If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Why have I never come across this before then? Is there a contemporary source?
Nicole
---------------------------------------------------
"We serial killers are your sons, we are your husbands, we are everywhere. And there will be more of your children dead tomorrow."
- Ted Bundy
You haven't read all the sources I have or (for shame!) all of my posts on the subject. And yes, it's mentioned in the papers. Right here on the Casebook's own press reports section. I can't recall if this detail appears in a book, but if it does, it would be in Begg's The Facts.
Thanks, I'll check it out! (The Stars' editors must've been delighted with this free advertisement!!)
Nicole
---------------------------------------------------
"We serial killers are your sons, we are your husbands, we are everywhere. And there will be more of your children dead tomorrow."
- Ted Bundy
So the assumption is that the killer was lower-class, and resident in a common lodging house, where they wouldn't have stretched to The Times.
That is some assumption.
I'd like to hear the evidence for such a wide-sweeping assumption.
Perhaps the killer was middle-class, subscribed to The Lancet, and even wrote letters to that publication, as well as The Times.
Whatcha Cap"n! thats interesting about The Lancet.I didnt know he wrote to the Lancet as well....!And I agree---why assume the ripper was working class?
I'd like to hear the evidence for such a wide-sweeping assumption.
Likelihoods, AP, rather than evidence. Statistically speaking, one would expect Jack not to have been an habitual Times reader, because there were comparatively few of them around, against vastly more who read the Star (for example), and others still who subscribed to no newspapers at all.
Natalie, yes he did.
Sam, I'd like to know the statistics for the nephew of a senior police officer at Scotland Yard who often advertised in The Times, lost gold watches and the like, in 1888, and that his nephew would not have come across The Times in 1888 when his uncle was advertising in the paper?
I'd say it was on the desk.
However Sam,the one suspect who caused the greatest stir in a National newspaper ,which took the unprecedented step of naming him [virtually] as "Jack the Ripper " was Thomas Cutbush .This immediately had Commissioner Macnaghten rushing to deny it a week later [in 1894] ---presumably because Cutbush was related to a Scotland Yard, "Chief of Police",ie Chief Supt. Charles Cutbush . And Thomas Cutbush was very middle class indeed.He was also known to have carried a vicious looking Bowie knife,bought in the Minories, used to carry out his later Kennington street stabbings,in 1891.Very middle class and very dangerous to be at large. Placement in the loony bin in March 1891 when Ripper files were closed.
Sam, I'd like to know the statistics for the nephew of a senior police officer at Scotland Yard who often advertised in The Times, lost gold watches and the like, in 1888, and that his nephew would not have come across The Times in 1888 when his uncle was advertising in the paper?
I'm not sure I understand the question, AP, but whatever it is, I'm sure I'd like to know the answer too.
I personally don't think the Ripper lived in a lodging house and have no problems with him reading the Times. I think he read whatever he could about the murders, particularly the inquests, and the Times had better inquest coverage than most of the cheap rags.
Thomas Cutbush was very middle class indeed.He was also known to have carried a vicious looking Bowie knife,bought in the Minories, used to carry out his later Kennington street stabbings,in 1891.Very middle class and very dangerous to be at large. Placement in the loony bin in March 1891.
Indeed, Nats - but proportionately how many more dangerous men were there, who lived or worked in that area who belonged to the tabloid or non-newspaper-reading "classes"?
Comment