Archive through February 26, 2001

** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **

Archive through February 26, 2001

Casebook Message Boards: General Discussion: Research Issues / Philosophy: The ripper and anti-semitism: Archive through February 26, 2001

Author: E Carter Friday, 23 February 2001 - 02:58 pm
Ashling, I have read all there is to read at the public records office, the writing copied from the wall is in neither Long or Halse's hand, (would you like the name of a very good document examiner?) You obviously have not read the material properly, have you! Why did Warren not give his opinion? He went there with the sole intention of seeing it! Remember, this is the first place he went! I live only one hour from the public records office access to source material is not a problem! I'm busy for no reason that gives me pleasure!
Author: Joseph Friday, 23 February 2001 - 05:58 pm
Hello Mr. Carter, For some unknown reason or reasons, you prefer to ignore straightforward and pertinent questions from me, that are directly related to your subject matter. Now that you have seen fit to answer Ms. Ashling's long standing question, only mine remains to be addressed. Perhaps you will be good enough to spare me a few minutes of your time. What led you to connect the Hebrew alphabet with the Goulston St. graffiti? What were you thinking prior to making the connection? I'm interested in knowing how you came to see it (The alphabet) as a means of decryption. Respectfully
Author: Jon Friday, 23 February 2001 - 07:19 pm
Ed. Ashling asked you if you had any other samples of handwriting from either Long or Halse? Surely that question is not difficult to interpret or answer. The rest of your poste is a little difficult to follow.....dare I ask what relevence it is to her question? - read the material properly? - Warren did not give his opinion? - you live near to the PRO ? I can read perfectly, but fail to understand your point. Am I the only one? Regards, Jon P.S. Are you suggesting Warren made every attempt to cover it up?, metaphorically speaking.
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan Friday, 23 February 2001 - 09:12 pm
(Pst! Joseph), Can I strangle him now? Love, Rosemary
Author: Ashling Friday, 23 February 2001 - 09:44 pm
Hi JOSEPH, I wish you luck on getting information from Ed--because he still has NOT answered my question. Thanks, JON! From your post and private e-mails I've received, I am now satisfied that my question to Ed is easily understood. ED CARTER--- I never asked what you think, theorize or deduce ... I merely asked if you have a document in your possession. Since you refuse to answer, you leave me no choice but to assume that the answer is No, you do not. What would examining copies of Long and Halse's handwriting accomplish? If we compared how they formed individual letters in their signatures, etc. to the way they formed the letters in the words they copied from the graffito--we could determine if they copied the message verbatim AND in the style of the original writing--OR if they simply wrote it down in their own normal handwriting style. ED--IF, for instance, Halse always left a space between the A and the L when signing his name--then one of the points you made several days ago about a space between the B and L in the graffito is based on a false assumption--i.e. that the graffito writer (who may or may not have been Jack) wrote it that way on purpose. In short, your whole theory could come crumbling down. IF, comparing Long and Halse's handwriting to the graffito showed that their normal style of forming letters was wildly different from the way they copied down the graffito words, then ...... You will be seen as a researcher who put down a firm foundation of FACT upon which to build your theory. I and others would then be willing to give your theory respectful consideration. ED, you've given me the impression that you either live in or near London or otherwise have easy access to PRO, therefore I hoped you might follow in the footsteps of authors like Beggs, Fido, Evans, Hinton, Paley, Skinner, etc. who have been generous in posting info here that they obtained while in London. For instance, Stewart Evans has kindly posted handwriting samples here so that everyone who reads these boards could reach their own conclusions on such topics as the Dear Boss letter. I live in the United States, and I guess it was wishful thinking on my part that you might have delved into records not found in authors' books. I know from reading geneology web pages that odd and end records still exist on police officers from the 1800s--i.e. pay records, dismissal charges, promotions, commendations, physical check-ups, etc. I hoped you had looked through these for samples of Halse and Long's signatures. However, ED since you refuse to even answer my question--and choose instead to attempt to insult my intelligence--I can only conclude that your research methods are not painstaking enough to warrant me reading further posts on your theories. Thanks for your time. Best regards, Ashling
Author: E Carter Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 09:58 am
O'K, Ashling, you did ask. This is a word for word extract of the letter sent to the Undersecretary of State by Charles Warren on the 6th November 1888. The ref is HO 144 221. A49301c. There are two copies in the file. 'I accordingly went to Goulstone Street before going to the scene', he talks about the Graffitti before stating ;'having taken a copy of which I enclose a duplicate'. This is in Warrens hand, the copies are in the same file along with this letter, it is these copies that are printed in every book and the graffiti is not in Warren's hand, I checked! The letter earlier states 'the most pressing question that moment was some writing on the wall in Goulstone Street, evidently written with the intention of inflaming the public mind against the Jews'. Halse took a copy, and I believe it was very accurate! But as far as I am aware Warren copied the text himself, he states this in the letter! If I am wrong, let me know and I will adjust my ideas! P>S Love ED>
Author: Jon Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 10:21 am
Ed. This is what you are referring to.... This was posted & discussed on the Victims/ Catherine Eddowes/ Goulston Street Graffiti board back in January last year. We have copies & quoted from that H.O. files several times, its nothing new.....what is your contention? I thought Halse said "it was wrote in 3 lines", ...who's right?
Author: E Carter Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 10:28 am
Joseph, if you look carefully at the two copies of the above text, Warren claims he sent a duplicate, but when the two are placed together it is not! This made me suspicious, I had some letters assessed by a document examiner, I asked her for an opinion(only an opinion)as to which was the origional and which the duplicate of the two. The one she determined the second copy looks as if it's been tampered with! I have always wondered about Goldstein's story, he apparently walked quickly up the road on his way home from Spectacle Alley, but stayed on the far side of the road until passing the club. Most people would cross about half way up. He went accompanied to the police station and the news papers the following day to clear his name. It's the circumstances surrounding this! I think he may have seen more than he told! I saw some esoteric text, it had similar characteristics. I still have some work to do! Respectfully back ED> Joseph when the kids go back to school next week, and I have more time, if you want I will go into more depth. Respectfully back ED>
Author: E Carter Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 10:30 am
Jon yes, that is one copy. P>S In the same letter Warren quotes from another letter that he had recieved from a Rabbi 'congratulating him for destroying the graffiti, and describing him as 'humaine', he sounds quite proud of himself! This is the Charles Warren who gained letters behind his name for quelling an uprising in Bechananland, attempting to relieve General Gordon at Khartoom and using the meetings act and the Queens act to protect Trafalgar Square the year before. Under his orders the Grenaders were allowed fixed bayonets, mounted police charged directly into the crowd. John Burns who was charged with public disorder and was gived six months, spent in the infirmary directly due to the beating he recieved. Does this sound like someone who would eraze evidence that he thought had the 'intention of inflaming the public mind towards the Jews?
Author: E Carter Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 10:41 am
The above letter of the 6th Nov, claims Warren to be the author, so why check the hand of Halse? Your copy is the one that looks as if it has been tampered with! The 'e'in the suppossed 'be' is an arrow in the original, so why has a definate arrow now curved! A duplicate is an 'exact' copy! Best wishes ED.
Author: Joseph Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 11:14 am
Hello Mr. Carter, Please take care of your family first, and then, when that situation has allowed you some time, I would be delighted to hear the story of how you came to see Hebraic letters as a possible solution to the Goulston St. graffiti mystery. How many youngsters do you have?
Author: E Carter Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 11:24 am
I would like to hear your ideas also, we have had two children. I have to go now, speak to you soon! ED>
Author: Jade Bakys Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 11:33 am
Hi Ed this is lamed, yes, as you know the Hebrew alphabet has specific idiosyncrasies, I have never seen a copy of the Goulston Street Graffiti except the one in the posting above and the B is interesting; but I need to know if the B is significant, not only for the Hebrew lamed, but the way it was wrote in your copy version. I know you are busy so please take your time and get back to me when you have the time. Love Jade
Author: Simon Owen Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 02:25 pm
Its easy to see , if the handwriting on the wall was anything like the copied script , how the various spellings of ' Juwes ' might have come about - especially since the light was poor at the time. Look at the word again - its easy to read it as ' Juwes ' , but then look again and it appears to be ' Jeuwes ' ! The shape of the B could indeed be an indication that lamed is intended ( N.B. the phrase ' not be ' could be read to imply the letter B does not indicate a letter but a symbol , its literally NOT a B ), and ' for nothing ' being on a seperate line could mean its to be read as 40 , but I can't see any indication that ' men ' means iron. In fact men in Celtic languages means ' stone ' as in ' dolmen ' or ' menhir ' . I suspect ' men ' means that we are specifically looking for a group of men and not a race of people here. The word ' Will ' is interesting however , the capital letter draws attention to it. Could it mean W / ILL , or 101 in Roman numerals ( I + L + L ) ? What about V+V ? That makes it 111 , or V + V + I + L + L ! What then does it all mean when put together though ? " The Juwes ( 3 Assassins ) are the men who 111 - lamed 40 " ? Its gibberish ! Help us Ed !
Author: Jon Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 02:48 pm
.....is there no end to this frivolity... :-) Jon
Author: Simon Owen Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 02:53 pm
Or " The Juwes ( 3 Assassins ) are the - men ^ hat ( iron to silver ) 111 lamed 40 " !!!
Author: Jade Bakys Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 03:18 pm
Hi Jon, Simon It's frustrating isn't it! but ED has worked many years on this theory and he hasn't lost his marbles in Warwick Parminter's back garden, and he isn't a crank. Please bare with him, because I want to follow what it is he gives up re the graffito. Sometimes I find it harder to decode Ed's postings than the actual graffito, but he has a unique style, and its very fresh and dare I say honest. J
Author: Jon Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 03:55 pm
Ed. I have just read through this thread from the begining, I am trying to get the gist of your case. If you have already summarized it somewhere, please indicate where. Alternately, if not, could you encapsulate the pertinent bits. Two killers?, Freemasons?, conspiracy?, how many victims 5, 6, 7,?....can you put it all together so we can gain a perspective? Thanks, Jon
Author: Jack D. Killian Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 04:07 pm
Forgive me but, this decoding/secret meaning business...me thinks is highly suspect. If one were to simply read the writing from left to write, or from bottom to top, it could be inferred; "For nothing be blamed, do not think the Juwes are the men." I am reminded of a quote from Shakespeare. I do not remember the entire verbiage but I think it ends with; "...thus, the poet's pen gives to airy nothing, a local habitat and a name." Regards, JDK
Author: Jon Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 04:18 pm
Jade I appreciate Ed has put 4 years(?) into his studies, which, for someone knew to the case may appear to be a long time. However, there are several here who were introduced to this murder mystery 20-25-30-35 years ago. Some here can tell you stories of walking the streets of Whitechapel, visiting the murder sites in daylight and at night, all before it was unceremoniously vandalized in the name of progress. Personally I have taken more than one hiatus from this god-forsaken mystery and each time was more than 4 years. This Casebook site has been around for about 4 years (96/97?), its not long at all. Press reports, Home Office Files, private (published) research, are all now available to make it easier for the public to get involved. I am still interested in getting to the bottom of what Ed's theory is. Rather than pick up on snippets here and there, I'd hope he would summarize his point of view and provide key references to back up his case. Regards, Jon
Author: David M. Radka Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 07:40 pm
Gosh, I wonder what the people who post here are like in real life. Would that I could walk into my favorite haunt, the Ground Round in Plainville, and meet them there. It would give me so much more to go on to question and interpret what they say here. What is Ed like? Where is he coming from? Try as I might, I just can't determine what he's really after in what he posts. Jon, Warwicke, Jack, what kind of men are they? There is one I know, and I do not give the name, but I've had a girlfriend or two like her before and I know something. Up to every trick in the book and then some. And then some. David
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan Saturday, 24 February 2001 - 07:59 pm
Dear All, I would council patience. If Ed finds time to answer Joseph's question re,Hebrew lexiconography, perhaps we will not be the men... Love, (another Wallbanger!) Rosemary
Author: Jade Bakys Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 06:42 am
I think it was E.H. Carr when quoting Lytton Strachey: �Igonrance is the first requisite of the historian, ignorance which simplifies and clarifies, which selects and omits�. Sometimes knowledge isn't enough, sometimes it is the approach that advances knowledge, the limits of knowledge do not exceed interpretation I wouldn�t like to make a judgement on your personality David, so I ask: do you have a low opinion of females? or do you have an amazing albeit generalised insight into pathological personality traits of women? Quite a man you must be to be able to do this from the impersonal postings, that appear to be the norm on this board. Maybe you find some female postings provocative, and feel you must project your failed past relationships onto female(s) here on the board.
Author: Ashling Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 07:05 am
Hi JON. You might remember a discussion on another board where a poster got it in their head that a doctor had taken the photos of Mary Kelly's body, merely because the doctor presented the photos during his testimony at the inquest. We established through research that the police had a regular photographer that they used to take crime scene photos ... Most of the posters agreed that the doctor had merely asked the photographer to take the photos, and of course had not taken the pictures himself. I suspect a similar misunderstanding in the words of Warren: "A discussion took place whether the writing could be covered up or otherwise or whether any portion of it could be left for an hour until it could be photographed ... I considered it desirable to obliterate the writing at once, having taken a copy of which I enclose a duplicate." As you well know, Superintendent Thomas Arnold said in his report: "An Inspector was present by my directions with a sponge for the purpose of removing the writing when Commissioner arrived on the scene." I can't imagine Warren performing menial tasks like sponging the graffito off himself, any more than he would sweep his office floor. Being the guy at the top means you delegate authority. Therefore, I can't make the assumption that Warren made a copy of the graffito himself--either at Goulston St. or later in his office. If the police needed an exact duplicate they could obtain one by reproducing the page in Long's pocket-book [notebook], using the same methods by which the Dear Boss letter was reproduced. At this point I can't make a solid evaluation of whose handwriting is evidenced in the five lines you posted above. And no, your memory has not failed you--Halse did indeed testify: "There were about three lines of writing, which was in a good schoolboy hand." In the interests of thorough research and solid facts, I will continue to seek samples of Halse's and Long's handwriting. Without it any evaluation of the style of the graffito letters is at the very least premature. Happy Hunting, Ashling
Author: Jon Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 09:54 am
Hi Ashling That pic of the graffiti you are referring to was something I posted on: Ripper Victims: Specific Victims: Catherine Eddowes: The Goulston Street Graffito. back on Jan 06 2000, then later on the 22nd (two postes down) I asked if anyone could verify if the writing was actually Warren's...nobody replied. I agree with you, "How sure can we be (including Ed.) that it is the writing of Warren himself?". Like you I would expect him to merely direct it to be done rather than do it himself, we know what authoritive figures were like in the Empire days, even today anyone in his (Warrens) role at a crime scene is not going to grab pen & paper to do what his subordinates are supposed to do. More likely "Make sure you get a faithfull copy of that writing Inspector, and have a duplicate done" then at any interview he would simply claim "I took a copy and had a duplicate made", which does not necessarily mean he did it himself. Ed mentioned that he had checked that the duplicate was not in Warrens hand.....did Ed actually say he had Warren's regular handwriting analyzed?.....I just may have missed that point, if he did. Regards, Jon
Author: E Carter Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 11:23 am
Jon, sorry I have only just arrived in, I will get back in asap, the copy was made by Warren,concerning his personality, remember he actually allowed bloodhounds to chase him through wood land! The graffti was written by the killers! There is absoultly no doubt! Look at the position of the J and the B in the text, these represent the two pillars: Jochim and Boaz situated in the East of Solomons temple, they are either side of iron and silver. But dont read too much into the graffiti at present, even if the answer looks obvious, the text is really very very clever! Warren actually said; 'having taken a copy of which I enclose a duplicate'!
Author: Warwick Parminter Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 12:51 pm
David my friend, though we've never met, I'm sure we would be friends if we did, especially with a pet interest like we all have. I think you wrote your post with the best feelings at heart, I'm always wondering the same things when I'm reading posts, what are you all really like, what do you look like, Caz and Chris I know, they put photos to their profiles. I feel kind of flattered that you mention me with Jon and Jack, I tend to regard myself as easily forgotten to other people. I'm certainly no man of mystery and I don't mind trying to tell you what sort of bloke I am. I think of myself as 95%honest, the dearest things in the world to me are, my wife, sister, dogs, and home. I have one good friend who I have known since our motorcycling days together years ago. I've never been ambitious, I've looked forward to retirement from the day I left school,--though I'm not lazy,--just to be able to do as I please. My greatest achievment was paying the last instalment off the mortgage, I drive a Rover 400 car, and though I've been all over the U.S.A. I've now lost my wanderlust, and I'm quite happy to sit at home in comfort and watch the world go by. In other words I'm very happy with my lot, and I hope things are working out as well for you David. Best regards to you Rick
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 12:54 pm
Dear Ed, Is it not "Jachin"? Also, Some Talmudic sources assert that the word "Boaz" probably had another one, or two, letters between the "o" and "a". Perhaps the word was originally, "Boreas" ? Love, Rosemary
Author: David M. Radka Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 01:12 pm
Warwicke, Thanks so much for your post. I am sure we'd be friends if we met, and I look forward to doing so someday, perhaps at a Ripper conference. To all, Maybe it would be a good idea to set up a topic under which each of us could write about themselves as Warwick has admirably done above. I think this would be good, as a way to give insight to others where each of us is coming from. What is written should give an idea of the nature of the subjective integration the writer has, so others could better question and interpret their posts. Impersonal posts are good from the perspective of avoiding contamination of the evidence with personal views and prejudices, but there is another side to this matter, too. When you read a book by authors such as Evans, Begg or Fido, you get an idea of the person behind the lines, and have available to you some way of developing a take on what they say about the case--whereas the rest of us posting here write only in blurbs and dribs. Mr. Evans, it seems to me, takes rather a hybridized policeman's view of things, Mr. Begg is a kind of British Mr. Spock of Ripperology, very logical, and Mr. Fido is a literary figure in his own right. What do y'all think of this? Should we set up such a board? David
Author: Simon Owen Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 02:09 pm
Blimey , this is getting deeper by the minute ! Joachim and Boaz , good grief ! However did you think of all this Ed ? Looking at it again , it could be that " men that " is really " men & hat " , ie iron and silver ! That ' t ' could very well be an ' & ' sign. The J and the B are in a vertical line , one above the other ; okay its a reference to Solomon's temple , as is Juwes. But what does it all mean ?
Author: E Carter Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 02:33 pm
Yes it's Jachin or Jochim, both are used, and the other name for Boaz is Mishpat the killers are actually building a temple! I was brought up in the East end and now live near London, as I mentioned about one hour by car from the Public Records Office. The murders make absolute sense! The temple gates are made of iron, beyond, silver, would be the 'holy of holies according to later Jewish tradition, this room is used by Levites alone, and contained a gold covered cedar alter. The authors of the graffiti try to lead the reader in the wrong direction, but once you get by this it's absolutly clear where to go! Remember those brought up in the Hebrew tradition, are the masters of secret text! The words shlm mean complete, over the top of the arch entrancing the temple are the words shalom. Ignore it and study the lower text! Best wishes ED
Author: E Carter Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 03:11 pm
Jon, I believe, in fact I know, there's more than on killer. To check over I would have met any one named, and at any time possible! The actual story is as interesting as the mystery! I view, Polly was set up, taken into Brown's stable and then chlorformed. Carried outside, here the throat was severed. I have given my reasons. Annie had much the same treatment, interestingly, some authors have put forward the theory that Polly was taken to Bucks Row because the noise of a train would cover her screams. But Annie was murdered in the back yard where 17 people slept nearby! Here the evidence that two killer were involved, begins to become more obvious! Liz was set up also! Chloroformed, and then carried! Goldstien's story dosen't work! The club he left in Spectacle Alley came off Church Lane where the killer was seen shortly after cleaning up! He wanted to be seen! Katherine was also set up! Most of the intricate marks on her face were inflicted in a small alley behind the Imperial club, remember chloroform drops the blood pressure! The man seen by Hutchinson wanted to be seen, but only to give the impression the killer was a Jew! Hutchinson spoiled the plot! So he made an excuse to leave and return later. Jon, it is not easy, one person claims my research methods are not of a good standard,then I produce quaility evidence previously unnoticed by anyone! And no one believes it! Warren said; 'Mr Arnold with a view to prevent public disorder, proposed to obliterate and had sent down an inspector with a sponge for that purpose'. Excuse any mistakes I am trying to do two things at once! Best wishes ED> P>S It's not how long you research, it's how! PPS. Your copy of the graffiti has been altered!
Author: Jade Bakys Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 03:42 pm
And I know why they took the uterus
Author: Ashling Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 04:15 pm
Hi JON--Beats me. I haven't noticed any clear statement by Ed that he had Warren's handwriting analyzed by an expert. I'm out of here ... See ya on another board. Ashling
Author: Jon Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 04:35 pm
Ed. Thankyou for the overview, it helps when someone is trying to understand your perspective. Now, as it has been suggested several times that Polly 'may' have been deposited in Bucks Row (dont recall the 'noisy train' theory), and contemporary opinions reviewed this possibility and concluded that she had been murdered where she lay, certain details that may support her being moved were looked into and discarded, the only one I recall being agreed to was "she lay as though she had been laid out", which is in reference to her arms & legs being straight out. You suggest she was coerced into the adjacent yard (evidence?), that it was there she was chloroformed (evidence?), that she was carried out into the street to have her throat cut (evidence?).....would it not have been more practical to have murdered her within the yard?, less chance of him (them?) being interupted, which looks like what happened anyway. It's little details like that which make me wonder how much of your theory is due to research as opposed to pure speculation. Don't loose face, what you propose is of interest, but understand, it also will get a cool reception until you show hard evidence or logical deductions. Regards, Jon (I've always favoured the chloroform idea, but I am reluctant to propose it due to the preverbrial 'lack of evidence'.)
Author: E Carter Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 05:15 pm
Jon, I have simply had enought of Ashling, I find her vulgar! She had added nothing new to the investigation, no new ideas, nothing! I am sorry! Best wishes ED! I have copy written my work! PS Good luck Jade, if you would like, I will send some documents through the systeme;via the moderator if that's possible. Love ED.
Author: Jade Bakys Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 05:31 pm
Ed, Please don't leave, this board as far as I am concerned was set up to look at jewish issues re: the ripper, and I am thorougly going over and over your posts, and by a lot of painstaking research on Solomons Temple, The Masons, Hebrew alphabet Alchemy looking at the structure of the text etc, in my own stumbling way making some headway, I also need your input on the modus operandi, because it is different. This means a lot to me, I am not interested in WHO Jack was, I am researching, research methods the how and why, not the We have been here before going over the same ground and we are so bored we will stroke each others egos. Look Ed, if you really don't think you can post here anymore, than I would appreciate any material YOU have researched re the theory above, and you can send it to my email, or through the moderator, thanks for that; but I am sad to see you go, and wish you all the very best. I am also glad you have copyrighted your research. Love Jade
Author: Joseph Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 10:03 pm
Hello Mr. Carter, You have, to some very small degree, just experienced life in the literary fish bowl my friend. If copywriting your work is an indication that you plan to someday publish it in some forum or another, I suggest you grow a few additional layers of dermis prior to taking the plunge. Ms. Ashling is far from vulgar, in fact, I have gone through every post she has made to you, and not once has she used a term of vulgarity, or cursed you in any manner, so if you can't deal with her, how do you intend to cope with the real world. She is merely venting her frustration with your, apparent, inability to answer a pertinent question, directly put to you. Although you have addressed a few posts to her, you didn't answer the question directly, or even indirectly. If you are going to publish your thesis, you had better be prepared to answer, in a very succinct manner I might add, the questions of: Your editor His/her boss The publisher The press Other aficionados This is just the short list of the people who will want to know how well versed you are with your own work. Don't forget, books, magazines, and even some web sites have editors, and editors have questions. While we're on the subject of writing, clarity of thought is another area where you could use a little practice, e.g.: To check over I would have met any one named, and at any time possible! The actual story is as interesting as the mystery! I view, Polly was set up, taken into Brown's stable and then chlorformed. (Carter, Sunday, February 25, 2001 - 10:11) Jon, sorry I have only just arrived in, I will get back in asap, the copy was made by Warren, concerning his personality, remember he actually allowed bloodhounds to chase him through wood land!(Carter, Sunday, February 25, 2001 - 06:23 am) These examples are typical, they aren't very clear, and a few readings are necessary to make any sense of them. Please believe me Mr. Carter, I'm not picking on you or trying to embarrass you; I am, in fact, an admirer, and supporter of fresh ideas, rationally expressed. The problem is, you may or may not have the answer to a century old mystery, but no one will know if you can't state your ideas clearly, and many of the Casebook Jacks find this prospect frustrating, and I don't think you can blame them. You also have a few writing quirks that you need to address real soon; occasionally you sign off, Love Ed, and then go on for a few more sentences. What up wit dat? :-)
Author: Joseph Sunday, 25 February 2001 - 10:18 pm
Hello Mr. Radka, I think Mr. Ryder already provides an area where we introduce ourselves to each other, he calls it: The profile of (Enter your name here). You get to it by clicking on the persons name. You should try it someday. :-)
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan Monday, 26 February 2001 - 05:43 pm
Dear Ed, We miss you Ed. But if there is a coda to the march of tin men between the Pillars of Solomon, it is this, there is no life beyond the Casebook! Much love, Rosemary