Mike Spooner

Member
Jan 31, 2018
721
111
53
I'll need to have a good long think about that !



Sally Nilsson's claims are not taken seriously by any reputable historians of the Titanic. Her "evidence" is based upon a fake crewman Luis Klein's "story" and other "evidence" she claimed to have uncovered but has curiously never published.

If you use this forum's search facility you can read a thread from several years back where Inger Shiel thoroughly deconstructed Nilsson's entire case for "ignored warnings" and "drunken officers". It's complete fiction.
OK thanks for the reply. But I do think if one is doing a serious documentary there is no harm in saying we do not have film footage of Titanic, but we do have film of the sister ship Olympic, and say she is a close match to Titanic!
 
Nov 14, 2005
690
258
133
Just a heads up.

We may be in for "round two" of this idiotic theory next year. :confused:

The same company that produced the pseudo-historical "Titanic: The New Evidence" documentary are currently making another film for broadcast next year about the causes of the sinking.

What are the odds that this coal bunker waste of time (together with all that proven rubbish about "brittle" steel, "lost" binoculars and an "inadequate" rudder) gets another airing with a certain "internationally respected Titanic historian" fronting it again, you know the one I mean. :mad:
I caught a documentary last night called Engineering Catrastophies. It was about the Titanic and Hindenburg disasters. They brought up the coal fire and missing binoculars too. Their take on it was a little different. They speculated the fire might have weakened the interior bulkhead not the sideplates. They also had a commentater say that they thought the binoculars probably wouldn't have made a difference because of the conditions that night. I give them credit for saying those items were just speculation by some. The Hindenburg segment was actually pretty good I thought.
 

Mike Spooner

Member
Jan 31, 2018
721
111
53
Under the same TV program: "Titanic: The New Evidence" documentary . I thought the documentary on the two French baby boys story was remarkable. Kidnap from France by their farther who never survived the Titanic. Didn't speak any English and did not know the name of their parents to! Through newspaper photos in France would in the end reunite them back to their mother.
So at least some good did come from the Titanic disaster.
Just one unanswered question? Why did they board Titanic at Southampton and not at Cherbourg?
 

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
398
157
43
Glasgow, Scotland
Because Navratil Snr was canny and wanted to throw off investigators by giving them the runaround. He had previously worked in London and must have spoke some English.

The story has been well known for decades.
 

Sally@Hichens

Member
Oct 27, 2019
12
12
3
Near Dorking, Surrey, England
Yes you are right about the Lusitania and the odd clip of Olympic to.
I am not to sure if Sally Nilsson got it quite right to say Hitchens pulled the wheel hard to the left to turn Port!
What did surprise me In her book she never mention about officers not on the bridge. Saw an officer asleep on a bench? Even to the point where Hitchens had to leave the wheel to find a officer! Fleet and Lee had given ice warning twice before, reported it three times with no change of course or reducing speed! What is the true in this I don't know. However makes interesting reading indeed!
Hi Mike. Re steering orders on the ship. The programme was cut so much sometimes translation was a bit wrong. I wanted to use terminology the audience would understand. Hope I didn't get it wrong. Steering orders referred to the tiller. To go to port the officer ordered starboard. The wheel gets turned to port, tiller goes starboard, ship goes port. Hope you enjoyed the programme.
 

Sally@Hichens

Member
Oct 27, 2019
12
12
3
Near Dorking, Surrey, England
I'll need to have a good long think about that !



Sally Nilsson's claims are not taken seriously by any reputable historians of the Titanic. Her "evidence" is based upon a fake crewman Luis Klein's "story" and other "evidence" she claimed to have uncovered but has curiously never published.

If you use this forum's search facility you can read a thread from several years back where Inger Shiel thoroughly deconstructed Nilsson's entire case for "ignored warnings" and "drunken officers". It's complete fiction.
"It's complete fiction". Of course you are completely entitled to your humble opinion as am I. I wrote this theory from a letter Don Lynch gave me and he also gave me a wonderful forward in my book, 'The Man Who Sank Titanic'. The book gives a different interpretation of events and it is for the reader to make their own minds up. The most important aspect of my findings and my unwaivering determination is to tell the life story of my great grandfather. I have done this and rather a lot of people appear to enjoy it by the many good reviews from my talks and healthy book sales.
 

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
398
157
43
Glasgow, Scotland
"It's complete fiction". Of course you are completely entitled to your humble opinion as am I. I wrote this theory from a letter Don Lynch gave me and he also gave me a wonderful forward in my book, 'The Man Who Sank Titanic'. The book gives a different interpretation of events and it is for the reader to make their own minds up. The most important aspect of my findings and my unwaivering determination is to tell the life story of my great grandfather. I have done this and rather a lot of people appear to enjoy it by the many good reviews from my talks and healthy book sales.
Sally, I'm genuinely very honoured for the first time in my life to communicate with an ancestor of a Titanic survivor. I mean that sincerely.

Don Lynch is well known as one of the great gentlemen of the global Titanic community who loves to encourage others to research the ship, the people who sailed aboard her and to preserve her legacy. He is not one to create conflict or discourage. I think you may be confusing his genuine encouragement and enthusiasm for you to tell your Great-Grandfather's personal story for an endorsement of your highly problematic theory.

Not one person on here begrudges you telling your Great-Grandfather's life story. In fact I'm sure everyone strongly encourages you keep on sharing his story more widely and let people know just who the real Bob Hitchens was.

It's that theory about the officers being drunk and incapable that people have a huge problem with.

In addition to Inger Shiel's rebuttal from several years ago on this very forum, there is also that of Dan Parkes (who really knows his onions when it comes to William Murdoch the first officer) who had made a very careful and even handed consideration of your claims here which I think you should read. My apologies if you have already seen it.





As you can see from Dan Parkes' exhaustive analysis there, it simply doesn't wash. William McMaster Murdoch was perfectly awake, alert and sober that fateful night. Don't just take my word for it (I'm only a daft bloke behind a keyboard with an amateur enthusiasm), there are several professional historians of the disaster who frequent this very forum who can explain in minute detail why the theory just doesn't work.

There is absolutely no shame at all in ever admitting one was wrong about something. For example I used to believe years ago that Captain Smith couldn't be to blame, it was all Ismay's fault and that the rivets and steel were shoddy. Today, I realise that holding such beliefs was completely ridiculous.

Now, I completely agree with you that the claims of Lightoller's granddaughter regarding "negligent" steering on your Great-Grandfather's part are complete and utter nonsense. A pulp fiction writer, and one hailing from a world of great privilege no less, has no right to arrogantly malign your Great-Grandfather's character.

I'm very sympathetic towards your Great-Grandfather and I think he got one hell of a raw deal in the years after the sinking. His portrayal in Mr Cameron's film was a bit over the top in my opinion, and of course as you have pointed out in the past your Great-Grandfather looked and sounded very different from the chap who plays him in the film.

It would be of great interest to me to read your feedback on a post I made regarding your Great-Grandfather just eleven days ago - Distance to the Iceberg when sighted, and questions about the lookouts.

If it's any consolation, if like your Great-Grandfather, I'd ended up in a small boat in the middle of the North Atlantic with a pest like Major Peuchen constantly on my back, I'd inevitably have ended up roaring some highly colourful Glaswegian vernacular* towards him !

*Which i can't repeat on a lovely, family friendly forum like Encyclopedia Titanica .
 

Sally@Hichens

Member
Oct 27, 2019
12
12
3
Near Dorking, Surrey, England
Thank you for your reply. I wonder how I haven't come across you before. I had 'exhausting' discussions with many on the board about my theory. The Titanic disaster shows some hard evidence ( the ship crashed into an iceberg and sank) but still, there is an enormous amount we will never know for sure. I tend to steer clear of black and white thinking. The shades of grey are infinitely more intriguing. As for Murdoch. He is human. Humans make mistakes, sometimes with awful consequences. There are about 20 examples of witnesses seeing an Officer commit suicide. Was it Murdoch? Did Hichens carry with him a terrible secret? Will we ever know? I'm not a regular on the board so may not follow so much. Just wanted to see what people thought of Titanic: Stories of the Deep. Have a lovely autumn. Best wishes, Sally
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seumas

Mike Spooner

Member
Jan 31, 2018
721
111
53
Hi Sally.
I am too honoured that you have joined ET and can have your say as an author. As I know another author was rather short change when he tried to explain to a film crew of coal bunker fire on a ship. (no he did not say it was the cause of the sinking!) where 90% of the film landed up on the floor and only the juicy distorted imaged merged into the documentary to much of his annoyance.
As you well may tried to say about the steering ship but probably found cut short to meet a time limit. But in your book you got the steering right. Seeing you on TV made me read your book again, which I enjoyed with interesting points you made.
I think Robert and Fred Fleet were treated as disposable prawns of a chess board for the power to be!
I have always found it fascinating when authors do biographies on individuals years later free from there sailing days. Think! hang on they never said that in the inquiries? I have say I am very critical of the inquiry the in way was conducted, my pinion putting the cart before the hose! By appointing lawyers in charge before hearing what the marine experts investigates reports had to say in the first place which can take years, then followed by the lawyers. I can see you have covered some of the mistakes made in the inquires to. To have an inquiry so soon after the disaster in my opinion was crazy. How was possible together all the marine experts reports in such short notice! I thought it was quite cold and callous affair how those been cross examining in the temporary court room by a Lord and Sirs barristers on that witness stand. With hundred pair of staring eyes focus on you and have your boss Ismay and Lightroller there too. This must of been quite an ordeal in a threating and timidity situation you find your self in, and careful not to criticise your company to! Yet there seems to be no consideration given to them of what they have just been through. Their survival in the freezing cold water with floating dead bodies. Robert having to up with that loud mouth American women Molly Brown. As class barrier was strong in those day those people like Robert and Fred Fleet would be classed as the peasants of society. Hate to say I thought Robert did the right decision by not going back to pick up the floating bodies. After all he was a seaman and only knew too well your survival in the freezing cold water was very limited. Then face the problem how does one drag in a body with extra weight of the wet cloths on them without tipping up the boat. Had anybody done a boat drill for this type of operation before?
I have to say I don't quite agree on Murdoch was drunk and found asleep! As I understand it was a strict company policy for officers not to so and a sacking offence. There are some other small mistakes in your book. But hay who is perfect?
I would like to meet you one day perhaps Sunbury on Thames. The home of the Kempton Steam Museum. The next steam up 16-17 November? Where you can get some idea how big the engines were as used in Titanic.
 

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
398
157
43
Glasgow, Scotland
Thank you for your reply. I wonder how I haven't come across you before. I had 'exhausting' discussions with many on the board about my theory. The Titanic disaster shows some hard evidence ( the ship crashed into an iceberg and sank) but still, there is an enormous amount we will never know for sure. I tend to steer clear of black and white thinking. The shades of grey are infinitely more intriguing. As for Murdoch. He is human. Humans make mistakes, sometimes with awful consequences. There are about 20 examples of witnesses seeing an Officer commit suicide. Was it Murdoch? Did Hichens carry with him a terrible secret? Will we ever know? I'm not a regular on the board so may not follow so much. Just wanted to see what people thought of Titanic: Stories of the Deep. Have a lovely autumn. Best wishes, Sally
I wonder how I haven't come across you before

Oh, I only joined this forum in March this year after having been a reader for many years. If you ever one day do a talk about your Great-Grandfather in the Greater Glasgow area I will definitely make the effort to attend.

There are about 20 examples of witnesses seeing an Officer commit suicide. Was it Murdoch?

I'm open minded about the subject but I don't really want to go too far into it because just like the huge debate about "the ship who stood still", debates about alleged shootings and suicides aboard the Titanic can get extremely heated and people needlessly fall out with each other which I don't like to see. All I will say is that regardless of what might possibly have happened, Henry Wilde and William Murdoch both did their duty, saved many lives and their families today can be be rightly proud of them.

Did Hichens carry with him a terrible secret?

There are a couple of things other than a shooting that this might conceivably be although I don't want to go speculating without any evidence so I won't go any further !

Have you ever thought of pursuing other projects on the Titanic such as telling the story of the sizeable amount of Cornish passengers and crew (such as Bob Hitchens) who were on board ? It would be a big job and require a lot of time, patience and some money but it would be worthwhile.

I don't know if you ever seen it (it's only about ten seconds long) but there is one deleted scene from the '97 film that portrays your Great-Grandfather at least a bit more sympathetically as they show him and Fred Fleet carrying a disabled Harold Bride aboard the Carpathia.

Thank you Sally, you have a nice Autumn too and please do return for more discussion ! :)

Hi Sally.
I am too honoured that you have joined ET and can have your say as an author. As I know another author was rather short change when he tried to explain to a film crew of coal bunker fire on a ship. (no he did not say it was the cause of the sinking!) where 90% of the film landed up on the floor and only the juicy distorted imaged merged into the documentary to much of his annoyance.
As you well may tried to say about the steering ship but probably found cut short to meet a time limit. But in your book you got the steering right. Seeing you on TV made me read your book again, which I enjoyed with interesting points you made.
I think Robert and Fred Fleet were treated as disposable prawns of a chess board for the power to be!
I have always found it fascinating when authors do biographies on individuals years later free from there sailing days. Think! hang on they never said that in the inquiries? I have say I am very critical of the inquiry the in way was conducted, my pinion putting the cart before the hose! By appointing lawyers in charge before hearing what the marine experts investigates reports had to say in the first place which can take years, then followed by the lawyers. I can see you have covered some of the mistakes made in the inquires to. To have an inquiry so soon after the disaster in my opinion was crazy. How was possible together all the marine experts reports in such short notice! I thought it was quite cold and callous affair how those been cross examining in the temporary court room by a Lord and Sirs barristers on that witness stand. With hundred pair of staring eyes focus on you and have your boss Ismay and Lightroller there too. This must of been quite an ordeal in a threating and timidity situation you find your self in, and careful not to criticise your company to! Yet there seems to be no consideration given to them of what they have just been through. Their survival in the freezing cold water with floating dead bodies. Robert having to up with that loud mouth American women Molly Brown. As class barrier was strong in those day those people like Robert and Fred Fleet would be classed as the peasants of society. Hate to say I thought Robert did the right decision by not going back to pick up the floating bodies. After all he was a seaman and only knew too well your survival in the freezing cold water was very limited. Then face the problem how does one drag in a body with extra weight of the wet cloths on them without tipping up the boat. Had anybody done a boat drill for this type of operation before?
I have to say I don't quite agree on Murdoch was drunk and found asleep! As I understand it was a strict company policy for officers not to so and a sacking offence. There are some other small mistakes in your book. But hay who is perfect?
I would like to meet you one day perhaps Sunbury on Thames. The home of the Kempton Steam Museum. The next steam up 16-17 November? Where you can get some idea how big the engines were as used in Titanic.
I think Robert and Fred Fleet were treated as disposable prawns of a chess board for the power to be!

Ah, you "think" but do you have sweet precious proof ? No opinions or emotions. Just any written proof will do nicely.

I have say I am very critical of the inquiry the in way was conducted, my pinion putting the cart before the hose!

Are you a certified member of the English and Welsh Bar ? Or a marine accident investigator ?

I thought it was quite cold and callous affair how those been cross examining in the temporary court room by a Lord and Sirs barristers on that witness stand. With hundred pair of staring eyes focus on you and have your boss Ismay and Lightroller there too.

You thought it as a cold and callous affair - wait, what, were you actually there ? :rolleyes:

Well, they had to give evidence at some point afterwards. And it was a public enquiry, so they quite rightly had to get up and take the stand. Not nice of course but it has to be done. Many, many people have done it after very tragic and traumatic events, so why not the Titanic's crew ? They also got their expenses paid.

Where should they have held the inquiry then ? Maybe the dining room of the Ritz Hotel with the orchestra playing and a break for tea and cakes ?

And what on earth were Ismay and Lightoller going to do to them ? Again provide some documented proof please - no opinions or emotions.

Yet there seems to be no consideration given to them of what they have just been through.
Life is mean and hard. You just have to get on with things like that.

As class barrier was strong in those day those people like Robert and Fred Fleet would be classed as the peasants of society.

I wouldn't deny for a second that there were huge class distinction in Edwardian Britain, that's a given. However Fleet, Hitchens and the rest of the crew were not treated like dirt by the inquiry. They were asked many tough questions, the sessions were long and gruelling but they have didn't have Mersey and the other members snapping or bawling at them. They were given plenty of time to reply and in their own words. Mersey occasionally even complimented witnesses on how they had delivered their evidence.

Hate to say I thought Robert did the right decision by not going back to pick up the floating bodies.

Regardless as to whether Hitchens was right or wrong (I wasn't there, so it's wrong to judge) in not taking Boat Six back. I'm puzzled as to where you got the idea that they would go back for bodies. A number of those in Boat Six and in other boats talked about going back for survivors in the water but never for dead bodies. What a utterly bizarre idea.
 

Mike Spooner

Member
Jan 31, 2018
721
111
53
I wonder how I haven't come across you before

Oh, I only joined this forum in March this year after having been a reader for many years. If you ever one day do a talk about your Great-Grandfather in the Greater Glasgow area I will definitely make the effort to attend.

There are about 20 examples of witnesses seeing an Officer commit suicide. Was it Murdoch?

I'm open minded about the subject but I don't really want to go too far into it because just like the huge debate about "the ship who stood still", debates about alleged shootings and suicides aboard the Titanic can get extremely heated and people needlessly fall out with each other which I don't like to see. All I will say is that regardless of what might possibly have happened, Henry Wilde and William Murdoch both did their duty, saved many lives and their families today can be be rightly proud of them.

Did Hichens carry with him a terrible secret?

There are a couple of things other than a shooting that this might conceivably be although I don't want to go speculating without any evidence so I won't go any further !

Have you ever thought of pursuing other projects on the Titanic such as telling the story of the sizeable amount of Cornish passengers and crew (such as Bob Hitchens) who were on board ? It would be a big job and require a lot of time, patience and some money but it would be worthwhile.

I don't know if you ever seen it (it's only about ten seconds long) but there is one deleted scene from the '97 film that portrays your Great-Grandfather at least a bit more sympathetically as they show him and Fred Fleet carrying a disabled Harold Bride aboard the Carpathia.

Thank you Sally, you have a nice Autumn too and please do return for more discussion ! :)



I think Robert and Fred Fleet were treated as disposable prawns of a chess board for the power to be!

Ah, you "think" but do you have sweet precious proof ? No opinions or emotions. Just any written proof will do nicely.

I have say I am very critical of the inquiry the in way was conducted, my pinion putting the cart before the hose!

Are you a certified member of the English and Welsh Bar ? Or a marine accident investigator ?

I thought it was quite cold and callous affair how those been cross examining in the temporary court room by a Lord and Sirs barristers on that witness stand. With hundred pair of staring eyes focus on you and have your boss Ismay and Lightroller there too.

You thought it as a cold and callous affair - wait, what, were you actually there ? :rolleyes:

Well, they had to give evidence at some point afterwards. And it was a public enquiry, so they quite rightly had to get up and take the stand. Not nice of course but it has to be done. Many, many people have done it after very tragic and traumatic events, so why not the Titanic's crew ? They also got their expenses paid.

Where should they have held the inquiry then ? Maybe the dining room of the Ritz Hotel with the orchestra playing and a break for tea and cakes ?

And what on earth were Ismay and Lightoller going to do to them ? Again provide some documented proof please - no opinions or emotions.

Yet there seems to be no consideration given to them of what they have just been through.
Life is mean and hard. You just have to get on with things like that.

As class barrier was strong in those day those people like Robert and Fred Fleet would be classed as the peasants of society.

I wouldn't deny for a second that there were huge class distinction in Edwardian Britain, that's a given. However Fleet, Hitchens and the rest of the crew were not treated like dirt by the inquiry. They were asked many tough questions, the sessions were long and gruelling but they have didn't have Mersey and the other members snapping or bawling at them. They were given plenty of time to reply and in their own words. Mersey occasionally even complimented witnesses on how they had delivered their evidence.

Hate to say I thought Robert did the right decision by not going back to pick up the floating bodies.

Regardless as to whether Hitchens was right or wrong (I wasn't there, so it's wrong to judge) in not taking Boat Six back. I'm puzzled as to where you got the idea that they would go back for bodies. A number of those in Boat Six and in other boats talked about going back for survivors in the water but never for dead bodies. What a utterly bizarre idea.
Hi Seumas,
Believe or not I do appreciate some of your comments! I have learnt over the years how controversial the Titanic story can be.
As for ET going on for 20 years and yet those who have years more experience than us. Still find hard to agree on everything.
As for two members Sam and Jim seem to be fighting like cats and dogs, and at times find quite hard to sort out who is right or wrong.
I could be pedantic to say you were not there either at the inquiry to. So how do you know there personal feeling and what state of mind they were in? Was there a medical exam took place first to if fit for an inquiry!
But hay isn't that what keep ET going for so many years and as ever members is entitle to express their own opinion on the many subjects.
As for the floating bodies I mean the survivors with there lifejackets.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,003
619
213
Funchal. Madeira
Hi Mike. Re steering orders on the ship. The programme was cut so much sometimes translation was a bit wrong. I wanted to use terminology the audience would understand. Hope I didn't get it wrong. Steering orders referred to the tiller. To go to port the officer ordered starboard. The wheel gets turned to port, tiller goes starboard, ship goes port. Hope you enjoyed the programme.
Hello Sally. Nice to see you here again. Here is something that might help to further explain the "tiller" thing.

"
helm orders 2019-10-29 001.jpg


To suggest that an experiences Quartermaster would turn the helm the wrong way is pure fantasy. Five people knew exactly the nature of the only positively established ice berg avoiding helm order given by First Officer Murdoch. Only 3 of these survived, your great grandfather being the principal witness of that group.
I suspect that Mrs Patton was advised by an enthusiastic amateur during the research phase of her novel about Titanic.
 

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
398
157
43
Glasgow, Scotland
Hi Seumas,
Believe or not I do appreciate some of your comments! I have learnt over the years how controversial the Titanic story can be.
As for ET going on for 20 years and yet those who have years more experience than us. Still find hard to agree on everything.
As for two members Sam and Jim seem to be fighting like cats and dogs, and at times find quite hard to sort out who is right or wrong.
I could be pedantic to say you were not there either at the inquiry to. So how do you know there personal feeling and what state of mind they were in? Was there a medical exam took place first to if fit for an inquiry!
But hay isn't that what keep ET going for so many years and as ever members is entitle to express their own opinion on the many subjects.
As for the floating bodies I mean the survivors with there lifejackets.
No, Mike I wasn't there at the inquiry. You are for once right about that.

However it is deeply, deeply irresponsible of you to continually waste peoples time with all these utterly absurd allegations of plots and cover ups based not upon the slightest scrap of evidence but purely on "what I think happened".

It doesn't matter a jot what you or I or anyone else *thinks happened*, that is completely irrelevant. It's what the evidence tells us what happened that counts. Is it really that hard to understand ? My history teacher in first year was able to explain this easily to me years ago, it's not that complicated.

Charles Pellegrino and the late Robin Gardiner both wrote books based in part on *what they think happened* and look at their reputation. Junk history.

So your latest theory (based on zero evidence at all) is that the survivors weren't healthy enough to give evidence ? Wrong. If the survivors were called to testify and were not in a fit physical condition to do so then their trade unions, the newspapers and sympathetic politicians would have raised a fuss. They didn't. The men were ready to testify and didn't complain.

Researchers have repeatedly went clean through the archives in England, Northern Ireland, the USA and Canada over the decades. They never found any evidence for all this tripe about bribes, threats and intimidation you keep insisting must have taken place.

I suspect that Mrs Patton was advised by an enthusiastic amateur during the research phase of her novel about Titanic.
She struck me as being a god awful hack author with high opinion of herself and was desperate for fame.

I absolutely cannot stand people like that at all.
 

Sally@Hichens

Member
Oct 27, 2019
12
12
3
Near Dorking, Surrey, England
Hi Jim. Thanks for this. I found the forum became a bit too inflamatory so headed off. It was when Louise Patten kept calling Robert a 'steersman' and spoke to me in a hierarchial manner that made me laugh and fume at the same time on Channel 4 news. I shall be heading off to Aberdeen soon for the unveiling of a headstone for Robert and a Dutch seaman who share a grave organised by Simon Medhurst, Ian Burnett of the Aberdeen graves office and the Swiss Titanic Society. Excited. It has taken a long time...
 

Seumas

Member
Mar 25, 2019
398
157
43
Glasgow, Scotland
Hi Jim. Thanks for this. I found the forum became a bit too inflamatory so headed off. It was when Louise Patten kept calling Robert a 'steersman' and spoke to me in a hierarchial manner that made me laugh and fume at the same time on Channel 4 news. I shall be heading off to Aberdeen soon for the unveiling of a headstone for Robert and a Dutch seaman who share a grave organised by Simon Medhurst, Ian Burnett of the Aberdeen graves office and the Swiss Titanic Society. Excited. It has taken a long time...
I never saw this, did you actually get to meet Patten in person or was it over a video link or something like that ? What happened ?

If I met someone who had made such silly and outrageous accusations against one of my ancestors without any proof, I'd struggle to keep my temper.
 

Jim Currie

Member
Apr 16, 2008
5,003
619
213
Funchal. Madeira
Hi Jim. Thanks for this. I found the forum became a bit too inflamatory so headed off. It was when Louise Patten kept calling Robert a 'steersman' and spoke to me in a hierarchial manner that made me laugh and fume at the same time on Channel 4 news. I shall be heading off to Aberdeen soon for the unveiling of a headstone for Robert and a Dutch seaman who share a grave organised by Simon Medhurst, Ian Burnett of the Aberdeen graves office and the Swiss Titanic Society. Excited. It has taken a long time...
Know exactly what you mean. You still might have to take a few NSAIDs ;) Anyway, nice to see you back. As you say, it has been a long time coming. Anyway, have a good trip to "The Granite City".
As you probably gather, my problem is that I don't have a romantic or speculative bone left in this old body and can't abide speculation that distorts the evidence. Perhaps we two should concoct a documentary of our own? Can't see it being a sell-out though.:D