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:
General Suspect Discussion: Could this be James Thomas Sadler ? - by PaulWilliams 3 hours ago.
General Discussion: The Double Event - by Fisherman 4 hours ago.
General Discussion: The Double Event - by Elamarna 5 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Could this be James Thomas Sadler ? - by Joolz 5 hours ago.
General Discussion: The Double Event - by Fisherman 5 hours ago.
General Discussion: The Double Event - by John G 5 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Mary Ann Nichols: Polly's Wounds: What were they like? - (17 posts)
General Discussion: The Double Event - (11 posts)
Witnesses: Robert Paul Time Issues - (6 posts)
Dear Boss Letter: Thomas Bulling-CNA - (2 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Could this be James Thomas Sadler ? - (2 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: Jack the Ripper East End Conference 2017: London - (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 > Letters and Communications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-01-2016, 10:35 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
*
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,498
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
David, agreed they did not publish until 1 October, as I understand it because they at first considered it no different to the many other hundreds of letters received.
it was probably known about within parts of the news industry, and indeed is believed by many to have been produced by a journalist in the first place.

It adds upp well. The journalists got the authentic letter on the 29th. The murders were performed on the 30th just as he said. After the murders the journalists understood that the letter was authentic and published the Dear Boss letter, giving it a false date, on the 1st (if that is a fact). Why should we think that a hoax letter could have a "correct date"? The whole letter including the date is false, Steve.

So even if the other letter was written 29th September 1888, which as you say is open to debate, there is no reason why the name used in the Dear Boss letter would not be known by quite a few persons.

Naturally the name became known when they read the letter from the 29th. And the whole nation got the name soon after.

So why didnīt they publish the real letter? I would say because it would make the police look incredibly stupid.


It was a warning, giving the right day, location and time. "Beware" he says! And they did not understand it. And therefore they could not print this in the papers!

Yes, this son of a x was really outsmarting the police!

But are we not able to outsmart the killer after 127 years? That is the question.

steve
Regards Pierre

Last edited by Pierre : 01-01-2016 at 10:40 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-01-2016, 10:46 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
So why didnīt they publish the real letter?
Why didn't who publish it? Who was it addressed to?

Should be easy for Pierre to establish. The address will be right beneath the postmark.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-01-2016, 10:52 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: north london
Posts: 2,216
Default

Pierre

you really make me laugh at time with the refusal to accept any logic other than your own


"The Dear Boss letter is a fraud. And thinking about the Dear Boss letter, the author must have gotten the concept "Jack the Ripper" from the letter dated the 29th."


While many would agree that the Dear boss letter was not written by the killer, this is not what you mean is it?

you are suggesting that it was faked at a later are you not?

I
If so what evidence do you have to support your statement?

The letter is dated 25th
The envelope was postmarked 27th, it was passed to Chief Constable Williamson at Scotland Yard 2 days later.

What evidence do you have to suggest this is wrong?

"So the suggestion is better than I first thought. It even explains the Dear Boss letter. And since the Dear Boss letter was first published in October, after the double event, the author(s) of it must have read the letter dated the 29th and understood that it was written by the killer since it preceded the double event."

Now given that you say we must look at the evidence:

There is no proof of posting for the letter you mention,
There is no record of publication before the date of the Dear boss letter.
is it not true that there no physical evidence for the existence of this letter other than it being mention in a book 39 years later?


Therefore where do you get the evidence to make this rather novel suggestion?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-01-2016, 11:05 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: north london
Posts: 2,216
Default

Pierre


"It adds upp well. The journalists got the authentic letter on the 29th. The murders were performed on the 30th just as he said. After the murders the journalists understood that the letter was authentic and published the Dear Boss letter, giving it a false date, on the 1st (if that is a fact). Why should we think that a hoax letter could have a "correct date"? The whole letter including the date is false, Steve. "


Proof of any of this please?

Name of journalist it was sent to?

Postmark of letter?


Your statement looks like a personal opinion, where is the scientific proof?
I ask you again do you have ANY evidence to back up this suggestion?

"So why didnīt they publish the real letter? I would say because it would make the police look incredibly stupid."

Your view it is real and the dear boss letter is fake are the very thing you say we all do.
Quoting you own view is not proof of anything?


you really are not very well equipped for serious debate are you, if this is all you can offer.

opinions must be backed by evidence!

Last edited by Elamarna : 01-01-2016 at 11:08 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-01-2016, 11:18 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
*
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,498
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Pierre

you really make me laugh at time with the refusal to accept any logic other than your own


"The Dear Boss letter is a fraud. And thinking about the Dear Boss letter, the author must have gotten the concept "Jack the Ripper" from the letter dated the 29th."

While many would agree that the Dear boss letter was not written by the killer, this is not what you mean is it?

Havenīt you read my post at all? The Dear Boss letter is a hoax.


you are suggesting that it was faked at a later are you not?


The letter from the 29th is authentic. The journalists wrote the Dear Boss letter after that letter.

1
If so what evidence do you have to support your statement?

The evidence is this: There is no chance that the journalists could have invented the name "Jack the Ripper" since there was a letter with this name before the Dear Boss letter.

The letter is dated 25th
The envelope was postmarked 27th, it was passed to Chief Constable Williamson at Scotland Yard 2 days later.

You are now talking about "the letter" - I presume you mean the Dear Boss letter? It was a hoax. So the dates are also false.


What evidence do you have to suggest this is wrong?

That WHAT is wrong? That the Dear Boss letter is a hoax?

"So the suggestion is better than I first thought. It even explains the Dear Boss letter. And since the Dear Boss letter was first published in October, after the double event, the author(s) of it must have read the letter dated the 29th and understood that it was written by the killer since it preceded the double event."

Now given that you say we must look at the evidence:

There is no proof of posting for the letter you mention,
There is no record of publication before the date of the Dear boss letter.

Naturally. The letter from the killer was written on the 29th. The police only had ONE day to read it, interpret it correctly and take action. And they couldnīt. And therefore they did not understand the meaning of the letter until after the double event. But then it was too late.

is it not true that there no physical evidence for the existence of this letter other than it being mention in a book 39 years later?

Steve, you can always discuss the provenance of historical sources. But is there any explicit reason to believe that the date of 29th September 1888 is wrong given the fact that the Dear Boss letter, which was published in the newspapers, had the name Jack the Ripper just two days after the date of the first letter?

Therefore where do you get the evidence to make this rather novel suggestion?

As stated above.
Regards, Pierre

Last edited by Pierre : 01-01-2016 at 11:20 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-01-2016, 11:29 AM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,090
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
is there any explicit reason to believe that the date of 29th September 1888 is wrong given the fact that the Dear Boss letter, which was published in the newspapers, had the name Jack the Ripper just two days after the date of the first letter?
As I've said, the only date on the letter itself when it was first published by J. Hall Richardson in 1927 was "29th inst". No month, no year. Just "29th inst". No reason to think that it was 29th September let alone 29th September 1888.

It was not until over 70 years after the murders, in 1959, that Donald McCormack claimed that the letter was dated "29th September [1888]", but his source appears to have been J. Hall Richardson's book so he was in no position to know this.

I'm guessing that Pierre, having read an article saying that the letter was dated 29 September 1888, is now programmed on a course from which nothing will ever divert him. He will simply be unable to accept any other possible date for this letter.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-01-2016, 12:22 PM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: north london
Posts: 2,216
Default

Pierre

you have not answered, continuing to say it is a hoax is not proof that the other letter is authentic!

Many could give you a name for the writer of "dear boss", but few apart from you would argue that envelope and letter were produced after another letter of even less provenance.



"The evidence is this: There is no chance that the journalists could have invented the name "Jack the Ripper" since there was a letter with this name before the Dear Boss letter".

please listen carefully, that is not evidence it is a circular argument, do you understand what that means.



You say that the letter of the 29 is genuine and from the killer.

What evidence do you offer to support this?

You argue that journalist could not have come up with "Jack the Ripper" since the name was already in existence.

What evidence,other than your opinion can you offer for this view?
you cannot argue they copied it from 29th , that is a circular argument.
you have no proof of when that letter arrived, if it arrived or where it arrived.


You claim "Dear Boss" was written after 29th September letter!



However this originally said 29th inst and was altered by McCormick to read 29th September.

What actually proof do you have of this that it was written before "Dear Boss"?


"Steve, you can always discuss the provenance of historical sources. But is there any explicit reason to believe that the date of 29th September 1888 is wrong given the fact that the Dear Boss letter, which was published in the newspapers, had the name Jack the Ripper just two days after the date of the first letter?"


Pierre you are always saying we must use science to evaluate data, however now you want to question science when you cannot make it say what you want.

You sarcastically said "Havenīt you read my post at all? " funny really given you have not really read mine.

1.There is no documentary proof for a letter dated 29th September 1888, it originally said 29th inst

2. 29th is the supposed date of writing, not posting or of receipt

3. There is no envelope for the letter known, therefore it does not have a postmark.

"Dear Boss" both letter and envelope still exist! unlike 29th September letter.


4. There is no reference of the 29th Letter until 39 years later.



if you can refute those 4 points, then we can debate.

otherwise it is just PERSONAL OPINION if not a flight of fancy.

Last edited by Elamarna : 01-01-2016 at 12:25 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-01-2016, 02:54 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
*
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,498
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Pierre

you have not answered, continuing to say it is a hoax is not proof that the other letter is authentic!

Well, then I have a question for you, Steve: Has anyone proved that the other letter is not authentic?

Many could give you a name for the writer of "dear boss", but few apart from you would argue that envelope and letter were produced after another letter of even less provenance.

And as you would say: Those who do not argue this only have their own personal opinion.

"The evidence is this: There is no chance that the journalists could have invented the name "Jack the Ripper" since there was a letter with this name before the Dear Boss letter".

please listen carefully, that is not evidence it is a circular argument, do you understand what that means.

Please listen carefully Steve. There are only two possibilities: either the letter dated the 29th 1888 is written before the Dear Boss letter or it is not. This is the basis for the chance of this letter preceding the Dear Boss letter, so a circle is not the basis, but two categories: YES / NO.

And it canīt very well be both - or can it?



You say that the letter of the 29 is genuine and from the killer.
What evidence do you offer to support this?

The author of this letter is using a metaphorical language and claims to know that two women will be killed in the Minories the day after the letter was written. And he is warning the police.

You argue that journalist could not have come up with "Jack the Ripper" since the name was already in existence.

What evidence,other than your opinion can you offer for this view?
you cannot argue they copied it from 29th , that is a circular argument.

No, you are arguing in circles, Steve. You just said the same thing above. And I answered it.

you have no proof of when that letter arrived, if it arrived or where it arrived.

The provenance is often a problem. But this doesnīt mean that the source is worthless, Steve. You have to consider different sources together with others.

You claim "Dear Boss" was written after 29th September letter!

Sure. It must have been, given that it is a hoax.

However this originally said 29th inst and was altered by McCormick to read 29th September.

Was it? How do you know this? Or is it only a personal opinion?

What actually proof do you have of this that it was written before "Dear Boss"?


Now you are being circular again. So: What actual proof do you have that the Dear Boss letter was written before the other letter?


"Steve, you can always discuss the provenance of historical sources. But is there any explicit reason to believe that the date of 29th September 1888 is wrong given the fact that the Dear Boss letter, which was published in the newspapers, had the name Jack the Ripper just two days after the date of the first letter?"

Pierre you are always saying we must use science to evaluate data, however now you want to question science when you cannot make it say what you want.

Naturally. And I donīt build my knowledge of the killerīs ID on this letter as you understand. But taken together with other sources I think it is very interesting.

You sarcastically said "Havenīt you read my post at all? " funny really given you have not really read mine.

1.There is no documentary proof for a letter dated 29th September 1888, it originally said 29th inst

Well, have you got proof or is this just a personal opinion?

2. 29th is the supposed date of writing, not posting or of receipt

3. There is no envelope for the letter known, therefore it does not have a postmark.

"Dear Boss" both letter and envelope still exist! unlike 29th September letter.

An existing hoax. With false contents. With false dates! How very valuable!

4. There is no reference of the 29th Letter until 39 years later.

Here one could draw a circle...

if you can refute those 4 points, then we can debate.

If you can refute my answers, then we can debate.

otherwise it is just PERSONAL OPINION if not a flight of fancy.

Or otherwise it is just PERSONAL OPINION if not an eternal circle.
Regards, Pierre

Last edited by Pierre : 01-01-2016 at 03:02 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-01-2016, 02:59 PM
David Orsam David Orsam is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,090
Default

Has Pierre now taken to writing his posts in metaphorical language? I can't understand a word of it.
__________________
Orsam Books
www.orsam.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-01-2016, 03:10 PM
Pierre Pierre is offline
*
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,498
Default A question for Steve

Hi again,

Steve, do you know if there was any other letter(s) from the killer sent to the police or the newspapers before the double event?

Any letter at all?

I am asking you since I know you have a lot of knowledge about the murders.

If you donīt know, maybe there is someone else who does.

Regards Pierre
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 05:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.