible - nobody was looking for TWO men
....was what I actually said, I said it was possible.
And Glen, I've attended many domestics and I'll tell you something from experience. Domestics always involve a 'cooling off' period when the attacker is beset or overcome with remorse for what he/she did in a fit of rage. I'll readily agree Liz Stride could have been killed in such circumstances but not Kelly.
Mary Kelly was taken apart piece by piece by a cold & calculating individual who saw her as an object and nothing more....I doubt very much wether her killer even reguarded her as a person.
Phil, you undoubtedly have a very sharp mind and I enjoyed your piece on the 'conspiricy' very much but......please try to remember that english is not everyone's first language and that lack of formal education does not make someone any less of a person.
It's a dull,grey day here in England, but you all have a fine day none the less. |
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1387
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 10, 2005 - 8:28 pm: |
|
Ally
Let's take it really slowly for you.
A straitjacket is so called because it is "strait" - narrow, or confined. Not because it's "straight". Surely that's not too hard to understand?
But some people did misunderstand, and thought the thing wasn't "strait", but "straight". By degrees, so many people misunderstood, that some American dictionaries listed it as an alternative usage - usage being king as far as lexicographers are concerned.
I'm marvelling that people are still having trouble understanding it - and I'm marvelling even more that people who've made ludicrous claims about the false spelling being "preferred" still refuse to correct themselves.
Still, that's the Casebook for you.
Chris Phillips
|
Martin Anderson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scouse
Post Number: 81
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 6:32 am: |
|
Chris,
In all sincerity my friend, your last post suggests that it is an American alternative although I understand that you are referring to the entymology of the word itself.
Can't you see - in this way both you and Dan are both right!
p.s. Rodney - thankyou, I aim to make people have a laugh if nothing else! Maybe coming from Liverpool where the world's best comedians (and Diary forgers) come from has something to do with it???
kind regards
Martin Anderson
Analyst
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1050
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 6:42 am: |
|
Chris,
Were you dropped on your head as a small child? Repeatedly? The English language evolves as time goes on. We are not speaking the same language that was spoken two thousand years ago or even two decades ago.
Whether "straight" was a misconcpetion that became accepted or not, it is now considered an accepted alternative. There are plenty of words that were coined that were not the original meaning or were not originally in the dictionary. Once they are in the dictionary, they are now considered accepted usage. There are plenty of words out there that the vast majority of people spell wrong and those don't make it into the dictionary. So when one does make it, it is because it is accepted as being a part of the language.
So let me spell it out one more time for you: You said straightjacket wasn't in the dictionary. You are wrong. It is. So shut up already.
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 4016
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 6:55 am: |
|
Steve,
"And Glen, I've attended many domestics and I'll tell you something from experience. Domestics always involve a 'cooling off' period when the attacker is beset or overcome with remorse for what he/she did in a fit of rage. I'll readily agree Liz Stride could have been killed in such circumstances but not Kelly.
Mary Kelly was taken apart piece by piece by a cold & calculating individual who saw her as an object and nothing more....I doubt very much wether her killer even reguarded her as a person."
I am sorry, but I know police officers who themselves have walked into domestic crime scenes just as gruesome as the one of Mary Kelly, and we do have several cases that are quite horrible, committed by a spouse, with no prior criminal record.
Some of them have been committed before the Ripper but we also have modern ones, and some of them are even worse than Mary Kelly's. It happens, accept it. I think you need to reconsider your perceptions of what quite ordinary people are capable of, because you are clearly wrong about this and your conceptions are clearly based on false deduction about the human mind. I know where you're coming from, though, since I used to be of the same opinion as yourself, but since been faced with a lot of crimes of this nature, and heard people giving evidence of them, I had to change my naive perception about human behaviour.
You are clearly wrong about this, and I am surprised that still after this have been debated here on several threads for at least a year or two people still pops up, who believes that this is not possible and haven't even checked out the facts. All it takes is some very simple research.
The human mind - and especially the dark side of it - is more complex than many of us wants to believe.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on September 11, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/historian
|
Martin Anderson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scouse
Post Number: 82
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 6:55 am: |
|
At the risk of this thread approaching its death, would I be right in saying that the general concensus is that Barnett was NOT a copycat killer after all?
When I first read up on the case, I went in with a resolute belief that there was no way Barnett was responsible for such a despicable act. Would he have just stopped killing after MJK as there is a general agreement that serial killers don't just stop. Neither do I believe that was MJK a one-off murder (or a copycat) - these were the actions of a MO leading up to such an aberration.
In other words I am saying whoever killed MJK also killed Chapman, Nicholls, Edowes and maybe Stride. I know there is at least one other person who doesn't agree with that and I respect his views unmitigatedly as he is an excellent eye-opening theorist.
However with other suspects my sentiments have swung in twists, turns and back into roundabouts. For example, I am now open to the possibility of Walter Sickert being JTR due to a certain person's arguments (no, not Cornwell). I am now coming back to the idea of Tumblety being involved but my interest in Kosminski has dwindled. It depends how much faith you put in the police and more specifically in Anderson; mine has nosedived especially after reading a number of books.
However this is not the case with Joe Barnett, as with James Maybrick. I need something a little more concrete before I am convinced. Until that happens, they are just names that happened to be in the right place at the right time, or the wrong place at the wrong time as the case may be.
Martin Anderson
Analyst
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1388
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 7:05 am: |
|
Ally
So let me spell it out one more time for you: You said straightjacket wasn't in the dictionary. You are wrong. It is. So shut up already.
Of course, I did not say that.
But as I've found with Caroline Morris, there's no point trying to have a sensible discussion with people who just make things up when it suits them.
Martin
In all sincerity my friend, your last post suggests that it is an American alternative although I understand that you are referring to the entymology of the word itself.
Can't you see - in this way both you and Dan are both right!
It would certainly be nice to draw this ridiculous argument to a conclusion.
So, yes, I'll agree that "straightjacket" is now an accepted alternative spelling in America, though it clearly originated as an error.
And as far as we've seen, "straight-jacket" (which is the spelling that was actually used), and "straight jacket" (which is Dan Norder's preferred spelling, the only one he's ever known), are unknown even to American dictionaries.
I'm not entirely sure where that gets us, as none of the people concerned - neither Phil, who originally used the expression, nor Caroline Morris, who repeated it, nor I, who objected to it - is American.
In any case, what's indisputable is that Dan Norder's claim that "straight jacket" is the "more preferred" spelling is quite wrong. It's not even a valid spelling in America.
To my mind just about the only interesting thing about this whole business is that he is simply incapable of admitting he made a mistake.
Chris Phillips
|
Martin Anderson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Scouse
Post Number: 83
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 7:42 am: |
|
Hello Chris,
I studied English language and English literature at A level and in my humble opinion, I would say that your explanation does make more sense. Even I was surprised to hear the correct spelling was strait-jacket and I am an excellent speller if I don't mind saying. It's one of those words that you would expect to be spelled as straight jacket and then evolved that way. The only other word I can think of which is similar is hi-tec - which of course evolved from high-technology but not exactly the same.
Either way lets put this to bed now and get on with more important things like the Diary thread! 
kind regards
Martin Anderson
Analyst
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1051
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 8:21 am: |
|
There Chris goes again with his own special little brand of misogyny. He is completely incapable of arguing with a woman without bringing up reference to other women who have done him wrong. Poor boy probably has mommy-issues.
|
Julie
Detective Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 133
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 12:46 pm: |
|
Chris Phillips
I confused you with Ripperologist contributor Chris Scott, and of course I do enjoy his writings as well as many others from both Ripper Notes and Ripperologist.
I fortunately have not encountered an unpleasant exchange between you and I and I do hope it stays that way.
I still stand by my guns when I refer to the constant posts on the spelling of a word, not a suspect or wittness, but a word is a waste of good time, space and talent as it stands.
If you or whomever else wish to continue to do so is of course up to you, no one twists my arm to read these posts, therefore like they say "If you don't like the heat than get out of the kitchen" well I have the option to read or not to read them.
So by all means debate the spelling till the cows come home.
I mean no offense and hope none is taken by you or any of the other posters who find this topic interesting.
regards
Julie
|
Chris Phillips
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 1390
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 12:57 pm: |
|
Julie
As far as I'm concerned more than enough has been said about straitjackets. And I am not going to respond to posts on the level of the last one by Ally.
Chris Phillips
|
Baron von Zipper
Sergeant
Username: Baron
Post Number: 26
Registered: 9-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 1:07 pm: |
|
All,
Funny, I've always used the term 'straitjacket' when referring to condoms...
Ah c'mon. A little levity never hurt anyone.
Cheers
Mike the Mauler
|
Julie
Detective Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 134
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 1:15 pm: |
|
Chris Philips
I cannot resist the temptation to comment on the spelling of strait jacket as opposed to straight jacket, you'll see why.
I have a WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY (of the American Language) Second College Edition by Simon Shuster Inc., In this publication both spellings are listed ,- believe it or not.
page 1406 - right column - nineth from bottom - lists straight jacket (definition listed in dictionary "SAME AS STRAITJACKET"
Page 1407 Left column - fourth from top lists
STRAITJACKET - definition :" coatlike devise that binds the arms tight against the body: used to restrain persons in a violent state."
This is obviously the American version of the Dictionary (Webster's) My edition 1984.
And it is as clear as a bell that the two are the same based on this dictionary.
regards
Julie
|
Ally
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Ally
Post Number: 1053
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 1:18 pm: |
|
Ever noticed how the insecure and those lacking in conviction can never just not respond? They always have to tell you that they won't respond, which of course, is a response.
|
Steve Swift
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 7:12 am: |
|
Definition of Straitjacket
Straitjacket: Or strait-jacket or strait jacket. 1. A garment shaped like a jacket with long sleeves the ends of which can be tied behind the back to restrain a violently disturbed person, as in a psychiatric in-patient unit, so that the person does not injure themselves or anyone else. (The straitjacket has also seen use in prisons, escapology, and sexual bondage.) 2. By extension, anything that is constricting, restricting, very limiting, confining. Sometimes spelled straightjacket, straight-jacket, or straight jacket. However, strait means narrow or confined so that straitjacket is preferable.
OKAY!! Everyone is right - there IS no 'correct' way to spell this.
Now children, get back to your desks and get back to work right this minute or you are ALL on detention!
*waves to Martin* I'm a scouser too
|
an armchair detective
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 5:14 am: |
|
From "The Columbia Guide to Standard American English":
straitjacket, straightjacket (nn.), straitlaced, straightlaced (adjs.)
Each of these words is properly spelled when strait- is the first element of the compound (see STRAIGHT). To be straitlaced is literally to be “tightly laced into a corset, bodice, or other garment” and figuratively (the main current meaning) to be “unbending, unyielding, and rigid, especially in manners and morals.” And a straitjacket is so named because it prevents any movement of the arms. But folk etymologies appear to have justified the misspellings that begin with straight-, and conservative and liberal dictionaries alike today approve both spellings for each word, although the original spellings with strait- are more frequent, especially in Edited English.
Regards,
Martin |
Sy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 11:28 am: |
|
From The New Oxford Dictionary of English, published by the Oxford University Press, 1998, page 1835 :-
straightjacket noun and verb, variant spelling of straitjacket.
and on page 1836 :-
straitjacket (also straightjacket) noun, a strong garment with long sleeves which can be tied to confine the arms of a violent prisoner or mental patient.
That's pretty clear-cut, isn't it? And this from the main English dictionary of reference. Sorry to those who think otherwise, it may be spelt correctly either way and it does appear in the dictionary that is the foremost authority on the English language, printed and published in England. The alternative spelling is just that, an alternative, and not an error that has been accepted through common usage. |
Gareth W
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 11, 2005 - 6:38 am: |
|
Martin,
Is "entymology" the study of the origins of insect language? ;o) |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
