FBI pulls the plug on Colin Wilson

[YankeeSergeant]

Stab wounds

With all due respect Gentlemen, it seems to me, counterproductive to argue about definitions. It has reached a point where neither of you will admit the other has a point. That is acceptable but I do believe the inflammitory rhetoric can be dialed back.
To return to the discussion at hand, Mr. Wilson writes an interesting book but itis best not to take all of his suppositions at face value. PLAy nice or Father Christmas won't visit.

[Natalie Severn]

This is not the place for gay declarations of love. There must be a homosexual forum somewhere for you to go to.

Into homophobia are you, Ash?

[Ashkenaz]

Into homophobia are you, Ash?

Not at all Nat. But we are doing ripperology in this forum. Thats what it says on the tin.

[Ashkenaz]

With all due respect Gentlemen, it seems to me, counterproductive to argue about definitions. It has reached a point where neither of you will admit the other has a point. That is acceptable but I do believe the inflammitory rhetoric can be dialed back.
To return to the discussion at hand, Mr. Wilson writes an interesting book but itis best not to take all of his suppositions at face value. PLAy nice or Father Christmas won't visit.

I'm as bored of it as you are YS.

But if he wants to argue that the groin is not in the genital area, or that two could not be described as a few, or that several is not a few when it says so in a dictionary, then I for one must disagree with the guy. Shockingly, he claims to be a graduate !

[Sam Flynn]

I'm as bored of it as you are YS.

But if he wants to argue that the groin is not in the genital area, or that two could not be described as a few, or that several is not a few when it says so in a dictionary, then I for one must disagree with the guy.

"The guy" is correct - one stab wound is NOT "several", and you are completely wrong in asserting that "the groin" = "the vagina".

Shockingly, he claims to be a graduate !

..."he" is, and what's more it doesn't take a degree to realise that you are (a) wrong; and (b) distorting and/or ignoring the simple facts of this matter.

ONE stab-wound. To the GROIN.

NOT "several" to the "vagina".

[Cap'n Jack]

The groin in 1888:

ROBERT ANNESLEY, Breaking Peace > wounding, 27th February 1888.


Reference Number: t18880227-348
Offence: Breaking Peace > wounding
Verdict: Guilty > lesser offence
Punishment: Imprisonment > no_subcategory
User Wiki: Corrections; Add Information
See original
348. ROBERT ANNESLEY (45) , Feloniously wounding George Taylor, with intent to do him grievous bodily harm.

MR. BROXHOLME Prosecuted.

THOMAS BENNELL . I am a parcels carrier at the General Post Office—on the night of 6th February I was in the King's Head public-house, Upper Thames Street, and saw the prisoner there and some other men—they annoyed the prisoner very greatly, and took his winkles and fish away from him—the prisoner pulled an open knife out of his breast pocket and rushed at one of the men, who threw the contents of a pot which he had in his hand into the* prisoner's face—that stopped him, and he then turned round towards Taylor, who was behind him, and made a cut at him in the same manner—that was the first time I had noticed Taylor; he had not joined in this chaffing—he hit Taylor, and then he turned round on me, but I knocked his arm down.

JOHN STEWART (City Policeman 681) Taylor called me, and I took the prisoner outside the public-house—I said the man charged him with running a knife into him; he made no answer—at the station I found this knife (produced) upon him—he was not drunk, and the prosecutor was sober.

GEORGE TAYLOR . I am a porter, and live at 4, Albion Street, Deptford—about 6-30 p.m. I went into the King's Head public-house to get some refreshment, and saw the prisoner there and some other men—they seemed to be larking with the prisoner, and I thought he seemed to be larking back—I did not join in it or speak to any of them—I shifted away from them four or five yards, and was leaning on the bar when suddenly I felt a blow, but did not know I was stabbed—some one then,. said that he had a knife in his hand, and I undid my clothes, and found I was stabbed in the groin—the knife had gone through my great coat and all my clothes and through a large belt—I went to St. Bartholemew's Hospital and remained there two days.

EDWARD MANSELL SIMPSON . I am house surgeon at St. Bartholomew's Hospital—on 6th February the prosecutor came there, suffering from a small incised wound on the right lower part of the abdomen, about half an inch long—it was in a dangerous position—this knife would be likely to cause such a wound—he stopped two days and then was discharged—he is out of danger now

See original
Prisoner's Defence. I had a knife in my hand; it was a mere accident not with any intention.

GUILTY of unlawfully wounding under great provocation. — Three Days' Imprisonment.

[Ashkenaz]

one stab wound is NOT "several", and you are completely wrong in asserting that "the groin" = "the vagina"...."he" is, and what's more it doesn't take a degree to realise that you are (a) wrong; and (b) distorting and/or ignoring the simple facts of this matter.".

No, but two stab wounds / knife wounds are several. When I re-read that there was one stab injury, and another blade injury that might have been a stab/slash/hack, I modified what I had said to avoid further confusion. From that point on [post50] I referred to several knife wounds.

Got it now mr.graduate ? You dont have to keep flogging your dead horse. I have been referring to several knife wounds since then. That is what I'm saying.

Once again you misquote me. I did not assert as you say I did,that the groin = the vagina. Listen carefully, this is what I said - the groin is in the vaginal area. Anyone would agree with that.

Me distorting facts of the matter ? That really is too funny from someone who has misquoted/distorted what I have said on more than one occasion.

[Ashkenaz]

you are completely wrong in asserting that "the groin" = "the vagina.
.

When have I ever said that ? Produce a link, go on. You can't because you are deliberately being dishonest. I have never said that.

The groin certainly does not equal the vagina. One is part of the female reproductive system, and the other is not.

[Cap'n Jack]

In post 44 you turned a groin into a vagina, Ash.
I would suggest a long period in bed with some sort of Santa Claus on your head, no worries, with your knowledge of anatomy you'll be able to breathe out of your arse.

[dmcdonald@onwight.net]

Well I was interested in reading this thread due to the Colin Wilson link but all I have seen is a very heated and fairly trivial row over definitioins that are really not that important in the great scheme of all things ripper.

Anyway for what it is worth, I have met and had dinner with Colin Wilson and his lovely wife of many many years. They live in the depths of Cornwall and like to be on their own away from the media.

I did not find him one bit inappropriate nor narrow minded. He was very interested in my work on J K Stephen and offered to read it as I told him I had problems finding a publisher. He did so and gave a (very little) advice but told me he thought it was good and I should plug on and find a publisher. I finally did so and he kindly wrote the foreword.

This was very neutral despite the fact that my book is nothing to do with the diary or Maybrick which I have since learned he has embraced. He did not seem at all wierd or anything else that has been bandied about on this message board.

I have recently read his book, 'The Angry Years' and can recommend it. It recreates the 1950s and his life then. It is a very interesting and compelling read.

Lets not make the forum a slanging match. Not much point really is there? It gets us nowhere.

Regards

Deborah McDonald

[Sam Flynn]

Debs,

It is surely important that we stick to the facts of this case. It's full to bursting with hoary old chestnuts already, without our introducing more myths, and slackening the rules of standard English in order to accommodate them.

I dislike slanging matches as much as the next person, but why should anyone have to face contrariness and scorn when all they're doing is pointing out the facts?

[Roy Corduroy]

Lets not make the forum a slanging match. Not much point really is there? It gets us nowhere.

Hi Deborah,

I couldn't agree with you more.

I made mention of Mr. Wilson going for Maybrick not to denigrate him in any way, simply to point it out. It caught me off gaurd, coming at the tail end of the chapter he wrote which was actually one of the high points of the compilation by Jakubrowski and Braund. In very enjoyable style, Colin Wilson told of his years as a sounding board for many others in Ripperdom. Doing just what he did with you, hearing out your ideas, giving encouragement.

Congratulations again on getting your book published, Deborah,

Roy

[Ashkenaz]

In post 44 you turned a groin into a vagina, Ash.
I would suggest a long period in bed with some sort of Santa Claus on your head, no worries, with your knowledge of anatomy you'll be able to breathe out of your arse.

You clearly have not read post44

[Magpie]

Once again you misquote me. I did not assert as you say I did,that the groin = the vagina. Listen carefully, this is what I said - the groin is in the vaginal area. Anyone would agree with that.

I'm sorry, but this is an disingenuous argument for two reasons.

1) Every time that Sam has pointed out that the groin encompasses an area much larger than the vagina, you have countered by replacing "groin" with "vaginal area". While you have not explicitly said that groin=vagina, you have repeatedly equated injuries to the groin with injuries to the vagina.

2) Your initial proposition was that the injuries caused by the Ripper were sexual in nature because they were directed at the vagina. Although you've since acknowledged that the wounds were not directed at the the specific orafice (vagina), your intitial proposition has not changed--so while semantically you are now saying "groin", substantively you are still saying "vagina".

Next, a word on "several"


addendum: rather than "the groin is in the vaginal area", it would be far more accurate to say "The vagina is in the groinal area".

[Magpie]

The hairsplitting argument over the meaning of "several" is pretty much pointless in the context of the overall argument.

The original assertion was that the Ripper "targeted" the sexual organs, and that the wounds being debated were evidence of this. Clearly they are not.

Pointing out two (whether you consider that "several" or not) injuries in the appoximate region of the vagina doesn't remotely equate to "focussing" on the sexual organs. It's even less significant when placed in the context of the total number of wounds.

If Eddowes had been stabbed once in the heart and twice in the vagina, you could possibly have a case. If the only wound other than the slit throat were the groinal/vaginal/genital ones, you might have a point. But two wounds amongst all the carnage? Hardly a blip.

To put it in perspective, Eddowes suffered a greater number of knife wounds to her face than to her vagina.