Originally posted by Bridewell
View Post
How do you expect anyone to prove that any specific person today is keeping their knowledge of the case secret? Do you expect that information to be written down somewhere? Hence no reputations can be risk can there.
It doesn't mean that there are not people today who don't know the real details of this case.
2. "In order for your theory (that the Millers Court victim was not MJK?) to have validity there would need to have been a substitute victim killed in her place. To what end and who was she?
The idea that someone else was killed deliberately instead of MJK is exactly what I have said. I have no idea who the victim was, but I'm sure it wasn't Kelly.
I believe the majority of the police on the ground, like Abbeline, were genuinely looking for JTR with honesty and with integrity. If there was a conspiracy to keep Jack from the hangman's noose, then that inevitably means that key top met police (eg Warren, Anderson, Swanson) were part of the cover up.
I believe JTR was arrested post the double event and at that point was known to his potential protectors in the top end of the Met. This is the real reason that Packer was ignored by the police and his timings put back by A.C.B. To protect Jack, the Met bosses discredited Packer as they didn't want Packer's description of JTR to be matched by the police on the ground (eg Abbeline) to the description of the arrested JTR.
3 people, Packer, Schwartz, and Hutchinson were at the very epicenters of their respective murders but none were called to the inquests. Coincidence? Also two of them (Packer and Hutchinson) both independently claimed they were ignored by the police. Coincidence? Were they both lying? If so, why?
JTR and Astrakhan arranged the murder of the substitute and the relocation of Kelly because there was a connection between Astrakhan and Kelly. Murdering Kelly was more a risk to JTR and Astrakhan than trying to relocate her because they feared this connection would be discovered by the police on the ground and their involvement with the previous murders discovered, as well
as the motivation for the murders.
What did Astrakahn mean when he said to Kelly (paraphrasing from memory) that "you'll be alright for what I have told you". Did such a well-dressed gentlemen need to persuade Kelly he's good for the cash for a supposed sexual encounter, or was he reassuring her about her relocation?
4. "I'm not going to be persuaded to an alternative viewpoint by nebulous speculation about "the authorities" and a supposed conspiracy. If you have evidence that MJK was not the victim then please publish it because I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one interested in reading it."
I'm not trying to persuade anybody about anything. I just give my honestly held views on the case based on my research since 2016 into my candidates for JTR, Astrakhan, and Kelly.
I'm glad to see you will be interested in reading my book.
Comment