Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Doctors and Coroners: Eddowes' gut cut - by Wickerman 53 minutes ago.
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - by Pcdunn 55 minutes ago.
Doctors and Coroners: Eddowes' gut cut - by Trevor Marriott 5 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by DirectorDave 6 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by Graham 6 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - by richardnunweek 6 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
General Suspect Discussion: Favorite suspect/s? - (9 posts)
General Discussion: Do you think it will be solved? - (5 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Dennis Nilsen - (5 posts)
Doctors and Coroners: Eddowes' gut cut - (4 posts)
Rippercast: False Flag: Jack The Ripper with author Stephen Senise - (1 posts)
Bury, W.H.: "...but because you are going to hang me you will get nothing out of me..." - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Witnesses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #501  
Old 08-25-2016, 03:07 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Orsam View Post
All you asked me to do Pierre was "provide a list of sources" and then, you said, "I will surprise you".

The list of sources has been provided.

Where is the surprise?
It is at the point where you will be after having answered a set of relevant questions. So what is your answer to the first relevant question?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #502  
Old 08-25-2016, 03:26 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
It is at the point where you will be after having answered a set of relevant questions. So what is your answer to the first relevant question?
I'm not playing your games Pierre.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #503  
Old 08-26-2016, 03:14 PM
Bridewell Bridewell is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Bottesford, Leicestershire
Posts: 3,637
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Great, David. Now, provide a list of sources for this:

and I will surprise you.
Sadly not. You never do. You just promise information and then fail to deliver. That's no longer a surprise. It's what we've come to expect.

Returning to the subject of the thread. A coroner's inquest is not the same as a criminal trial. Its purpose is to determine when where and how the deceased met his or her end not, where murder was involved, who was the person responsible. That is for another time and place. Description of a suspect would be of enormous press & public interest, but of little relevance to the purpose of the inquest proceedings. No cover up; no conspiracy.
__________________
Regards, Bridewell.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #504  
Old 08-27-2016, 08:58 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=Bridewell;391114]

Quote:
Sadly not. You never do. You just promise information and then fail to deliver. That's no longer a surprise. It's what we've come to expect.
Hi Bridewell,

I do not make promises. But I have estimated that I might have some source(s) giving sufficient information this autumn so I can report some result of any kind. It is not my wish to disappoint anyone. And the problem is that whatever the outcome, people will be disappointed. So I am a bit reluctant right now to do what I must. But I am working on getting over that.

Quote:
Returning to the subject of the thread. A coroner's inquest is not the same as a criminal trial. Its purpose is to determine when where and how the deceased met his or her end not, where murder was involved, who was the person responsible. That is for another time and place. Description of a suspect would be of enormous press & public interest, but of little relevance to the purpose of the inquest proceedings. No cover up; no conspiracy.
I donīt think it was a matter of conspiracy. I think it was a matter of not endangering the public trust in the police.

Best wishes, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #505  
Old 08-27-2016, 09:56 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 7,816
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
I do not make promises.
But you made one earlier in this thread:

"Now, provide a list of sources for this:
and I will surprise you."


I provided the list of sources and you failed to deliver on your promise to surprise me.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #506  
Old 08-27-2016, 10:50 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,956
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post

And the problem is that whatever the outcome, people will be disappointed. So I am a bit reluctant right now to do what I must. But I am working on getting over that.

Pierre

With all due respect I must ask you why will people be disappointed with the outcome of your research?


Are you suggesting again, that revealing the identity will some how cause problems in the UK.
May I say, when it was suggested the killer was a member of the Royal family, no one was bothered.
Indeed many members of the British public still believe it is linked to the British Royal family, and nothing has happened.
If that is what you mean?
You have suggested just this sort of thing, more than once, that somehow naming the killer will cause problems in the UK, then I feel
you need to understand such a belief is pure fantasy.

However maybe you mean something else?


If you can prove the ID of killer you will be told well done and all will be happy the case is solved.

If on the other hand you cannot prove the ID, and honestly most do not expect you to, then people will not be disappointed as they have no expectations for you to fulfil.

Either way, why will people be disappointed?
Please be clear why you think this is the case?


Steve

Last edited by Elamarna : 08-27-2016 at 11:10 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #507  
Old 08-27-2016, 12:06 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=Elamarna;391149]

Quote:
Pierre

With all due respect I must ask you why will people be disappointed with the outcome of your research?

Are you suggesting again, that revealing the identity will some how cause problems in the UK.
May I say, when it was suggested the killer was a member of the Royal family, no one was bothered.
Indeed many members of the British public still believe it is linked to the British Royal family, and nothing has happened.
If that is what you mean?
You have suggested just this sort of thing, more than once, that somehow naming the killer will cause problems in the UK, then I feel
you need to understand such a belief is pure fantasy.

However maybe you mean something else?
Steve,

Was the Royal family responsible for investigating the Whitechapel murders?

Was Queen Victoria the head of Scotland Yard?

Was Prins Albert the Whitechapel killer?

If the Royal family was in charge of the investigation of the murders and they had found out that Prins Albert was the murderer and they would have let him go, what do you think this would have meant to people in 1888 and in 2016 if they found out?

Quote:
If you can prove the ID of killer you will be told well done and all will be happy the case is solved.

If on the other hand you cannot prove the ID, and honestly most do not expect you to, then people will not be disappointed as they have no expectations for you to fulfil.

Either way, why will people be disappointed?
Please be clear why you think this is the case?
It has been very easy for a long time to blame people for being the Whitechapel killer. Therefore, a discourse has been constructed, which is not taken seriously. Outlandish theories have not made the case any better.

But if the case is solved for real and the reality is that the killer was a man protected by those who were supposed to protect the poor in Whitechapel, that will be a scandal. At least this is what I believe.

Thank you for asking the question, Steve.

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #508  
Old 08-27-2016, 12:42 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,956
Default

[quote=Pierre;391153]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post



Steve,

Was the Royal family responsible for investigating the Whitechapel murders?

Was Queen Victoria the head of Scotland Yard?

Was Prins Albert the Whitechapel killer?

If the Royal family was in charge of the investigation of the murders and they had found out that Prins Albert was the murderer and they would have let him go, what do you think this would have meant to people in 1888 and in 2016 if they found out?



It has been very easy for a long time to blame people for being the Whitechapel killer. Therefore, a discourse has been constructed, which is not taken seriously. Outlandish theories have not made the case any better.

But if the case is solved for real and the reality is that the killer was a man protected by those who were supposed to protect the poor in Whitechapel, that will be a scandal. At least this is what I believe.

Thank you for asking the question, Steve.

Regards, Pierre
Pierre

You are so wrong in your view of the reaction there would be today.


Lets look at your first point about Prince Albert, I assume you mean prince Albert Victor, given Albert had been dead some years at that point.

The Monarchy was unpopular at that time, there had been riots the year before in London.
Yes in 1888, it may have been a problem.
However I am convinced he would not have been allowed to carry on. He would have been stopped, and yes it would have been covered up.

However not so in 2016.
Now it would mean very little, society has changed.
No families of those involved would be forced to resign, although of course they may feel bad themselves and be ashamed of their ancestors who were involved, but that would only affect the immediate family.

Why do you say "blame people for being the Whitechapel killer"

Do you mean accuse? If so I agree.

However one does not blame someone for being the killer.


And finally on to the Police.

It would if proven to be true, be headlines for a day or two, but it would have no effect on how the British people view the Police; especially considering a proportion of the population have a very low opinion of them to start with.

I think you have a skewed view of how the British are, and behave, which has nothing to do with your theory on the killer of course.

On the whole we do not hold these institutions like The Police or the Judiciary in the high position you feel we do.
I do not mean this to be derogatory in any way way, but your view of the British towards the Police, and authority in general seems very much like that displayed in the film "The Blue Lamp" where all police and authorities were portrayed as being respected even by the criminal classes, it is fiction.


I really fail to see this great disappointment you see, did you not once use terms like "angry" and "upset" as well to describe what you think will be the public response?

I may well be wrong on the actual words you used, and am posting from memory, so forgive me if those are not exact, but those are the feelings you feel will be expressed by many are they not?

Can I just ask what you base this on?

cheers

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #509  
Old 08-27-2016, 01:39 PM
MysterySinger MysterySinger is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 422
Default

There would be outrage that he had the audacity to wear a peaked cap in public and to shout "Lipski" at a passer by.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #510  
Old 08-27-2016, 01:48 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 4,407
Default

[quote=Elamarna;391154][quote=Pierre;391153]

Quote:
Pierre

You are so wrong in your view of the reaction there would be today.

Lets look at your first point about Prince Albert, I assume you mean prince Albert Victor, given Albert had been dead some years at that point.

The Monarchy was unpopular at that time, there had been riots the year before in London.
Yes in 1888, it may have been a problem.
However I am convinced he would not have been allowed to carry on. He would have been stopped, and yes it would have been covered up.

However not so in 2016.
Now it would mean very little, society has changed.
No families of those involved would be forced to resign, although of course they may feel bad themselves and be ashamed of their ancestors who were involved, but that would only affect the immediate family.
OK. I will remember what you say and I hope you are right about that.

Quote:
Why do you say "blame people for being the Whitechapel killer"

Do you mean accuse? If so I agree.

However one does not blame someone for being the killer.
That was funny! Of course I meant "accuse".

Quote:
And finally on to the Police.

It would if proven to be true, be headlines for a day or two, but it would have no effect on how the British people view the Police; especially considering a proportion of the population have a very low opinion of them to start with.

I think you have a skewed view of how the British are, and behave, which has nothing to do with your theory on the killer of course.
We will see.

Quote:
On the whole we do not hold these institutions like The Police or the Judiciary in the high position you feel we do.

I do not mean this to be derogatory in any way way, but your view of the British towards the Police, and authority in general seems very much like that displayed in the film "The Blue Lamp" where all police and authorities were portrayed as being respected even by the criminal classes, it is fiction.

I really fail to see this great disappointment you see, did you not once use terms like "angry" and "upset" as well to describe what you think will be the public response?

I may well be wrong on the actual words you used, and am posting from memory, so forgive me if those are not exact, but those are the feelings you feel will be expressed by many are they not?

Can I just ask what you base this on?

cheers

Steve
The protection of the killer. Not stopping him in 1889.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.