More about Leicester Uni

Has anyone else seen this? http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/New-row-interim-resting-place-king/story-20471638-detail/story.html Sandra =^..^=

This just gets worse.

Jess

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

From: SandraMachin <sandramachin@...>;
To: <>;
Subject: More about Leicester Uni
Sent: Wed, Jan 22, 2014 1:24:30 PM

 

Has anyone else seen this? http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/New-row-interim-resting-place-king/story-20471638-detail/story.html   Sandra =^..^=  

Why?....

Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?

Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.

And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.

Eileen....
--- In , Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
>
> This just gets worse.
>
> Jess
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>

Although I share your revulsion at all this, it's what I feared when I read the Jones/Langley book. If Philippa honestly thought she'd be allowed a say in the procedures surrounding the remains of a King of England then she was being naive, as were the cathedral authorities and indeed the Uni who are now caught up in the legal formalities. No one actually thought it would happen. He doesn't belong to any of them. It's to the Courts to decide who should have a say and it is all very sad - but it's as it should be. On a better note, I enjoyed the Portillo programme the other night where we met Richard Buckley and his colleague who reckons he (not our Jo) unearthed the remains. It was played very carefully and very well, with Michael saying he felt in awe at having stood at the burial place of Richard. H.

On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 14:34, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
Why?....

Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?

Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.

And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.

Eileen....
--- In , Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
>
> This just gets worse.
>
> Jess
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>

The following has a familiar ring to it. http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1965/mar/11/reinterment-of-anne-mowbray-remains. And a few days ago I found (but have since lost) a reference that the queen attended the reburial in Westminster on 31 May 1965. Can't find it now, anywhere. So, the same old fuss and messing around, but at the end Her Majesty seems (maybe/maybe not) to have attended the ceremony at Westminster. If she did, why not for Richard? Sandra =^..^= From: Hilary Jones Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 4:36 PM To: Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni Although I share your revulsion at all this, it's what I feared when I read the Jones/Langley book. If Philippa honestly thought she'd be allowed a say in the procedures surrounding the remains of a King of England then she was being naive, as were the cathedral authorities and indeed the Uni who are now caught up in the legal formalities. No one actually thought it would happen. He doesn't belong to any of them. It's to the Courts to decide who should have a say and it is all very sad - but it's as it should be. On a better note, I enjoyed the Portillo programme the other night where we met Richard Buckley and his colleague who reckons he (not our Jo) unearthed the remains. It was played very carefully and very well, with Michael saying he felt in awe at having stood at the burial place of Richard. H. On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 14:34, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote: Why?.... Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals? Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen. And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching. Eileen.... --- In , Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote: > > This just gets worse. > > Jess > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android >

Nice to see you back Sandra! How fascinating. I didn't know about the fuss surrounding this. H

On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:14, SandraMachin <sandramachin@...> wrote:
The following has a familiar ring to it. http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1965/mar/11/reinterment-of-anne-mowbray-remains. And a few days ago I found (but have since lost) a reference that the queen attended the reburial in Westminster on 31 May 1965. Can't find it now, anywhere. So, the same old fuss and messing around, but at the end Her Majesty seems (maybe/maybe not) to have attended the ceremony at Westminster. If she did, why not for Richard? Sandra =^..^= From: Hilary Jones Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 4:36 PM To: Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni Although I share your revulsion at all this, it's what I feared when I read the Jones/Langley book. If Philippa honestly thought she'd be allowed a say in the procedures surrounding the remains of a King of England then she was being naive, as were the cathedral authorities and indeed the Uni who are now caught up in the legal formalities. No one actually thought it would happen. He doesn't belong to any of them. It's to the Courts to decide who should have a say and it is all very sad - but it's as it should be. On a better note, I enjoyed the Portillo programme the other night where we met Richard Buckley and his colleague who reckons he (not our Jo) unearthed the remains. It was played very carefully and very well, with Michael saying he felt in awe at having stood at the burial place of Richard. H. On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 14:34, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote: Why?.... Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals? Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen. And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching. Eileen.... --- In , Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote: > > This just gets worse. > > Jess > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android >

Found it again. The Queen didn't attend Anne Mowbray's reburial, she was represented'. http://issuu.com/richard_third/docs/2005_03_spring_bulletin/26 So I retract the suggestion that she was there and therefore should be for Richard too. But there again, she must surely be represented', yes? Sandra =^..^= From: SandraMachin Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 5:14 PM To: Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni

The following has a familiar ring to it. http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1965/mar/11/reinterment-of-anne-mowbray-remains. And a few days ago I found (but have since lost) a reference that the queen attended the reburial in Westminster on 31 May 1965. Can't find it now, anywhere. So, the same old fuss and messing around, but at the end Her Majesty seems (maybe/maybe not) to have attended the ceremony at Westminster. If she did, why not for Richard? Sandra =^..^= From: Hilary Jones Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 4:36 PM To: Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni Although I share your revulsion at all this, it's what I feared when I read the Jones/Langley book. If Philippa honestly thought she'd be allowed a say in the procedures surrounding the remains of a King of England then she was being naive, as were the cathedral authorities and indeed the Uni who are now caught up in the legal formalities. No one actually thought it would happen. He doesn't belong to any of them. It's to the Courts to decide who should have a say and it is all very sad - but it's as it should be. On a better note, I enjoyed the Portillo programme the other night where we met Richard Buckley and his colleague who reckons he (not our Jo) unearthed the remains. It was played very carefully and very well, with Michael saying he felt in awe at having stood at the burial place of Richard. H. On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 14:34, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote: Why?.... Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals? Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen. And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching. Eileen.... --- In , Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote: > > This just gets worse. > > Jess > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android >

Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?

This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."

Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?

Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.

I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.

They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.

There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.

In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."

Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.

~Weds

---In , <eileenbates147@...> wrote:

Why?....

Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?

Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.

And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.

Eileen....
--- In , Jessie Skinner <janjovian@...> wrote:
>
> This just gets worse.
>
> Jess
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>

Of course...it's way beyond any of them...but in HMO it shouldn't even have been necessary to involve the courts. ..after examination of Richard's remains they should have been handed over to the relevant Govenment Dept that deals with Royal burial. However that has not happened and we are where we are. My argument is while the continuing legal wrangles go on the university should ensure that Richard 's remains are laying somewhere suitable. it really is beyond belief that the situation is as it is.

The only good thing to come out of it is that this legal argumentation will cost the university money....lots of money...and serve them damn well right! Eileen

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Although I share your revulsion at all this, it's what I feared when I read the Jones/Langley book. If Philippa honestly thought she'd be allowed a say in the procedures surrounding the remains of a King of England then she was being naive, as were the cathedral authorities and indeed the Uni who are now caught up in the legal formalities. No one actually thought it would happen.  He doesn't belong to any of them. It's to the Courts to decide who should have a say and it is all very sad - but it's as it should be.
>  
> On a better note, I enjoyed the Portillo programme the other night where we met Richard Buckley and his colleague who reckons he (not our Jo) unearthed the remains. It was played very carefully and very well, with Michael saying he felt in awe at having stood at the burial place of Richard.   H.
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 14:34, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
>  
> Why?....
>
> Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
>
> Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
>
> And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
>
> Eileen....
> --- In , Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> >
> > This just gets worse.
> >
> > Jess
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> >
>

--- In , <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
>
Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
>
Eileen
This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
>
> Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
>
> Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
>
> I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
>
> They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
>
> There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
>
> In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
>
> Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
>
> Why?....
>
> Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
>
> Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
>
> And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
>
> Eileen....
> --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> >
> > This just gets worse.
> >
> > Jess
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> >
>

Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard. The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H

On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:


--- In , <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
>
Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
>
Eileen
This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
>
> Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
>
> Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
>
> I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
>
> They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
>
> There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
>
> In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
>
> Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
>
> Why?....
>
> Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
>
> Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
>
> And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
>
> Eileen....
> --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> >
> > This just gets worse.
> >
> > Jess
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> >
>

Well when you consider the reverence paid to the bones of the Unknown Soldier laid to rest in Westminster Abbey, a ceremony attended by the King, Richard has indeed received the thin edge of the wedge. All civilised societies, and some uncivilised ones for that matter, honour their dead especially those that have fallen in battle. Tis a great shame that any mention of these shameful and unacceptable goings on are only being mentioned in the local Leicester newspaper/s. If it became known more generally there might be a backlash against the university which might force them to think again.
I agree with you about Phillipa as I now understand that she did make an attempt before the dig for an agreement that after examination the bones would be then taken somewhere suitable until such time as Richard was laid to rest once more. ...I believe she has been stitched up and those responsible for that should hang their heads with shame. They won't of course...They have absolutely no ethics I'm afraid....How I despise them....EIleen

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard.
>  
> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
>  
>
>
> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> >
> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> >
> Eileen
> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> >
> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> >
> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> >
> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> >
> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> >
> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> >
> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> >
> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >
> > Why?....
> >
> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> >
> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> >
> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> >
> > Eileen....
> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This just gets worse.
> > >
> > > Jess
> > >
> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> > >
> >
>

Eileen, lovely points, and yes, one would think, as has been stated ad nauseum, he was a King of England, and should be reinterred as such!
On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:53 AM, "EILEEN BATES" <eileenbates147@...> wrote:

Well when you consider the reverence paid to the bones of the Unknown Soldier laid to rest in Westminster Abbey, a ceremony attended by the King, Richard has indeed received the thin edge of the wedge. All civilised societies, and some uncivilised ones for that matter, honour their dead especially those that have fallen in battle. Tis a great shame that any mention of these shameful and unacceptable goings on are only being mentioned in the local Leicester newspaper/s. If it became known more generally there might be a backlash against the university which might force them to think again.
I agree with you about Phillipa as I now understand that she did make an attempt before the dig for an agreement that after examination the bones would be then taken somewhere suitable until such time as Richard was laid to rest once more. ...I believe she has been stitched up and those responsible for that should hang their heads with shame. They won't of course...They have absolutely no ethics I'm afraid....How I despise them....EIleen

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard.
> Â
> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
> Â
>
>
> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> >
> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> >
> Eileen
> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> >
> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> >
> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> >
> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> >
> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> >
> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> >
> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> >
> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >
> > Why?....
> >
> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> >
> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> >
> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> >
> > Eileen....
> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This just gets worse.
> > >
> > > Jess
> > >
> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> > >
> >
>

From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 23 January 2014, 10:22
Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni

> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H

He probably would have. But that's because First World War soldiers are still part of a living family network. That's not the case with Richard: just as it's not with the Mary Rose sailors; the Towton soldiers; Alfred the Great (if that really is his or his son's pelvis that's been squirreled away in a box for years)... I'm not making value judgements here - it's simply how things appear to work across the western world. Not sure where the cut-off is. Weren't a couple of bodies discovered from Waterloo recently? Although, I think in such instances the Regiment would be categorised as the living family link...
All this possibly puts the Queen's reluctance to allow any examination of royal remains into a different light. She seems to be aware that if you're properly buried, precedent dictates that you should not be disturbed. Whereas, once you're out of the box, you're fair game.
Richard is luckier than most in that at least he *will* be re-interred - and royally, too. Eventually. Once Jarndyce and Jarndyce have wrung every last shred of public sympathy from the process.
Jonathan

From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 23 January 2014, 10:22
Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni

Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard. The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H

On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:


--- In , <wednesday.mac@...> wrote:
>
> Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
>
Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
>
Eileen
This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
>
> Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
>
> Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
>
> I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
>
> They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
>
> There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
>
> In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
>
> Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
>
> ~Weds
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
>
> Why?....
>
> Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
>
> Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
>
> And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
>
> Eileen....
> --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> >
> > This just gets worse.
> >
> > Jess
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> >
>

ÿ Hilary wrote:
"Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard. The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1." Doug here: It's "kerfluffle", with an 'L". As to the more important subject, after reading the thread and thinking about *why* the Universtity would want ready access to Richard's bones, the only conclusion I come up with is that his bones are a "known". Which would mean that, if at some future date some other form of extracting and identifying DNA from bones, found in similar circumstances and of a similar or greater age, should arise or even more precise methods be developed, *then* the new process/method could be used and the results they produce could be compared with the information that was gathered earlier; ie, by the methods that *were* used. *If* something such as the above *is* the reasoning behind the University's actions, my personal opinion is that then their actions are *slightly* mitigated (very, very, *very* slightly!), and would be even more so were they to inform the public (and us!) those were the reason for their actions should something along those lines turn out to *be* the reasons.
As it is, the University is simply being disrepectful. Not only to Richard's remains, but the general public, us included; treating everyone outside the University as if *our* opinions/wishes aren't worth being listened to, let alone taken into account. Perhaps that could be brought up the next time the University requests some public funding... Doug

That's a true and reasonable answer Doug. But if they want to develop some similar scientific means of identifying DNA etc there are plenty of coffins they can open up in Westminster. Why would it be considered unethical to 'crack open' Edward I or MB (couldn't resist that one) but it isn't to subject Richard to all this? And I'm not just talking about kings - would we really like people in our churchyards to be dug up for scientific experimentation? There are plenty of ossiaries from the black death - can't they do a bit of work on them? The difference between the Mary Rose, Towton and Richard is that we know who Richard is. If we knew who the bones from the former were I'm sure we'd treat them with even more awe and try to find any modern relatives. Anonymity can be used as an excuse, but it really shouldn't be. As for length of time since burial, we don't treat Tutankhamun like this, even though some tests have occasionally been done. He is still in his sarcophagus. In the Portillo programme Leics Uni went to great lengths to sell itself as the pioneer of modern DNA techniques. That's obviously their agenda. H.

On Thursday, 23 January 2014, 14:51, Douglas Eugene Stamate <destama@...> wrote:
ÿ Hilary wrote:
"Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard. The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1." Doug here: It's "kerfluffle", with an 'L". As to the more important subject, after reading the thread and thinking about *why* the Universtity would want ready access to Richard's bones, the only conclusion I come up with is that his bones are a "known". Which would mean that, if at some future date some other form of extracting and identifying DNA from bones, found in similar circumstances and of a similar or greater age, should arise or even more precise methods be developed, *then* the new process/method could be used and the results they produce could be compared with the information that was gathered earlier; ie, by the methods that *were* used. *If* something such as the above *is* the reasoning behind the University's actions, my personal opinion is that then their actions are *slightly* mitigated (very, very, *very* slightly!), and would be even more so were they to inform the public (and us!) those were the reason for their actions should something along those lines turn out to *be* the reasons.
As it is, the University is simply being disrepectful. Not only to Richard's remains, but the general public, us included; treating everyone outside the University as if *our* opinions/wishes aren't worth being listened to, let alone taken into account. Perhaps that could be brought up the next time the University requests some public funding... Doug

Hilary, you've replied to both me and Doug simultaneously (I think!), so I hope my response will make sense to anyone just dipping into the thread

I'm not sure that anonymity (or lack of) is an excuse, one way or another. As far as the Mary Rose is concerned, we know a huge amount about the remains from personal belongings, e.g we can identify the master carpenter and various others. Does the addition of a name make much of a difference to the amount of dignity that should be accorded?

Once again, I'm not saying this with approval (in fact, I disagree profoundly with the display of human remains at the Mary Rose exhibition). I'm just highlighting the fact that there appears to be in divide in how remains are viewed once you get beyond the "living memory" stage - again, with the caveat, that you *don't* disturb coffins. I don't think you can detect a logical through-line for any of this. It's instinctive, and how strongly one feels seems to come down to how close you are to the subject.

Jonathan


From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
To: "" <>
Sent: Thursday, 23 January 2014, 15:21
Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni

That's a true and reasonable answer Doug. But if they want to develop some similar scientific means of identifying DNA etc there are plenty of coffins they can open up in Westminster. Why would it be considered unethical to 'crack open' Edward I or MB (couldn't resist that one) but it isn't to subject Richard to all this? And I'm not just talking about kings - would we really like people in our churchyards to be dug up for scientific experimentation? There are plenty of ossiaries from the black death - can't they do a bit of work on them? The difference between the Mary Rose, Towton and Richard is that we know who Richard is. If we knew who the bones from the former were I'm sure we'd treat them with even more awe and try to find any modern relatives. Anonymity can be used as an excuse, but it really shouldn't be. As for length of time since burial, we don't treat Tutankhamun like this, even though some tests have occasionally been done. He is still in his sarcophagus. In the Portillo programme Leics Uni went to great lengths to sell itself as the pioneer of modern DNA techniques. That's obviously their agenda. H.

On Thursday, 23 January 2014, 14:51, Douglas Eugene Stamate <destama@...> wrote:
ÿ Hilary wrote:
"Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard. The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1." Doug here: It's "kerfluffle", with an 'L". As to the more important subject, after reading the thread and thinking about *why* the Universtity would want ready access to Richard's bones, the only conclusion I come up with is that his bones are a "known". Which would mean that, if at some future date some other form of extracting and identifying DNA from bones, found in similar circumstances and of a similar or greater age, should arise or even more precise methods be developed, *then* the new process/method could be used and the results they produce could be compared with the information that was gathered earlier; ie, by the methods that *were* used. *If* something such as the above *is* the reasoning behind the University's actions, my personal opinion is that then their actions are *slightly* mitigated (very, very, *very* slightly!), and would be even more so were they to inform the public (and us!) those were the reason for their actions should something along those lines turn out to *be* the reasons.
As it is, the University is simply being disrepectful. Not only to Richard's remains, but the general public, us included; treating everyone outside the University as if *our* opinions/wishes aren't worth being listened to, let alone taken into account. Perhaps that could be brought up the next time the University requests some public funding... Doug

To me it is scandalous that no one has sought papal intervention on behalf of a catholic kings remains are being treated this waySent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: Pamela Bain <pbain@...> Sender: Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:58:15 +0000To: <><>ReplyTo: Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni

Eileen, lovely points, and yes, one would think, as has been stated ad nauseum, he was a King of England, and should be reinterred as such!
On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:53 AM, "EILEEN BATES" <eileenbates147@...> wrote:

Well when you consider the reverence paid to the bones of the Unknown Soldier laid to rest in Westminster Abbey, a ceremony attended by the King, Richard has indeed received the thin edge of the wedge. All civilised societies, and some uncivilised ones for that matter, honour their dead especially those that have fallen in battle. Tis a great shame that any mention of these shameful and unacceptable goings on are only being mentioned in the local Leicester newspaper/s. If it became known more generally there might be a backlash against the university which might force them to think again.
I agree with you about Phillipa as I now understand that she did make an attempt before the dig for an agreement that after examination the bones would be then taken somewhere suitable until such time as Richard was laid to rest once more. ...I believe she has been stitched up and those responsible for that should hang their heads with shame. They won't of course...They have absolutely no ethics I'm afraid....How I despise them....EIleen

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard.
> Â
> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
> Â
>
>
> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> >
> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> >
> Eileen
> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> >
> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> >
> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> >
> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> >
> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> >
> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> >
> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> >
> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >
> > Why?....
> >
> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> >
> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> >
> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> >
> > Eileen....
> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This just gets worse.
> > >
> > > Jess
> > >
> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> > >
> >
>

Hi Jonathan, Blame yahoo, but yes it was for both of you and anyone else. I think most of us have got rellies buried in churchyards across the land. I've got a couple who've been there since 1545. Now I've never met them, they could have been good or right nasty pieces of work (they worked for Reggie Bray) but I still wouldn't want them dug up and displayed. And the great double standard is the bones in the urn which the powers that be say it would be distasteful to disturb - and we don't know who they are. I think we all really agree, it's how far we're prepared to go to make excuses for the behaviour of Leics Uni. H.

On Thursday, 23 January 2014, 16:04, "c.nelson1@..." <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
To me it is scandalous that no one has sought papal intervention on behalf of a catholic kings remains are being treated this waySent from my BlackBerry® smartphoneFrom: Pamela Bain <pbain@...> Sender: Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:58:15 +0000To: <><>ReplyTo: Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni
Eileen, lovely points, and yes, one would think, as has been stated ad nauseum, he was a King of England, and should be reinterred as such!
On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:53 AM, "EILEEN BATES" <eileenbates147@...> wrote:

Well when you consider the reverence paid to the bones of the Unknown Soldier laid to rest in Westminster Abbey, a ceremony attended by the King, Richard has indeed received the thin edge of the wedge. All civilised societies, and some uncivilised ones for that matter, honour their dead especially those that have fallen in battle. Tis a great shame that any mention of these shameful and unacceptable goings on are only being mentioned in the local Leicester newspaper/s. If it became known more generally there might be a backlash against the university which might force them to think again.
I agree with you about Phillipa as I now understand that she did make an attempt before the dig for an agreement that after examination the bones would be then taken somewhere suitable until such time as Richard was laid to rest once more. ...I believe she has been stitched up and those responsible for that should hang their heads with shame. They won't of course...They have absolutely no ethics I'm afraid....How I despise them....EIleen

--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard.
> Â
> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
> Â
>
>
> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> >
> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> >
> Eileen
> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> >
> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> >
> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> >
> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> >
> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> >
> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> >
> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> >
> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >
> > Why?....
> >
> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> >
> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> >
> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> >
> > Eileen....
> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This just gets worse.
> > >
> > > Jess
> > >
> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> > >
> >
>

Yes...and surely it's time to say concerning Richard *Enough*! Now let him rest.....

Eileen
--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>  
> Blame yahoo, but yes it was for both of you and anyone else. I think most of us have got rellies buried in churchyards across the land. I've got a couple who've been there since 1545. Now I've never met them, they could have been good or right nasty pieces of work (they worked for Reggie Bray) but I still wouldn't want them dug up and displayed. And the great double standard is the bones in the urn which the powers that be say it would be distasteful to disturb - and we don't know who they are.
>  
> I think we all really agree, it's how far we're prepared to go to make excuses for the behaviour of Leics Uni.   H. 
>
>
>
> On Thursday, 23 January 2014, 16:04, "c.nelson1@..." <c.nelson1@...> wrote:
>
>  
> To me it is scandalous that no one has sought papal intervention on behalf of a catholic kings remains are being treated this way
> Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Pamela Bain <pbain@...>
> Sender:
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:58:15 +0000
> To: <><>
> ReplyTo:
> Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni
>  
> Eileen, lovely points, and yes, one would think, as has been stated ad nauseum, he was a King of England, and should be reinterred as such! 
>
> On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:53 AM, "EILEEN BATES" <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
>
>  
> >Well when you consider the reverence paid to the bones of the Unknown Soldier laid to rest in Westminster Abbey, a ceremony attended by the King, Richard has indeed received the thin edge of the wedge. All civilised societies, and some uncivilised ones for that matter, honour their dead especially those that have fallen in battle. Tis a great shame that any mention of these shameful and unacceptable goings on are only being mentioned in the local Leicester newspaper/s. If it became known more generally there might be a backlash against the university which might force them to think again.
> >I agree with you about Phillipa as I now understand that she did make an attempt before the dig for an agreement that after examination the bones would be then taken somewhere suitable until such time as Richard was laid to rest once more. ...I believe she
> has been stitched up and those responsible for that should hang their heads with shame. They won't of course...They have absolutely no ethics I'm afraid....How I despise them....EIleen
> >
> >--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >>
> >> Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry
> as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation
> of a king's remains was not bog standard.
> >>  
> >> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >>
> >> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> >> >
> >> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> >> >
> >> Eileen
> >> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they
> were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> >> >
> >> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> >> >
> >> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> >> >
> >> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> >> >
> >> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a
> "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> >> >
> >> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> >> >
> >> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> >> >
> >> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> >> >
> >> > ~Weds
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Why?....
> >> >
> >> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> >> >
> >> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and
> again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> >> >
> >> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> >> >
> >> > Eileen....
> >> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > This just gets worse.
> >> > >
> >> > > Jess
> >> > >
> >> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>

Agreed, Eileen. In terms of experimentation, the university have had plenty of time (considering that their original place was that if he was found, he would be re-interred within four weeks, on or around 2nd Oct). That plan quickly went to the wall.

I think there is a difference (though not much) between unknown remains and those of identified individuals, but I am less and less happy about actual human remains being displayed in museums.

Re re-interment of remains of known individuals from dates beyond the living descendants (collateral or direct) - Ned Kelly's remains were identified by collateral DNA descent in 2008 and his remains have been finally handed over to his collateral descendants (130 years distant) and buried just the other year. This in a commonwealth country, presided over by our own Queen. In the event, a new exhumation licence was issued by the Victoria State government which enabled the collateral descendants to re-inter Ned Kelly as they believed he would have wished.

Hi everyone...just trying to catch up on all the news....been offline since 4th January so I don't really know what has been going on at the University.....it seems pretty bad.Phillipa and John will always have my support in how they have conducted their search for Richard(and also themselves)It seems to me that museums/scientists want to gain as much knowledge as possible...which is fair enough if it is done with good grace.Personally I agree with you all and don't think anyone's remains should be on public display be they the highest or lowest in the land,modern or historical.Iam sure/hope that he will be laid to rest in a very moving and personal ceremony.....there are too many people who care for him and what he represents for this not to happen.....
love and best wishes to all
Kathryn x

--- In , "EILEEN BATES" <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
>
> Yes...and surely it's time to say concerning Richard *Enough*! Now let him rest.....
>
> Eileen
> --- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jonathan,
> >  
> > Blame yahoo, but yes it was for both of you and anyone else. I think most of us have got rellies buried in churchyards across the land. I've got a couple who've been there since 1545. Now I've never met them, they could have been good or right nasty pieces of work (they worked for Reggie Bray) but I still wouldn't want them dug up and displayed. And the great double standard is the bones in the urn which the powers that be say it would be distasteful to disturb - and we don't know who they are.
> >  
> > I think we all really agree, it's how far we're prepared to go to make excuses for the behaviour of Leics Uni.   H. 
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, 23 January 2014, 16:04, "c.nelson1@" <c.nelson1@> wrote:
> >
> >  
> > To me it is scandalous that no one has sought papal intervention on behalf of a catholic kings remains are being treated this way
> > Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: Pamela Bain <pbain@>
> > Sender:
> > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2014 11:58:15 +0000
> > To: <><>
> > ReplyTo:
> > Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni
> >  
> > Eileen, lovely points, and yes, one would think, as has been stated ad nauseum, he was a King of England, and should be reinterred as such! 
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2014, at 4:53 AM, "EILEEN BATES" <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >  
> > >Well when you consider the reverence paid to the bones of the Unknown Soldier laid to rest in Westminster Abbey, a ceremony attended by the King, Richard has indeed received the thin edge of the wedge. All civilised societies, and some uncivilised ones for that matter, honour their dead especially those that have fallen in battle. Tis a great shame that any mention of these shameful and unacceptable goings on are only being mentioned in the local Leicester newspaper/s. If it became known more generally there might be a backlash against the university which might force them to think again.
> > >I agree with you about Phillipa as I now understand that she did make an attempt before the dig for an agreement that after examination the bones would be then taken somewhere suitable until such time as Richard was laid to rest once more. ...I believe she
> > has been stitched up and those responsible for that should hang their heads with shame. They won't of course...They have absolutely no ethics I'm afraid....How I despise them....EIleen
> > >
> > >--- In , Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry
> > as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation
> > of a king's remains was not bog standard.
> > >>  
> > >> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>  
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> > >> >
> > >> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> > >> >
> > >> Eileen
> > >> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they
> > were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> > >> >
> > >> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> > >> >
> > >> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> > >> >
> > >> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> > >> >
> > >> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a
> > "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> > >> >
> > >> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> > >> >
> > >> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> > >> >
> > >> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> > >> >
> > >> > ~Weds
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Why?....
> > >> >
> > >> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> > >> >
> > >> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and
> > again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> > >> >
> > >> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> > >> >
> > >> > Eileen....
> > >> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > This just gets worse.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Jess
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Wednesday and Eileen,
You are quite right....LU might think it's not legally binding but morally it is.Richard always did his best and that's what the Society strives to do for him.Bless everyone who continues to do so.

Regarding Alfred the Great...........he was,as his name implies,a great king and it's good news that part of his or his son's remains have been found and hopefully the remains will be interred somewhere suitable and with dignity.Alfred's descendants lived on and include Richard and his siblings.I like to believe that Richard and his father lived up to their predecessor's aims,beliefs and sense of duty.Long may they all rest in peace.
Best wishes Kathryn x


--- In , "EILEEN BATES" <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> >
> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> >
> Eileen
> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> >
> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> >
> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> >
> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> >
> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> >
> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> >
> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> >
> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >
> > Why?....
> >
> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> >
> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> >
> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> >
> > Eileen....
> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This just gets worse.
> > >
> > > Jess
> > >
> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> > >
> >
>

Hi Jonathan,
Yes,the Queen is probably reluctant in case granting permission to excavate sets a precedent and there's exhumations popping up all over the place.

The whole point of Richard's remains being discovered was to give him a proper final resting place.The scientific evidence was primarily to establish who he was.The secondary discoveries regarding his health etc are just a bonus.

When his remains where shown in the original the King in the Car Park programme I felt very uncomfortable...akin to looking at John Merrick's remains.There's absolutely no need to display Richard's remains or anyone else's in public.

I just hope it he is treated reverently and not as a circus side show.

--- In , Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...> wrote:
>
> From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
> To: "" <>
> Sent: Thursday, 23 January 2014, 10:22
> Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni
>
>
> > The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
>
>
> He probably would have.  But that's because First World War soldiers are still part of a living family network.  That's not the case with Richard: just as it's not with the Mary Rose sailors; the Towton soldiers; Alfred the Great (if that really is his or his son's pelvis that's been squirreled away in a box for years)...  I'm not making value judgements here - it's simply how things appear to work across the western world.  Not sure where the cut-off is.  Weren't a couple of bodies discovered from Waterloo recently?  Although, I think in such instances the Regiment would be categorised as the living family link...
>
> All this possibly puts the Queen's reluctance to allow any examination of  royal remains into a different light.  She seems to be aware that if you're properly buried, precedent dictates that you should not be disturbed.  Whereas, once you're out of the box, you're fair game.
>
> Richard is luckier than most in that at least he *will* be re-interred  - and royally, too.  Eventually.  Once Jarndyce and Jarndyce have wrung every last shred of public sympathy from the process.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
> To: "" <>
> Sent: Thursday, 23 January 2014, 10:22
> Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni
>
>
>
>  
> Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard.
>  
> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
>  
>
>
> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> >
> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> >
> Eileen
> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> >
> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> >
> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> >
> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> >
> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> >
> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> >
> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> >
> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >
> > Why?....
> >
> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> >
> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> >
> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> >
> > Eileen....
> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This just gets worse.
> > >
> > > Jess
> > >
> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> > >
> >
>

Egyptian mummies get more respect than Richard III!
On Jan 25, 2014, at 9:40 AM, "kathryng56@..." <kathryng56@...> wrote:

Hi Jonathan,
Yes,the Queen is probably reluctant in case granting permission to excavate sets a precedent and there's exhumations popping up all over the place.

The whole point of Richard's remains being discovered was to give him a proper final resting place.The scientific evidence was primarily to establish who he was.The secondary discoveries regarding his health etc are just a bonus.

When his remains where shown in the original the King in the Car Park programme I felt very uncomfortable...akin to looking at John Merrick's remains.There's absolutely no need to display Richard's remains or anyone else's in public.

I just hope it he is treated reverently and not as a circus side show.

--- In , Jonathan Evans <jmcevans98@...> wrote:
>
> From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
> To: "" <>
> Sent: Thursday, 23 January 2014, 10:22
> Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni
>
>
> > The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
>
>
> He probably would have. But that's because First World War soldiers are still part of a living family network. That's not the case with Richard: just as it's not with the Mary Rose sailors; the Towton soldiers; Alfred the Great (if that really is his or his son's pelvis that's been squirreled away in a box for years)... I'm not making value judgements here - it's simply how things appear to work across the western world. Not sure where the cut-off is. Weren't a couple of bodies discovered from Waterloo recently? Although, I think in such instances the Regiment would be categorised as the living family link...
>
> All this possibly puts the Queen's reluctance to allow any examination of royal remains into a different light. She seems to be aware that if you're properly buried, precedent dictates that you should not be disturbed. Whereas, once you're out of the box, you're fair game.
>
> Richard is luckier than most in that at least he *will* be re-interred - and royally, too. Eventually. Once Jarndyce and Jarndyce have wrung every last shred of public sympathy from the process.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Hilary Jones <hjnatdat@...>
> To: "" <>
> Sent: Thursday, 23 January 2014, 10:22
> Subject: Re: More about Leicester Uni
>
>
>
> Â
> Yes it would seem that Richard has donated himself to medical research and legally you can only do that yourself with a lot of kefuffle (is that how you spell it?). Bodies taken for such were usually executed criminals so he now has that status. I am as angry as you. I don't blame Philippa, I think she was used by those who had much better legal teams and who exploited what they saw as her eccentric enthusiasm. And also the clerk who issued the bog-standard licence without realising that the potential exhumation of a king's remains was not bog standard.
> Â
> The lack of respect for the dead is really disgraceful. He would have faired better as a soldier of WW1. H
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, 22 January 2014, 17:53, EILEEN BATES <eileenbates147@...> wrote:
>
> Â
>
>
> --- In , <wednesday.mac@> wrote:
> >
> > Is this what happens when people have no loyalty to Richard, and no honor to do what they said they'd do?
> >
> Yes! ...this is exactly what happens...
> >
> Eileen
> This jumped out at me from the article: "Dr John Ashdown-Hill, genealogist with the Looking For Richard team, said a document completed before any archaeological excavation had begun stated the bones would be placed in a "prayerful environment" until they were reburied. However, the University of Leicester said it does not recognise the document as legally binding as it is not a signed contract, and said it has no plans to release the remains."
> >
> > Another argument they've put forth is that their research isn't concluded. So which is it? The document's not binding, or the research isn't finished?
> >
> > Yes, they want the bones hermetically sealed and a back door into the tomb so they can take bits of him every now and again...presumably until there's nothing left.
> >
> > I also remember reading an article in which someone from another university was gleefully expounding on how they'd gotten their own tooth and were conducting experiments on it. So it's not just Leicester University that wants access to him.
> >
> > They have the bones of Alfred the Great to research now, and the archaeologist who found him stated that the discovery of Alfred's remains are greater than the discovery of Richard's. I didn't know the two were in competition. I suppose they are from a "promote my career" point of view. So now the scientists have two kings to split apart and scatter to the four winds in their laboratories.
> >
> > There's a story told of Oscar Wilde when he was a child. He had a favorite stuffed bear, and his brother Willie used to wrestle him for it. In one of their tussling matches, Willie shoved Oscar off of his bed, and Oscar broke his arm.
> >
> > In later, adult life, when Willie wanted something and Oscar didn't want to give it, Oscar told him, "No. You don't deserve my bear."
> >
> > Leicester's attitude of possessiveness and ownership long ago made me feel they don't deserve our boar.
> >
> > ~Weds
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---In , <eileenbates147@> wrote:
> >
> > Why?....
> >
> > Intolerable, unforgivable....have they no morals?
> >
> > Words really fail me....and this has confirmed, for myself, what I have been thinking for some time. I had hoped I would be proved wrong. I think you can see from the Unis actions that they will not have any qualms about digging Richard up every now and again unless where ever he is finally laid to rest are absolutely resolute in not letting this happen.
> >
> > And thanks once more to PL and JA-H for fighting RIchard's corner for him. Whereever he is....I believe he will be watching.
> >
> > Eileen....
> > --- In mailto:, Jessie Skinner <janjovian@> wrote:
> > >
> > > This just gets worse.
> > >
> > > Jess
> > >
> > > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> > >
> >
>