|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 176
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, December 17, 2004 - 5:46 pm: |       |
One of the blessings of a dialog like this board is that I ,at least,need an active interchange of ideas in order to keep my opinions and mind flexible.
I came to the case a long time ago having only read Cullen's Autumn of Terror and therefore being a confirmed Druittist. Through later books and mainly through this Casebook,though, I've changed a lot.
Although I abandoned poor Monty Druitt a long time ago, I've also changed my mind more than I would have thought about at least these things:
Accepting that Tabram may have been a victim
Accepting that Stride may not have been a victim
Having no pet suspect at all(though I was very excited about Arbie LaBruckman for a while.)
I wonder what changes of perspective other have had?
Mags |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 343
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 17, 2004 - 10:26 pm: | |
Mags,
A good question, but perhaps I'm not the one to ask because after more than a year of learning and sharing here my basic feelings about victims and suspects have changed not at all. None of the theories I'd encountered previously are at all convincing nor are any of the new ones I've seen revealed here.
That said, I've learned a lot from the postings and not just about JtR. And meanwhile, don't give up on Mr. Druitt. I still maintain he is the suspect most likely to be proven the Ripper, which is not the same as being the most likely suspect.
Don. |
Adam Went
Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 34
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, December 17, 2004 - 11:44 pm: | |
Hi Mags,
I'm not exactly in the best position to say how my opinions have or haven't changed either, since I've only been here a little over a week, but I did read quite a bit before that.
I agree with the sentiment of Don's post. Nothing has really changed my views. As you probably read, my suspect right from the beginning has always been Severin Klosowski/George Chapman, and it would take an extremely strong case to persuade me away from that view. But, admittedly, the Ripper may very well be someone we haven't ever encountered yet. Only time will tell.
A lot of my opinions have previously been attacked on topics, especially my posts on the Elizabeth Stride forum of Victims, for my belief that she was a JtR victim and not killed by Michael Kidney. But in reality, nobody knows for sure what went on back then, and it's going to take a lot of research by a lot of people to try and uncover the full stories.
Regards,
Adam. |
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 399
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 12:06 am: | |
I have changed my mind a gazillion times. Given that we have such limited evidence I dont see how anyone can lock into one suspect and be convinced that this is the one. In fact I am quite amazed when I see individuals actually becoming enraged with each other because of a difference of opinion. I probably propose a different theory every week, but I'm hoping that one day I'll hit pay dirt. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2388
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 12:07 am: | |
Hi Mags,
My own views have been consistent throughout on ONE point: namely that it is fair to assume that the Ripper may have been someone we haven't encountered yet. And, like Mr Souden, I still think that holds up.
Although it once was Fido's accounts of the murders and his David Cohen theory that got me interested in the case, I've never had a favourite suspect and I still haven't.
Another point I still like to stress is the one regarding the Ripper's personality, namely that he most likely was a disorganized killer rather than an organized psychopath. Although I am not as confident about this in all aspect as I used to be.
Besides that, my views have changed completely since I first entered the case.
As the usual naive new-comer I was convinced of a number of things:
-- that the Ripper was a Polish Jew
-- that Stride and Kelly (and maybe even Tabram) were clear-cut Ripper victims
-- that the canonical five were a number that was untouchable
etc.
Apart from the fact that I can't totally dismiss the Jew theory, my mind has changed completely towards the opposite on these points above.
I started out as a total defender of Stride's inclusion and as a devoted "inclusionist" (as J R Palmer once called me), and now through years of research, discussions with Ripperologists and police men and debating on this site, I have had to reconsider an revaluate all of my earlier rather strong beliefs -- one of the most healthy experiences I have come across so far.
The old rule that usually applies on old cases -- "the more you learn and study, the less you realize that you know" -- is certainly true in the case of Jack the Ripper.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1418
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 6:01 am: | |
Hi Mags,
This is a really interesting thread.
As you lot have probably gathered, i don't have many fixed views on the case (yes there are one or two notable exceptions!!). my first ripper book was the Mammoth JTR so I never really believed in just one theory (though I still put Bury higher up the list than many!!) for more than a day because for a first timer all those theories seem pretty strong (or well most of them).
I guess I don't know who I think did it - and in a way I am far to cynical to ever be satisfied!!
Jenni
Ho! HO! Ho!!!!!!! |
Frank van Oploo
Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 391
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 11:42 am: | |
Hi Mags,
Interesting question.
Since I came on these boards in the summer of 2003, I have only considerably changed my mind on one point. At first I thought Jack the Ripper was something like a psychopath type of killer. Now I’m inclined to think he was paranoid or a paranoid schizophrenic, but only slightly so.
Furthermore, although I don’t really have a ‘favourite’ suspect, earlier on I thought Hutchinson would be the best suspect in the case, as he was the only one to have acted suspiciously in direct connection with one of the murders, but now I have doubts. Today, I think he could have been someone like Thomas Cutbush and I think he’s there in the police files somewhere, as I think he must have been caught for minor offences, such as assault with a knife.
I guess what I’ve been mostly doing in the past year and a half is fine-tuning my views by reading books, seeing TV programms and with the help of other posters who forced me to keep thinking. Thanks for that!
All the best,
Frank |
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 164
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 1:24 pm: | |
Good thread, Maria...
Amen,Glenn. One thing that I think is a "treat" for people who originally had just a casual interest in the WM and Victoriana, is the discovery of all the details and information they weren't aware of previously. As enjoyable,if not more so than just the study and the Case itself,is the passion people have about the Case and its incredibly dedicated cadre of researchers.
Its hard to find anything out in that "other world" that is so passionately discussed...and one so enjoyable.
Give me time,Glenn....I'll change that "disorganized" to an "organized" within a few years....trust me ! ...now we drink...
(Message edited by howard on December 18, 2004) |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 180
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 2:58 pm: | |
Very interesting observation about Druitt, Don, and that's the kind of thing I'm talking about, I'd never have thought to put it that way.
Adam, the great thing is that nobody here is trying to change your opinion (really!) it's just that when somebody says someting he's asked to defend his position. And for those of us who have a pet suspect but are fairminded, reading other people's thoughts pro or con can sometimes cause that little stir that leads to a whole new way of looking at things. That may or may not take you away from your original ideas but hey, isn't that what life and learning are all about?
I agree with Glenn on several points-- on the KIND of person Jack had to have been and on the suspicion that we haven't heard his name mentioned yet. I was very excited about David Cohen too but haven't totally given up on him.
It's really great, whatever direction you're coming to the case from, to at last have people to talk about it with! There's no one in my RL who wants to hear another word about Monty's train schedule or how much a severed kidney would really bleed after a few minutes. My poor husband, who's rather squeamish, once took a glance at the Kelly photo and said "What the hell IS that??"
Here's to you all.
Mags |
Adam Went
Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 41
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 3:15 am: | |
Hi Mags,
"Adam, the great thing is that nobody here is trying to change your opinion (really!) it's just that when somebody says someting he's asked to defend his position. And for those of us who have a pet suspect but are fairminded, reading other people's thoughts pro or con can sometimes cause that little stir that leads to a whole new way of looking at things. That may or may not take you away from your original ideas but hey, isn't that what life and learning are all about?"
I agree with you completely there Mags, and trust me, I've had to do a hell of a lot of defending my position for a week-old member!
Still, as I've said elsewhere before, once I form opinions I am basically unshakable from them, unless I come across something extremely convincing. I wish it wasn't like that, but it just seems a real waste of time if you spend 10 years researching 1 line of thought, to suddenly have it proven totally wrong, and have to start from scratch again.
But, we learn from our mistakes, and I've learnt heaps and heaps of stuff here already that I never knew before, so...let's keep it going!
Cheers,
Adam. 
The Wenty-icator! |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1433
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 5:26 am: | |
Hi Adam,
in the main it is only friendly banter, not true in all cases but in yours i think so(naming no particular cases!). Your certainly not the first person to think Chapman is the Ripper, and I doubt you will be the last either!
At the end of the day whatever our position is we are all interested in the same thing!!
Hi Mags,
exactly - people to talk top about it is a blessing! especailly such nice people as on these boards.
Jenni
Ho! HO! Ho!!!!!!! |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2397
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 5:32 am: | |
Mags,
"My poor husband, who's rather squeamish, once took a glance at the Kelly photo and said 'What the hell IS that??'"
That was my first reaction as well, but when I did realize what was on there, I got a shock. Today I am rather used to looking at gruesome and shocking crime scene photos, though, and it doesen't affect me in the same way anymore. If one is sqeamish, I'd advice that person not to open Geberth's book Practical Homicide Investigation.
Adam,
Inserted partly from my response to you on the Exhume the graves thread:
I get the feeling here that you think people are out to get you, and I can acknowledge that you've had a tough time here for a new-comer But if you are ever going to survive on these Boards, you must drop that martyr/paranoid thing.
I have been battered on these Boards far worse than you ever have so far, and where I've been almost totally alone; if one can't take it, one shouldn't be here. I am personally very grateful for how you've managed to fuel new life into these Boards these recent days.
But you can't state things with such certainty (without having read up on things enough to back up your strong claims), and then expect people to agree with you. That is not how it works.
When the counterpart is trying to explain things or give you his or her views, you just don't seem to listen or take it in. No offense.
As far as Klosowski is concerned, our discussions on that topic are like cut-outs or reruns from the discussions I once had with young Peter Sipka from USA. He and I will never agree on Klosowski, but we are today the best of friends on a private basis and are having e-mail contact every day (since we by incident found out that we had millions of other things outside the Ripper field in common).
So you see, it's nothing personal. Believe me, I look forward to each and every one of your posts, and I sincerely hope you continue to post on a regular basis. So keep 'em comin', my friend 
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Adam Went
Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 45
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 6:46 am: | |
Hi once again, Glenn,
You wrote:
"I get the feeling here that you think people are out to get you, and I can acknowledge that you've had a tough time here for a new-comer But if you are ever going to survive on these Boards, you must drop that martyr/paranoid thing.
I have been battered on these Boards far worse than you ever have so far, and where I've been almost totally alone; if one can't take it, one shouldn't be here. I am personally very grateful for how you've managed to fuel new life into these Boards these recent days."
Well no, I didn't really have the chance to have my "run-in" session, it was just kind of "WHOA! What the hell happened?" pretty much as soon as I started posting. Still, I guess I had to get into disagreements sooner or later, so better sooner.
I don't think people are out to get me, not by far, this is a great community, it's just, as I said, that I was pretty much into debates the moment I joined the forum. And, unfortunately, 80% of them or more have been with you!
"When the counterpart is trying to explain things or give you his or her views, you just don't seem to listen or take it in. No offense."
No offense taken. But, as I explained before, I am a very stubborn person. A word of warning: It's going to be very difficult for you or anyone else to shake me from the opinions I have formed in the last 1 and a bit years that I've been studying the Ripper. You will find it very, very tough. Just thought you should know that.
"He and I will never agree on Klosowski, but we are today the best of friends on a private basis and are having e-mail contact every day (since we by incident found out that we had millions of other things outside the Ripper field in common).
So you see, it's nothing personal. Believe me, I look forward to each and every one of your posts, and I sincerely hope you continue to post on a regular basis. So keep 'em comin', my friend"
Well thank you, Glenn, and I do find your posts all very interesting and informative as well, no matter whether we agree, or, more often, disagree with each other's points.
Coincidentally, I mentioned Peter in my last response to you on Liz's topic. It's good you could get to be friends with him, but I have a strange inkling that 90% of communication between us would involve debating of some sort. But that's not always bad! I enjoy it too!
Regards,
Adam.
The Wenty-icator! |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2400
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 7:15 am: | |
Hi Adam,
"Well no, I didn't really have the chance to have my "run-in" session, it was just kind of "WHOA! What the hell happened?" pretty much as soon as I started posting."
Well, that can also be a good thing, as I see it.
The worst scenario of all must be that no one responses to your posts at all. That must really be a drag.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2401
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 8:43 am: | |
Hi again, Adam.
"A word of warning: It's going to be very difficult for you or anyone else to shake me from the opinions I have formed in the last 1 and a bit years that I've been studying the Ripper. You will find it very, very tough."
Hehe. And that was one of the very first things I said myself when I started out here. My first mistake..
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Adam Went
Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 46
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, December 19, 2004 - 11:54 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,
You wrote:
"Well, that can also be a good thing, as I see it.
The worst scenario of all must be that no one responses to your posts at all. That must really be a drag."
A good point. It would make you feel pretty stupid. Still, so far, it's apparent that there's no shortage of people to respond to my posts, whether for an agreement or a disagreement, and so I guess that is a promising sign that atleast what I say is interesting to some people.
"Hehe. And that was one of the very first things I said myself when I started out here. My first mistake.."
Well, in that case, it's probably my first mistake too then, and certainly won't be the last anyway. Over time I may soften up my approach, but for the time being I intend to stand firm on what I've already said.
Regards,
Adam.
P.S. Jennifer, congratulations and well done on a very interesting article in the last issue of "Ripperologist" magazine about the diary debate. It's a bit late, I know, but I only just received my first subscription to it. A wonderful magazine!
The Wenty-icator! |
Phil Hill
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 2:18 am: | |
"...the Ripper may have been someone we haven't encountered yet..."
I think it may be Colin Wilson who tells a story in the forewaord to one of his books: On Judgement Day, God will call for JtR to step forward. All of us will push to the front to see, and when JtR gives his name, we'll all say "WHO!!!"
My first reading in JtR was Maccormack (I NEVER understood the Dr Pedachenko theory and still don't!! When Cullen's book came out (yes I'm THAT old!!) I thought Druitt a likely and "attractive" suspect.
In the early 70s I widened the basis of my knowledge and read Odell, Matters and Stewart. I admired and still do, the first part of Matters' book but never took to Dr Stanley, and stewart's murderous midwife I always thought wide of the mark, but the Jewish ritual slaughterman had merit it seemed then.
The BBC/Knight material in the mid-70s was fascinating and new. I recall buying the knight book on the first day (I had already read some of the newspaper serialisations in the Evening Standard) and was a bore while staying with friends for the weekend - I read the book at EVERY opportunity. I went to bed on the friday night pooh-poohing the book (factual nonsense historically about Royal affairs) but came to breakfast next morning saying "This guy may be onto something."
It was the Masonic stuff, the comparison between the Eddowes mutilations and the Hogarth drawing, and the Juwes material, plus the netley coincidences etc that persuaded me.
However, once I became aware that so much of Knight's presentation is fraudulent (and that he knew it) I quickly discarded the conspiracy theory. It has NO BASIS.
In more recent years - I always firmly believed that the "Diary" is a hoax and a not very good one, and discard Maybrick entirely. Tumblety showed that period suspects can still emerge and be credible, though I am unconvinced. I was intrigued by the idea of Barnett as JtR, but after much thought, and learning more about Abberline, decided against him firmly.
Latterly, Swanson's marginalia has made me more of a Kosminski - supporter (or someone very like him). But frankly I don't know. Recent reading has led me to infer a possible Fenian dimension.
I have spent a great deal of time on Sickert but even before the Cornwell fiasco, has concluded he didn't do it. he may though have been behind many of the hoax letters, and was certainly fixated on the killngs.
I am these days open-minded on Tabram as a JtR victim (probably but there might have been another serial killer around who stabbed!! (My position on "early" victims reflects that - probably but as yet unproven).
I now believe with 80% certainty that Stride is NOT a Ripper victim, but was killed by her "partner" Kidney.
I no longer believe that the police were incompetent as i once was inclined to - I now believe they did extraordinarily well (based on the surviving case papers) and worked exceptionally hard on the case.
I have moved to a position of almost admiring Warren.
On Anderson I am less sure than I used to be of his reliability - but I have an open mind on that score.
One constant: for some reason I have always liked Melville Macnaghten and trust his judgement and integrity.
To conclude, I remain a slight Druittist with Kosminski overtones. But it is the journey that fascinates, not the unknown (maybe unknowable) destination. Meeting the Ostrog's, Tumblety', D'Onston Stephens, Joe Sickerts of the Victorian world is in itself enjoyable, whether one is convinced by the arguments of their supporters or not.
My thanks and respect to all those who have published on the subject and given me so much intellectual stimulation and "pleasure" (if I can use that word of the JtR mystery) over 40 years.
Phil
|
jfripper
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 8:22 pm: | |
Hi Mags,
As an unregistered guest, (Not For Long) this may appear a little late. In answer to your query however, I first was introduced to the Ripper case by Stephen Knight's "The Final Solution". Upon first read I was hooked, and yes his solution did seem credible, but then what did I know? As a young naive beginner in Ripperology, NOTHING. To remedy this I began to purchase all the books available at that time (mid 70's).
What a mind explosion. So many theory's, so many solutions, but at least they were all constant at accepting the Canonical FIVE.
In the thirty years since, via my own personal research and the research of others my perspective of the case has changed dramatically and today, like Glenn, I have strong reservations about the inclusion of Stride and Kelly in the Canonical FIVE, though I would give merit to the inclusion of Tabram within the Canon.
My own personal opinion is still FIVE victims, but only four in the East End of London.
As regards suspects, throughout I have kept an open mind, never really putting my faith in any of the solutions so far offered. As to the MAYBRICK DIARY, I found this the biggest step backwards in Ripperology, in regards time wasting. As a non-in-the-know DIARY person, the first time I heard about it, and that there was a photo available of the suspect, my first gut reaction was that it was someone well-known from the Victorian era. Someone whose life could be easily researched. Voila, JAMES MAYBRICK. A NON-STARTER IN MY BOOK.
I would have been more inclined to believe? if the diarist had been a Joe Bloggs/ John Doe.
As to the present day, I do have a preferred suspect and I am at the present doing my own research into this person. Whether this theory blossoms or dies, only time will tell.
Cheers,
Michael
|
extendedping
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, December 18, 2004 - 11:56 pm: | |
as per don's post, in not sure this proves anything but i just came across old police records that show conclusively druitt was only weighed down slightly by the several small rocks found in his right pocket...so what drowned him? in fact it was the combined weight of the 3 ureri, 1 heart, half a human kidney, and 6 pieces of chalk found in his left pocket that really sunk him. |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1361
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 3:51 am: | |
Hi Michael,
James Maybrick would have remained a complete unknown had he not died in mysterious circumstances.
Do you not think that any serial killer, living a necessarily secret double life, would have as much chance of dying in mysterious circumstances as the average man who goes about his business honestly and decently?
I'm not arguing for Maybrick as the ripper here, just questioning your reasoning that a notorious criminal is less likely to have made his mark on society in other ways than honest Joe Bloggs.
Love,
Caz
X |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2414
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 4:26 am: | |
Phil and Michael,
Forgive me for sounding childishly enthusiastic here, but once again, hats off to you both. Reading your posts are almost like reading my own thoughts, although expressed much better.
Caz,
Why are you only popping up like a Jack (sic!) in a box, when the Diary is mentioned? I know you've co-written a book on the subject, but aren't there any other perspectives for you to explore in the Ripper case besides Maybrick and the ridiculous Diary controversy?
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 186
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 9:02 am: | |
It's intersting for me that so many of us have been hooked on the case for so long. I've been at it for upwards of 30 years too.Certainly my mind has changed over the course of all that time and so many developments and discoveries.
The process is the thing, I believe, in relation to this case.Really, how many of us believe that we'll EVER get close to an answer? I know I can envision us all there crowded together at the Pearly Gates with the unmasked Killer, bomarding him with questions and at least half us us--you know who you are!- still not believing it.
Mags |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1457
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 12:53 pm: | |
Mags,
Close to the answer? i don't know i often feel like i could be staring straight at it and not realise!!
Jenni
Ho! HO! Ho!!!!!!! |
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 400
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 2:12 pm: | |
The best way to get at truth is through examination of evidence. But since we are bereft of so much of it we are driven to discussion and debate, a much less effective method. Nevertheless, someday one of us may propose a theory which will be difficult to refute. Then a detail of the theory which is checkable will be checked (probably by someone in England). Then the whole thing will unravel. |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 443
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 7:36 pm: | |
I've changed my mind on the Ripper murders lots of times over, but then it's easier when you aren't emotionally invested in a specific solution, as many people are.
I really think that all we can do is come up with plausible ideas, some moreso than others, until new evidence comes in. I don't know if there's any solid evidence yet to come in, but if it does I think a solid group of people would believe it -- mostly those who either wouldn't have to admit they were wrong in doing so or those who could swallow their pride and admit they were wrong.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1369
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 12:36 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,
What's wrong with popping up to question someone's reasoning, on a subject in which we happen to have a particular interest? Everyone picks and chooses which topics to explore. Why should you wish me to be any different? I don't see you criticising anyone else for concentrating more on one area than others.
Love,
Caz
X
|
Lindsey Millar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 121
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 1:01 pm: | |
I, myself, have changed my mind a thousand or more times.. Which is why I'm grateful for the input on these boards.
I'm still of the mind that Jack was a no-namer.. but am looking closer at Tumblety. Okay, he didn't fit the witness reports, but I'm taking a closer look at him anyway.
Bestest,
Lyn |
Kitty
Sergeant
Username: Kitty
Post Number: 25
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 1:52 pm: | |
I've just come over from the messaage board under suspects, entitled 'Albert Victor', where those who'd arrogantly rejected the conspiracy theory were being challenged ( on a non personal basis)by me to produce more sound reasoning for their views. People vigourously defended their own knowledge. I come over here to see everyone who had a good rant on the other board, having a good drink and admitting they haven't got a clue about the case!
Interesting! |
Kitty
Sergeant
Username: Kitty
Post Number: 26
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 1:58 pm: | |
PS re your above messages , G from Sweden, there seems to be alot of self pity going on! |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2426
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 2:18 pm: | |
Caz,
"Why should you wish me to be any different? I don't see you criticising anyone else for concentrating more on one area than others."
Then you've missed several of my posts through the couple years I've been here.
But if you want to paint yourself into one corner and stay there, it's fine by me.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2427
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 2:24 pm: | |
Kitty,
"I come over here to see everyone who had a good rant on the other board, having a good drink and admitting they haven't got a clue about the case!"
And you have, I suppose?
Yeah, you just proved that on that other thread...
"PS re your above messages , G from Sweden, there seems to be alot of self pity going on!"
Quite possibly so (you're probably right), although not on my part.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Lindsey Millar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 128
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 3:55 pm: | |
Kitty,
"I come over here to see everyone who had a good rant on the other board, having a good drink and admitting they haven't got a clue about the case!"
That about sums me up!
Bestest,
Lyn |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2435
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 4:23 pm: | |
Count me in, Lyn.
I could use a Guinness; these boxing fights makes me thirsty...
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Lindsey Millar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 134
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 8:11 pm: | |
Guiness coming right up Glenn! My dear long dead brother's drink!His grave was smothered in Guiness wreathes. I had the pleaure of drinking one last Guiness with him before he passed away.
Bestest,
Lyn |
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1370
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 4:13 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
And there was I, thinking you were painting yourself into a corner with your narrow view of who Jack could have been, and who he couldn't have been.
How exactly am I painting myself into a corner, by exploring the various theories about who wrote the diary, who scratched the watch, and when? My interest, these days, is not so much in trying to identify or understand Jack, but more in the people who try to identify or understand him, and also (surely the clues are there?) in the subject of unresolved documents and other suchlike artefacts.
If that's ok with you?
Love,
Caz
X
(Message edited by caz on December 23, 2004) |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2441
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 4:58 am: | |
Hi Caz,
I don't know if suggesting a character type (which I am not 100% sure of and which could fit hundreds of people in East End) is to paint oneself into a corner.
On the contrary.
I don't -- in contrast to some others -- have a pet suspect, and therefore I don't narrow down my fields of study to one person.
And I am certainly not the one who focuses my whole energy and the entire investigation on two artefacts connected with one certain suspect.
But as I said, you are free to do anything;
I just thinks it's a bit comical, that you are quite absent from most of the threads, but as soon as someone mentions the Diary and the watch -- or Maybrick -- you suddenly pops up out of nowhere. It's quite amusing, considering you refer to me as narrow-minded.
It's like mentioning the 39 theory, and whoops" -- up comes Richard. I find that very amusing.
But by all means, please continue...
A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, Caz.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Adam Went
Detective Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 53
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 5:05 am: | |
Glenn,
Alright, why is it that you have to insult everyone you find who doesn't agree with one or another of your beliefs? It may interest you to know that not everyone agrees with what you have to say either, myself included. And whether you agree or not, there is absolutely no reason for you to speak to other members the way you do.
If you feel what members post is incorrect, then PROVE it wrong instead of just insulting it. I may have only been here 2 weeks, but that seems like second nature.
Caroline, Kitty, I agree with what you both have to say. Best thing to do is not to pay any attention to Glenn. That way we avoid arguments, and Glenn may get the message. (But I wouldn't hold my breath for too long.)
Regards,
Adam. 
The Wenty-icator! |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2443
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 5:29 am: | |
Well Adam,
I think you hardly read Kitty's posts correctly. I believe you missed words like "losers" etc. -- and if you did, you were probably the only one.
But OK, everyone acknowledges the insults on the part who they dislike and forget the others, I guess.
"If you feel what members post is incorrect, then PROVE it wrong instead of just insulting it. I may have only been here 2 weeks, but that seems like second nature."
As far as Kitty's ideas is concerned, this has been debated and proven to be a false lead for at least 30--20 years. You can't really expect me to go over the complete information that pulls these theories by the ear AGAIN -- I could sit here til Easter. I would instead advice people to check those facts who already have been layed out in oppositions against these theories -- those can be found in all the relevant Ripper literature as well as in hundred posts on these Boards. I think one is obliged to do that before one proclaims a theory as "something new".
So far Kitty has delivered no concrete views whatsoever. All she's said is that we who don't believe in a Royal or masonic conspiracy are idiots and a sore bunch of losers. No other information. I have begged her to show me some reasons for why this theory should be revised, considering the crime scene evidence etc. Still no answer - all I've received so far is insults.
But feel free to agree with Kitty on whatever points she has, Adam, I certainly won't stop you.
As far as Caz is concerned -- who I have nothing against as a person; on the contrary, I think she's a lovely and bright woman -- I think you should take a look at the Diary and watch threads and see what's happening there, if you think this is crude...
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Diana
Inspector
Username: Diana
Post Number: 421
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 8:04 am: | |
Its almost Christmas, folks! Remember "Peace on earth and good will to men"? |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2448
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 8:09 am: | |
True, Diana. True. You are right, of course.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Want to buy some pegs, Dave?"
Papa Lazarou |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 201
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 10:55 am: | |
I'm very disheartened at how little it has taken-just the recent appearence of Kitty and her insulting,demeaning and racist comments- to change the tone of so many posts on this board.
Mags |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 366
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 11:01 am: | |
Mags,
See what you've done. Do you feel like some poor soul who tried to convene a peace conference only to have a full-scale war break out among the delegates? Oh well, the worst weapons being used here are invective, sarcasm and hyperbole.
Merry Christmas one and all.
Don. |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1478
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 11:04 am: | |
Mags,
don't be disheartend we all like each other really. Its mega stressful around Xmas i am sure we will all cheer up henceforth.
Jenni
Ho! HO! Ho!!!!!!! |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 202
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 11:06 am: | |
Don,
You forgot illogic,ignorance and -worst of all-insufferably poor use of the English Language. And I'm NOT talking about Glenn!
Mags |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 685
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 11:15 am: | |
Back to the original intent of this thread:
Early on in my studies of this case (back in 1990 I took the Walk and read Fido's book)I came to the conclusion that the killer is most likely someone we have never heard of and never will. However, I also came to the conclusion that it is still worth investigation just in case that conclusion is wrong! For me, this case serves as a surrogate mystery novel. I don't read fiction (I have tired but it doesn't interest me), so I read historical investigation instead.
Mags, I've made the opposite change regarding Druitt. Once I had all but discounted him. Now I am very open to Monty as a viable suspect. The difficulties I see are twofold: His participation in the cricket match a few hours after Chapman's murder and the unfortunate fact which I must acknowledge that there we know of no direct evidence against him. With regard to the cricket match, this does not eliminate him. While such behavior may seem strange to us, it at least proves that Monty was within a few miles of the murder site a few hours after the murder occurred. The lack of evidence is more problematic. This is always a problem when a suspect dies before he can be tried. The irony is that once I thought he fit the personality profile of a serial killer, but now I am less so inclined. Monty wasn't the loner I thought he was nor was he really the underachiever I once thought. Nevertheless, he did have a history of mental illness in his family and apparently manifested some of this illness himself.
The main reason I am more open to Monty nowadays is in careful consideration of the opinions of police officers. True, only Macnaghten seems to have true focused on him in writing but if you read between the lines, certain patterns emerge. There seem to be two lines of suspects: (1) a "Polish" (i.e. foreign) Jew or (2) a respectable member of society from a prominent family. The preponderance of those officers who left an opinion seems to lean toward either an outright cover-up or at least a refusal to name the perpetrator because justice cannot be served (perpetrator either dead or insane and confined)and also in order to protect the reputation of his prominent family. (The police would not care about protecting the reputation of a foreign Jewish family). Druitt fits both criteria: his is dead and he comes from a prominent family worth protecting. Of the known police suspects, only Druitt fits both of these criteria. True, one can fit Clarence and J.K. Steven and even Maybrick into that category of dead and prominent but they were not known police suspects.
Finally, the other reason I have changed my mind on Druitt is the surprising realization that there is so much unknown about his life at the time of the murders and so much potential for finding out more. Consider how many pupils he interacted with. Did some leave diaries mentioning Mr. Druitt? What about teammates? Local Blackheath historical records? There could well be a cache of information awaiting discovery.
I'm not willing to say Monty is guilty, but I think there is potential.
Andy S.
|
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 203
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 11:31 am: | |
Hi, Andrew--
Ted Bundy wasn't a loner or under achiever either so I think we can't rule Monty out on that score.
The idea about protecting the family is a good one, but I'd argue that if the police knew that the killer was a lower class Jew they still wouldn't have wanted that to get out for political reasons--to forstall possible violent anti-Semitism.
Mags |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 204
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 11:41 am: | |
Hi,Andrew. I wanted to add that one of the fascinating things about Druitt for me is the description that PC White made of the man he saw, which fits Monty to a T. If only we could know whether to trust that account!
This is me tearing my hair out.
Mags |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 367
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 11:52 am: | |
Andy,
Again, nothing but anecdotal evidence, but it is interesting that just last night I was reading about a murderer named Salvage who committed the sexual murder of a young teen girl in the late 1920s in Ruckinge, Kent. The interesting passage is "Having buried her body the killer calmly went off to play cricket on the village green, . . ."
Says nothing about Druitt, of course, but in at least one instance a sexual murderer had no problem calmy playing cricket shortly after his crime. For that matter, my very post on the boards was on this subject and detailed how the great Ty Cobb played a baseball game within hours of beating someone senseless with a gun butt.
I suppose it was a good thing for Cobb's victim that back then Ty wouldn't have been on steroids.
Don. |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 686
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 12:10 pm: | |
Mags --
I don't know all that much about Bundy, though I would consider him an underachiever but perhaps not a loner. John Wayne Gacy on the other hand was a loner but not an underachiever (as an aside, I lived in Chicago when the Gacy murders were discovered). Monty may have been an underachiever in that he perhaps should have been a leading member of society rather than a run-of-the-mill barrister/schoolmaster, but he was not unsuccessful.
I would say that Monty fits White's description as well as that of Hutchinson. He is not that far off from most of the witness descriptions.
I also thought of the tactic of avoiding racial unrest by not disclosing the perpetrator's identity. But the upshot of the comments seems to focus on protecting a specific family from embarrassment.
Don --
Many thanks for the anechdotal reference. Such references are important in that they show that such unexpected behavior does indeed take place.
Andy S.
|
Lindsey Millar
Detective Sergeant
Username: Lindsey
Post Number: 147
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 7:37 pm: | |
I too am re-thinking Druitt.. killers have been shown to act in the most normal circumstances after killing.
Andy, you said, "I would say that Monty fits White's description as well as that of Hutchinson. He is not that far off from most of the witness descriptions."
Hmmmmmm.....
Thinking here....
Bestest,
Lyn |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
