Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ripper Victims?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    It's all true.

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Comment


    • #92
      yes kids dressing like adults is quite true, but back in the victorian times this problem of identifying JTR is easy to understand

      1.... most adult males from the middle/ working classes looked the same, there was also very little variation in colours, especially in the ship yards/ down the mines etc.....white shirt/ waste coat/ dark trousers/ jacket and a cloth cap or a Wide awake.

      you only have to look at football crowds from the 1920s and 30s, 140 000 at Hampden pk and they all look the bloody same , even the upper classes tended to look the same, just miles smarter !!!!!!!

      so obviously at night, JTR looks just like everyone else and with a moustache, at least 7 years older, height ? as we all know, these eye witnesses are a disaster, none of this will hold up in a modern court of law, JTR would get off easily.

      we have Maybrick, that looks like a fat bank clerk, or even BS.. we have G.Chapman that looks a bit like a surly looking Druitt, it's a waste of time isn't it !

      Comment


      • #93
        waste not . . .

        Hello Malcolm. Yes, a waste of time. I'm tempted to add, "So also is any hunt for this lone serial killer, JTR." But I had better not.

        Cheers.
        LC

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
          Hello Malcolm. Yes, a waste of time. I'm tempted to add, "So also is any hunt for this lone serial killer, JTR." But I had better not.

          Cheers.
          LC
          this forum is still quite interesting though, i want to do a quick google about fred and rosemary west, because i saw them on a tv drama a few days ago.

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post



            Hi Malcolm. You seem to have an inner struggle with George Hutchinson that hues the lens through which you view all the evidence (this is consistent with GH, this isn't consistent with GH, etc). Have you thought about putting GH aside for the time being?

            Yours truly,

            Tom Wescott
            Tom, with sincere respect, couldn't someone just as fairly ask you to "put aside" Le Grand "for the time being" too?

            Also--I live within 10 miles or so of a group of Mennonites and I don't know where you get the idea that Mennonites "are less progressive than the Amish..." I have Mennonite friends and one of their favorite jokes is that they're "liberal Amish"! Mennonites around here are becoming more and more mainstream, only the adults conform to homemade clothing and even there the skirts of the women keep getting shorter! The Mennonite children dress no differently than any other children around here--they most certainly do not wear suits and hats as the Amish boys do!! They also drive cars like anyone else, I've never seen an Amish-type buggy around here, the shock of seeing one would probably cause a wreck lol! Anyway, sorry for getting so far off-topic, I will now .

            Back to the original question: Personally I do not think that Jack was the Torso Killer. Their killing methods were different, their treatment of the bodies were different, and I just cannot picture Jack deciding "Right, this one I will disembowel and leave displayed in a public place", then haring off to murder another woman, hack her to pieces, and deposit her dismembered remains in the water, then back to the first method....it just does not make sense. There is some logic even in madness!
            Last edited by Mrs. Fiddymont; 11-12-2011, 11:03 AM. Reason: my lamentable grammar!
            "It's either the river or the Ripper for me."~~anonymous 'unfortunate', London 1888

            Comment


            • #96
              Hi Fiddymont,

              I suppose someone could ask me anything they'd like, but I studied the case for years before I knew anything about Le Grand, and typically when I discuss the murders, or the evidence, I'm not even thinking about him. When I'm asked about Le Grand, or writing him, that's a different story. I think you have to first be extremely familiar with the facts of the case before you can capably factor in any individual suspect. In Malcolm's case, he doesn't seem capable of producing a post of any length without mentioning 'GH', 'Toppy', 'LA-DE-DA' or all the above. That's his prerogative, but since he said the back and forth of considering him Toppy was frustrating him, I suggested he might get more out of a study of just the case itself. It wasn't a mean suggestion at all.

              Yours truly,

              Tom Wescott

              P.S. Clearly, Mennonites have changed in the last 28 years since I was around them.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Tom_Wescott View Post
                P.S. Clearly, Mennonites have changed in the last 28 years since I was around them.
                I worked with an Engineer who married into a Mennonite family. There are different levels of Mennonites, some have cars, others only buggy's. Some are allowed appliances other are not, while in some communities there is no restriction on musical instruments, then in others only the piano is permitted.
                Regards, Jon S.

                Comment


                • #98
                  That's really weird. Why only the piano?

                  Best wishes,
                  Steve.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Regarding the Ripper quasquicentennial, I believe it will be 125 years on May 11 that the unidentified woman's torso was pulled from the Thames in what is now known as the Rainham Mystery.
                    This my opinion and to the best of my knowledge, that is, if I'm not joking.

                    Stan Reid

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X