| Author |
Message |
    
Chris Scott
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Chris
Post Number: 1633
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 11:04 am: | 
|
To any in the UK who have access to Channel 5 (I don't - grrr!) there is a programme on this evening at 7.15 that may be of interest called Divine Designs. The "blurb" for the programme reads as follows:
Dr Paul Binski presents a two part exploration of the history of Spitalfields, from its origins as a Roman burial ground. A home for immigrants over eight centuries, the area has also often found itself at the centre of religious conflict, as well as acquiring a reputation for crime and depravity.
Chris |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1579
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 3:04 pm: |
|
Wow,
i really enjoyed this programme!!!
Jenni
"All You Need Is Positivity"
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1476
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 8:04 am: |
|
Guys,
If you dont get 5 then you missed quite an interesting programme.
The re-vamped Christ Church was shown from the inside (most beautiful) and some chap who used to attend Provedence Row gave us an account of how both sexes use to spend the nights together (Seems some things never changed there!). The market, Ten Bells and the brewery were all featured also.
The programme took us from when Spitalfields was a Roman burial ground to the Middle ages (Hospital and artillery ground) to the Huguenot settlers and onto the Jewish settlers in the 1880s to 1900.
All in all a decent programme. Only draw back was the naming of Jack ("nowadays" said the presenter "we are quite certain who Jack the Ripper was.." he then goes on to name George Chapman and Kosminski !).
I recommend it though....if you can get it !
Monty
"I tell you I didnt do it cos I wasnt there, so dont blame me it just isnt fair....now pass the blame and dont blame me..."- John Pizer
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1582
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 9:16 am: |
|
Monty,
i thought the inside os Christchurch to be very stunning also. worth watching the progamme for that.
Jenni
"All You Need Is Positivity"
|
Philip Hutchinson
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 7:29 pm: |
|
Folks - it is being repeated this Sunday on Channel 5 at 12:35pm.
It is Richard Jones who was interviewed about Jack, walking up Gunthorpe Street. He didn't say it was George Chapman; he mentioned him as they were passing The White Hart at the time and Chapman is, after all, mentioned on the board outside the pub. He DID say he THOUGHT it was Kosminski though. |
Philip Hutchinson
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 7:33 am: |
|
I got this e-mail from Richard Jones last night (the Ripperologist who was interviewed for the programme) and he's given me permission to post this about what they did to what he had to say :
It always amazes me which parts of interviews they use on the television. The thrust of what I did was about the anti-Jewish unrest that the murders caused in the area, and how the murders actually brought about social change in the neighbourhood. At the end we walked past the White hart where, of course, there is a board on the wall saying effectively "Jack the Ripper lived here." So they asked me to say something about it and I launched into how Chapman had lived there two years after the murders but that a poisoner probably wouldn't have been a Ripper. Lo and behold it's just the bit about Chapman being the Ripper that's left in. Still, it was fun!
If anyone couldn't get Channel 5, get in touch with me. I have it on video and sure we can get something arranged (actually I have quite a big Ripper documentary collection) |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2731
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 3:23 pm: |
|
Philip,
I unfortunately can't get Channel 5, but I would have loved to see that.
I clearly remember Richard Jones from the Ripper documentary The Hunt for Jack the Ripper (I think it was), and he seemed like a person with quite a lot of sense (especially as I remember he supported the notion that the Ripper probably was just another local unknown man from Whitechapel).
I once had A&E:s Biography documentary about the Ripper as well (Phantom of Death), but unfortunately I've lost it.
Thank God Mr Jones cleared that up. The pure thought of that he may have supported Klosowski would probably have given me a serious depression...
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971
|
Chris Phillips
Chief Inspector
Username: Cgp100
Post Number: 610
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 3:57 pm: |
|
I thought it came across reasonably clearly that Richard Jones favoured Kosminski and disfavoured Chapman/Klosowski.
Can anyone enlighten my ignorance by giving me more information about Jones - has he published on the Ripper, for example?
Chris Phillips
PS I found the film of the restored interior of Christchurch pretty spectacular too - a wonderful contrast to the bare, stripped interior I saw when I was last inside the church.
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2732
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 4:38 pm: |
|
Chris,
I dont know if he has published any Ripper book (I don't think so) but he has lead Ripper tours for some years now. He also has been consulted on some Ripper documentaries.
He has published a lot of other books, though, within the field of British culture history and books about haunted castles in Britain etc. I think he also works as a magician on occasion and is a member of a society in that field.
So I don't think he's a professional Ripperologist as such, although he seems well read up this and other murder cases.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1397
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 4:54 pm: |
|
Must watch this next Sunday!I went inside Christ Church over Christmas and also thought it was lovely.Apparently it had quite a spooky atmosphere previously though.
Natalie |
David O'Flaherty
Chief Inspector
Username: Oberlin
Post Number: 683
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 5:09 pm: |
|
People who like renovation might be interested in the Shoreditch Town Hall Trust. They're renovating the Town Hall where Coroner Macdonald held the Mary Jane Kelly inquest. I understand that they expect work to wrap up within the next few weeks.
Cheers,
Dave
(Message edited by oberlin on January 07, 2005) |
Philip Hutchinson
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 8:37 pm: |
|
The views and knowledge on what Richard does and believes are pretty close to what I know.
Richard has indeed been published, but not on Jack (he did release a video on Jack though, which, as Glenn rightly points out, was THE HUNT FOR JACK THE RIPPER which you can sometimes see for sale on eBay). Richard's publishing is indeed on ghosts. I am on the Council of The Ghost Club (founded by Dickens in 1862) and it is my job to book speakers. Richard is speaking next month. His book WALKING HAUNTED LONDON (which has a whole chapter on Jack but very little on the ghost stories - that's MY department!) is one of the best and most respected ghost guide books by any living author. I was on KILROY (aaarrrggghhh!!!) with Richard on a programme about ghosts in 2001 and I ended up argueing on screen with some idiot woman who told everyone that Jack The Ripper (MJD, by the way!) haunted her friend's bakery!
Glenn - I have the programme you lost and PLENTY of others besides (including the whole brilliant James Mason film THE LONDON NOBODY KNOWS which, of course, has footage of 29 Hanbury Street - though I know you can see that clip elsewhere on this site). Can your VCRs handle PAL system tapes in Sweden? If so, get in touch and I will try to furnish you with a list of what I've got.
One DVD I do recommend is the 1988 Peter Ustinov documentary THE SECRET IDENTITY OF JACK THE RIPPER. It has loads of errors in it, but recreates a lot of the locations VERY well (Millers Court is a disaster though) and has some great footage of Durward Street before Essex Wharf came down - and fun to see just how young Don Rumbelow looked! You can get this one very cheaply on eBay.
Chris - yes, I thought that was what came across clearly too on the clip they used of Richard. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2747
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 12:55 pm: |
|
YES, Philip!!!!!!!
I use the PAL standard!
I'll send you an e-mail.
I have The Hunt for Jack the Ripper and also the Ustinov panel documentary The Secret Identity of Jack the Ripper. But that is unfortunately all I have. So far I haven't managed to be that succesful in my search on ebay or Amazon. Seems you should have a bit of luck too.
Thanks.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1402
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 10, 2005 - 4:43 am: |
|
Hi All,
For those who didn't catch the prog, Richard Jones certainly gave me the impression that he was assuring his listeners that 'we' (implying those ripper historians who knew best) had very little doubt that Kosminski was in fact Jack.
But to be fair, he isn't the only one who has made it sound like there's no mystery left. 
He did point out that although Abberline favoured Chapman, his crimes were of a different nature from the ripper's.
Love,
Caz
X
|
George Hutchinson
Sergeant
Username: Philip
Post Number: 20
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, January 10, 2005 - 6:31 am: |
|
True, Caz.
Until I met Stewart Evans I too favoured Kaminski/Cohen (but not our poor hairdresser) and I no longer do. He didn't manage to convince me to go along with Tumblety, but he set me right on the futility of assumption.
Richard's belief is, I understand, with the whole Jewish lunatic tale though TV programmes have a habit of editing all the important things and making out you are saying something else (for example, note how above it was assumed he was saying Chapman was the Ripper?).
I feel, in fairness to Richard, if anybody has a theory and it makes sense to them then they will expound it if pressured to do so. I don't think Richard would have commented on the identity of JTR had the - largely ignorant of Ripper matters - film crew not asked him the all pervading million dollar question.
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2787
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 2:07 am: |
|
Hutch,
I guess you're right about Richard. In The Hunt for Jack the Ripper he seems to give a personal opinion where he says that "I believe the Ripper was just another unknown Polish Jew, living in the heart of Whitechapel" etc. I am not sure if he really said Polish Jew, but I seems to recall that he did. Correct me if I am wrong.But I think you are right; the production team probably does pressure you to reveal your thoughts on this particular matter. I personally don't think there's anything wrong with Richard's interpretation, though.
"Until I met Stewart Evans I too favoured Kaminski/Cohen (but not our poor hairdresser) and I no longer do. He didn't manage to convince me to go along with Tumblety, but he set me right on the futility of assumption."
That is exactly what happened to me too. Precisely the same experience.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971
|
Jeff leahy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - 9:12 am: |
|
Just a little defence of television production.
You shoot hundreds of hours of footage and you edit it down to half/one hour of finished product, cutting out the slips, camera jolts, sneezes, and often intellegible way that people speak rather than write. This is done using cutaways and enhanced with music for atmosphere.
TV is entertainment. At its best it can be an excellent way of conveying the basic facts and projecting some good opinion. (did anyone see BBC 2 doc on Alchzitz last night? sorry about dyslexic spelling) But by its nature the editing process twists and distorts specific messages subjects may wish to convey. And that doesn't mean that there is a giant conspiracy by television producers and directors. Just that they have to consider the over all paice and thrust which in its turn is re-edited by executive producers and commissioning editors. By necessity stuff (metophorically) gets left on the cutting room floor or you'd all be board shitless and turn over to East Enders (which the majority of you (meaning general public) do.)Then the end product is sometimes some way from its encial intent. That does not make us all liars and con-artists (unless we work for the BBC).
However, hopefully an exciting TV programme will enspire people to by a book (hopefully not Patricia Cornwalls) or visit this site and find out a little more.
I dont beleive the makers of this programme deliberately set out to miss represent. You try cutting down what was probably an hours worth of walking and talking film footage into the two or three minutes most human attension spans will allow!!
The public gets what the public wants. Rant over. will try to catch the program, thanks for the tip.
Jeff
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2804
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - 1:20 pm: |
|
Jeff,
"...That does not make us all liars and con-artists (unless we work for the BBC)."
Hahahaha. I loved that one. 
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971
|
George Hutchinson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Philip
Post Number: 58
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - 3:03 pm: |
|
Hi Jeff -
No intention to convey any feelings of charlatanism and conspiracies amongst the media. Some are legit, others DO have a specific agenda.
The question comes when editing makes facts become fiction, and I'm sure something more feasible could have been done with Richard for those extra 30 seconds than drawing him on a subject which is by its very nature uncertain. Why not more comments on the actual sites in Spitalfields? It's good the programme covered it at all, but they cut the wrong bits!
Bored by Jack The Ripper? Even the average man on the street - never! Repulsed at worst but BORED? The only guy I know of who finds the Ripper boring (for his own reasons!) is Don Rumbelow, and who could blame him?!
PHILIP
Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd!
|
Jeff Leahy
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 7:47 am: |
|
Hi George
I was just trying to make a general piont. The Joke around here is that 'Truth is the first casualty of television' and while I share your fascination for the Ripper case I'm afraid very few commissioning editors seem to commission anything that cant be pinned to an aniversary.
In my experience most producers have a certain amount of integrity when it comes to there subject matter but it is an industry dominated by ratings and quick fixes. You'd be surprised how small the average veiwers attension span is.
Try counting the number of cuts per-second in a current show then compare it to a Moorecomb and Wise Xmas special made twenty five years ago. Its quite facinating how the langage has changed. A whole scene might be just one or two camera angles over 3 or 4 min sketch.
But I'm sure we'd both agree that a serious look at the Ripper case, particularly the victims is long over due. A serious look at all the facts hasn't been done since Barlow and Watts 70's, back when Moorecomb and Wise were tops.
Perhaps you'd even drag poor old, long suffering DON out of the wood work. Its about time.
Jeff |
