New claims Jack the Ripper was noted poet who studied as a priest in the North East

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi, I know absolutely nothing about Thompson except for Hounds of Heaven. I just read Richard s book and felt that he seemed to have more going for him as a suspect than most. After I've read the Walsh biography I'm may not feel the same. But just for trying to keep an open mind, whilst admitting my lack of Thompson knowledge it seems that to some people that I'm a gullible idiot and they respond to points by adding 'duh' on the end. I like debate but I've never insulted anyone. At the very least, I can say that I actually read the book first. I joined the site for debate and discussion but it appears that my moderate views are blasphemous. Perhaps I should just stay silent.
Regards
HS

[Pcdunn]

I don't think comments have been too bad so far, Herlock, nor do I think you need to resort to keeping your thoughts to yourself. Casebook has a lot of members, but a relatively small group of regular active participants, many of whom know each other and have long-running debates. It isn't uncommon for newer members to feel out of their depth and ignored-- I've only been here since late 2014, myself, and often am ignored.

I think there have been so many "suspect books" (and, lately, films or TV programs) that the hard core Ripperologist community is primed to be stubborn about accepting the latest one.
Some members have their own suspect. Others don't know, but are skeptics about historical people being named, sometimes on flimsy evidence or imaginative conjecture.

Don't give up on the forums yet, Herlock!

[Herlock Sholmes]

I don't think comments have been too bad so far, Herlock, nor do I think you need to resort to keeping your thoughts to yourself. Casebook has a lot of members, but a relatively small group of regular active participants, many of whom know each other and have long-running debates. It isn't uncommon for newer members to feel out of their depth and ignored-- I've only been here since late 2014, myself, and often am ignored.

I think there have been so many "suspect books" (and, lately, films or TV programs) that the hard core Ripperologist community is primed to be stubborn about accepting the latest one.
Some members have their own suspect. Others don't know, but are skeptics about historical people being named, sometimes on flimsy evidence or imaginative conjecture.

Don't give up on the forums yet, Herlock!

Hi Pat

To be honest I may have partially mixed comments on here with ones made on the JTR Forum but it can be a but frustrating. If you read a book on a suspect and then make an assessment then that's what you're doing; assessing the suspect as he appears in that book, especially if you have no prior knowledge of the suspect(although I recall him being mentioned years ago. For eg I'm sure that everyone that read Richard Wallace's book on Dodgson didn't go out and read every Dodgson biography as background. Others on here and on the forum appear to have read Thompson biographies before and so have a yardstick that I don't have. If I got a bit defensive, and I probably did, it may be because I recall when the diary came out in '91, think. Many were immediately screaming 'forgery,' and 'amateurish fake,' many of them probably before they'd read the thing. And I always felt that some allowed personal bias to take over.

My copy of the Walsh biography came today so I can form a clearer opinion. After 30 years of being interested in the subject entering the world of technology can be tricky.

All the best
HS