Skip to content

Ancora Imparo –

Dear Sir / Madam

We, the Committee, have unanimously agreed that Mr. Gordon Cramer be exposed as a doubtful source when it comes to the interpretation of certain events, places, names and objects with regard to the Somerton Man Mystery.

Over the last 10 or so years, as well as re-distributing known facts about the case, Cramer has spruiked himself as being the first to ‘crack the code’ despite not having done so, and his blog as the leader in its field when it comes to research and accuracy. We feel these claims are grossly inaccurate if not disobliging and would like to present to you, dear reader, a couple of examples of his more outlandish claims in the hope that publicising them will convince Cramer that there are more than a couple of discerning people interested in the case and it might be about time for him to pull his head in.

~~

‘Ancora Imparo’ translates to Still, I’m only learning and is credited to Michelangelo who was reported to have said it when he was aged 87 so I’m ok using it as I’m getting there.

Gordon Cramer has recently taken up this Italian phrase as a pseudonym in a website dealing with crimes and missing persons where he has recently been flooding the Somerton Man discussion (see comment) with jumbo-sized cut and pastes from his own website which of course relegates the more modest posters to the distant background. They and their contributions are overcome.

Cramer also boasts of having written 500,000 words on the subject so with this in view I thought I’d give him a bit of a shave and post a few choice items of his I consider memorable. That’s the sort of man I am – considerate, built, wavy-haired, mannered and gentle of nature. Not a bad bone in the body. Just like Adonis.

So, let’s commence with Cramer’s disposition with regards to the contents in the Somerton Man’s suitcase.

Litter. He wrote, or words to the effect, nothing in the case is related to the man. A common ploy by unknown persons in order to foul the investigation by sending it off the track.

Well, I had no argument with that because it is known to happen, however when Cramer learnt of Strapp’s  insistence that the gent he was observing was wearing striped duds vis-s-vis the unstriped ones the dead man was found to be wearing – that is the trousers that were repaired by the same thread as found in the suitcase –  the old litter argument hit shallow water and ran aground. But not for long because Cramer is a clever fellow and his immediate comeback was that it would have taken ’15 minutes, tops’ for someone to grab the unstriped duds from wherever they were being kept, head for the Railway Station post haste, redeem the suitcase, take out the needle and thread then repair the trousers he was found in, not to mention the coat he was wearing at the time as well, then re-lodge the suitcase and scarper. All unobserved. Either that or Prof. Cleland was very obliging and took on the task himself.

I submitted this argument in a comment to Cramer’s blog site but he must have had a software problem because it wasn’t put up. Still, I’m only learning.

Moving on  …

“Through a large magnifying glass he (DS Leane) also saw capital letters written in faint pencil on the back of the book” Feltus.

(1) Faint pencil.

(2) Which was photographed.

(3) Then marked over with ink.

(4)  Then photographed.

(5) Then reproduced as a jpeg image which is all Cramer had to work with.

(5) Like this letter Q.

Images lifted from Cipher Mysteries

See those little bumps and shudders within the letter Q above? Most folks might think they were caused by the inconsistent pressure of the pen and ink application used to cover the photograph of DS Leane’s original capital letters written in faint pencil.

But NO .. !

They are a cleverly conceived and concealed micro-code.

'Q'

I give you – the NEW letter Q !

Cramer would have us believe that what we are looking at here ^ is a coded message the faint pencil mark was concealing, because being a clever chap, Cramer insists that there are certain processes that can uncover hitherto hidden messages written in say, lemon juice, which is fair enough, it can be done, even urine comes in handy for that purpose. However in this instance I don’t think the process would work with a jpeg image of a photograph of a photograph, though I’m sure some of the less knowledgable of his readers might think he’s working with the actual Rubiayat. Cramer’s cagey that way, a little slippery, so much so I wouldn’t be surprised if he is deliberately leading his readers to believe the ink has settled over the letters on the book.

The above image provides an even better view of the inking as applied to the code photograph  … some letters are smeared over (A) while others are not (P). Letter E looks to have been done differently, perhaps it took longer given the faint outline it presented on the back cover of the Rubaiyat.

And why a party so adept at concealing messages would just turf them into a parked car, particularly with the MI5 sniffing around is another question.

I submitted this argument in a comment to Cramer’s blog site but he must have had a software problem because it wasn’t put up. Still, I’m only learning.

Moving on …

What we are looking at here is Alf Boxall’s copy of the Rubaiyat as given him by the delightful young nurse whose last name he couldn’t remember ever being told, nevertheless, according to Cramer they were both hand in glove with transferring messages of a secret nature. Him to her. Her to him.

Cramer has done his work here as well as he righteously claims that everything we are looking is not what it appears to be. The two pages are awash with secret code.

On the left we have …

Every word of the verse.

The signature ‘Jestyn’

The hair, eyebrows, eyes, cummerbund and stylish blouse being worn by the illustrated lady.

On the right …

The authors name.

The publisher’s name.

The book title.

The translator’s name.

The illustrator’s name.

The illustration.

The Australian publisher’s details.

Not only that, Cramer claims there are microscopically written secret messages hidden in the book bindings, left and centre.

Where would a heavy-duty mechanic and a young nurse-in-training have received the training for that?

I submitted this question in a comment to Cramer’s blog site but he must have had a software problem because it wasn’t put up. Still, I’m only learning.

Moving on …

Need I say it?

Yes, because Cramer claims that this too hides a cornucopia of secretly written messages, despite that it looks so very much like a machine imprint.

I submitted this argument in a comment to Cramer’s blog site but he must have had a software problem because it wasn’t put up. Still, I’m only learning.

Moving on …

Everybody has been asking where the dickens is that pesky phone number reported to have been written on the back of the Rubaiyat – X3239, Jessica’s number? DS Leane found it without saying he needed the same large magnifying glass he used to spot the code, but where is it?

I checked with Gordon Cramer. HE found it. Of course.

.. up there in the corner by the right.

Image lifted from Cramer’s blog

You want to look closer?

Image lifted from Cramer’s blog

Moving on  …

Without being a chest-beater, I can confidently claim that until Cramer was alerted to certain relevant facts published here he remained ignorant of same despite his boasts of many many years of detailed research ..

For instance:

He was surprised to learn the code had a definitive pattern with regard to the position of letter A in each line of over seven letters.

He was surprised to learn Gordon Strapps swore in his deposition that the man he was watching was wearing striped trousers.

He was surprised to learn that the code, as an acrostic, could be attributed to a book called The Omarian Alphabet.

He was surprised to learn Alf Boxall didn’t recall anything about Jessica Harkness.

And he was surprised to learn Constable Moss had been interviewed by the Truth newspaper where he said NO MATCHES WERE TO BE FOUND ON THE BODY.

There you have it ……

I think I’m just about done here, and thanks for reading this far.

~~

Cordially,

I remain ..

The author

7 Comments Post a comment
  1. …… as an aside. I’ve just been ingloriously turfed off the Websleuth site, no doubt due to Cramer’s intervention. At least it proves one thing, the man is a little sensitive to criticism.

    June 4, 2022
  2. The Sly Dog #

    The internet is a unwieldy beast. Too much information to sift through… a lot of it factually correct but also a whole lot of utter nonsense. The fact you get ignored or blocked on other sites when asking pertinent questions (I assume you are not trying to post harmful content; threats, lewd remarks or hate speech against race, religion, sexual orientation) with the sole aim to further the discussion on TSM subject matters – well that is effectively censorship. The gate-keepers of those sites could be labeled bullies or something like a reverse troll, pulling out all stops to preserve the purity of the views they promote. That ain’t democracy.
    Keep up the good work Pete running a site that provides us with a medium to undertake critical review on this case and open forum to run through and question differing opinions.

    June 4, 2022
    • Thanks Sdog, appreciated. This Cramer joker is a bit of a loose unit though, once publicly commenting that I lived near to his home, which I don’t, owning a rifle, which I also don’t, and was likely to use it to threaten him and his family. Then on another occasion he accused me of stalking his family online. The comments are still sitting up on his site somewhere and as much as I’d like to use the available laws forbidding the use of such slander I reckon getting up his nose might be more effective, and cheaper.

      June 4, 2022
  3. Dan Valentine #

    Oh that’s a shame you’ve been banned from WS Pete. WS is poorer for it. I’ll keep watching this blog. I see that Ancora Imparo even referred to Gordon Cramer in one of his posts, as if it wasn’t him.

    June 4, 2022
  4. Luvya Dan, where do I send the money?

    June 4, 2022
  5. Clive #

    Any micro-writing found on X3239, after all it’s on the Code page.

    June 5, 2022
    • Might need a microscope. And I think Cramer said you have to turn it upside down to see it properly, or inside out. Checking for microcodes ain’t easy, Clive.

      June 5, 2022

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: