david boutflowers phonecall to colin.

[nugnug]

i did make one you clearly havent seen it.

[Caroline]

i did make one you clearly havent seen it.

I saw this one

he cliamed stag wrote pervy letter to an undercover policewoan when in fact it was the other way around.

And replied to it

They exchanged what you call 'pervy letters'. The policewoman was trying to get him to write violent letters and to reveal he killed Rachel Nickell. He didn't reply with violent letters, but he did write quite explicit letters back - so Fielder didn't lie.

Basically, Fielder didn't lie.

[nugnug]

oh yes he did he was at the trail he knew what the judge said and who was righting invistgating the pervy letter he saif the reverse.

[Patti]

I don't think Fielder lied, he exaggerated the truth.

How many times do we see black outs sanctioned on the press before any trial? All of them, because they cannot be trusted with the truth, an element of truth yes, but all sensationalized to sell newspapers. 

Most historian will never believe what they read in the press even back to Jack the Ripper days 1888.

Fielder is a trickster....he expands the truth by writing BS. 

[guest154]

I don't think Fielder lied, he exaggerated the truth.

How many times do we see black outs sanctioned on the press before any trial? All of them, because they cannot be trusted with the truth, an element of truth yes, but all sensationalized to sell newspapers. 

Most historian will never believe what they read in the press even back to Jack the Ripper days 1888.

Fielder is a trickster....he expands the truth by writing BS. 

What are you basing this on though?

[Caroline]

I don't think Fielder lied, he exaggerated the truth.

How many times do we see black outs sanctioned on the press before any trial? All of them, because they cannot be trusted with the truth, an element of truth yes, but all sensationalized to sell newspapers. 

Most historian will never believe what they read in the press even back to Jack the Ripper days 1888.

Fielder is a trickster....he expands the truth by writing BS. 

He'd be happy here then or perhaps he could get a job with the OS 

[guest154]

He'd be happy here then or perhaps he could get a job with the OS 

Sounds like he would fit right in....although not too sure he would be popular here! 

[Jane]

Hm, I'm beginning to think that for future reference there will have to be a re-evaluation of our concept of TRUTH. We all understand that the "truth" experienced by the victor is rather different from  the "truth" experienced by the loser.

I've already offered several interpretations of it ie, fantasy, ambiguity, imagination. Mike has a WHOLLY different interpretation. He maintains that all he does is post diary fashion, his thoughts of the day.  If we accept it as the truth but tomorrow he changes his mind and contradicts the previous day's thoughts, the problem is ours, HE hasn't lied, he's changed his mind. I'm going to add "musings" to my list of interpretations. I could also add "embroidery" because I have a sneaky suspicion that numerous fancy stitches have been employed, by some, to create something more interesting than "chain stitch."

[Patti]

What are you basing this on though?

I am basing this on what happens today 2015. There is a rule of thought Mat! Why do the press get blanked out during a trial? Its because they persuade the public and print false information...its a fact my love. 

[guest154]

I am basing this on what happens today 2015. There is a rule of thought Mat! Why do the press get blanked out during a trial? Its because they persuade the public and print false information...its a fact my love. 

I am not asking about your whole post, just what you are basing the bit in bold on.

[Caroline]

oh yes he did he was at the trail he knew what the judge said and who was righting invistgating the pervy letter he saif the reverse.

Where did he say that? In his book?

[Patti]

He'd be happy here then or perhaps he could get a job with the OS 

I'd employ him.  He sells! 

[Caroline]

I am basing this on what happens today 2015. There is a rule of thought Mat! Why do the press get blanked out during a trial? Its because they persuade the public and print false information...its a fact my love. 

It doesn't matter if he exaggerated by mentioning sex aids (although we don't know that he did exaggerate). The point is that a few weeks after her death, Jeremy is trying to peddle explicit pictures of her. What kind of a person does that?

[Patti]

I am not asking about your whole post, just what you are basing the bit in bold on.

Its the Sun Mat! Do I need to explain further or have you never read the Sun newspaper?

Sorry I am being a pain, but come on its the Sun Mat.....known as the gutter press for a reason.

Newspapers are not factual they extort the truth to the point where it is so sensationalist it had the readers gripped in ore....OK, if they printed the basic truth and it was factual, no reader would be interested in reading it, for they would find it boring....Exaggerate the truth and sensationalize it and readers will read it and take every word of it to be fact, yet its not........but the readers believe it.   

[gringo]

I don't think Fielder lied, he exaggerated the truth.

How many times do we see black outs sanctioned on the press before any trial? All of them, because they cannot be trusted with the truth, an element of truth yes, but all sensationalized to sell newspapers. 

Most historian will never believe what they read in the press even back to Jack the Ripper days 1888.

Fielder is a trickster....he expands the truth by writing BS. 

  Fielder lies Patti, not just bend the truth. There was no truth whatsoever in his claims re Carmen Proetta(ex prostitute, ran an escort agency, married to a drug peddler). It is reasonable to assume that he took as much care with the truth in this case.