Deviant. Paul Harrison's book.

[Caroline]

Does anyone know how old BC was at the time of the murders?

[maggie]

Does anyone know how old BC was at the time of the murders?

Thats a point, if he was 34 at that time or more he'd be at least in his 60s now.

I know Mike put up a doc showing part of his police interview, his age may have been on that. I haven't been able to find it since although I have searched.

[Caroline]

Thats a point, if he was 34 at that time or more he'd be at least in his 60s now.

I know Mike put up a doc showing part of his police interview, his age may have been on that. I haven't been able to find it since although I have searched.

He'd be 64 is he was 34 in 1985? 

[maggie]

He'd be 64 is he was 34 in 1985? 

Yes, just a child 

[Caroline]

Yes, just a child 

He couldn't be much older than that or people would have commented and he was referred to as a 'young man' in Wilkes's book.

[ngb1066]

This raises a big red flag. Random phone call claiming to be brett? Regardless we cant take this as authentic 

I agree entirely.

It is also very convenient that most of those with whom the author reports interviews are now dead and are unable to comment.  I have my own views on this dreadful book and its author.  He is lucky that his lawyers made certain cuts as he would otherwise very probably have been sued.  I may post more on this in due course.

 

[ngb1066]

He was paid nothing.

How do you know?

[ngb1066]

how come paul harrision gets all these amoumous letters and no other auther does.

Strange, isn't it? 
 

[maggie]

I agree entirely.

It is also very convenient that most of those with whom the author reports interviews are now dead and are unable to comment.  I have my own views on this dreadful book and its author.  He is lucky that his lawyers made certain cuts as he would otherwise very probably have been sued.  I may post more on this in due course.

 

Look forward to reading your thoughts, Neil.

[lookout]

I agree entirely.

It is also very convenient that most of those with whom the author reports interviews are now dead and are unable to comment.  I have my own views on this dreadful book and its author.  He is lucky that his lawyers made certain cuts as he would otherwise very probably have been sued.  I may post more on this in due course.

 

Well said ngb. I feel exactly the same .

[Caroline]

How do you know?

How do you pay an anonymous person? The guy didn't say who he was. However, I didn't even get a free copy - I hear Yorkshireman are pretty thrifty? So he's sticking to his roots! 

[lookout]

How do you pay an anonymous person? The guy didn't say who he was. However, I didn't even get a free copy - I hear Yorkshireman are pretty thrifty? So he's sticking to his roots! 

So how do you know that PH didn't know this ( phantom ) person ? I wouldn't trust PH with my cat.

[guest154]

How do you know?

Because the book states no one was paid.  The letter makes it clear that they do not want anything in return. After having read the book I believe the author of the anonymous letter wasn't paid.

If you have anything that goes against that - I'd be interested in seeing/hearing it but I don't think you do. I think your dislike of PH is clouding your view on what is a pretty clear matter. I don't particularity like PH either but it seems clear to me there was no need or reason to pay an anonymous letter writer.

[lookout]

 I wonder how much PH was paid over the " threat " fiasco in the Scottish press.

[nugnug]

why would anybody want to threaten him.