Note in Bible

[Peter F Young]

Peter, Stephen Knight's book is full of errors and based on Joseph Gorman Sickert's alleged recollections and family history, which has been demolished as it does not tie in with the known facts.

Gull's alleged involvement in the series of murders is the stuff of ripper fantasy, See,
Alan Moore's From Hell!

Agree completely Mike, Rumbelow shot it down in flames too...

[Peter F Young]

Does anyone else think the facial similarities of most of the canonical victims is uncanny?

[miss marple]

They all had eyes, noses and mouths, but apart from that they don't resemble each other.
Eddows had a low forehead, deepset eyes small chin.All had different hair.
Stride had beautiful garboesque bone structure with a wide mouth. Kelly apparently had a strong jawline. Chapman looked rather plain, from her living photo and small featured. Its difficult to get an accurate picture of Nichols.
As an artist I can't see any likeness.
Miss Marple

[Peter F Young]

I was thinking more of the mortuary photos in the various books available.
Regards,
Peter.

[Chris]

I was thinking more of the mortuary photos in the various books available.

Fair enough: in the mortuary photographs, they all look dead.

[Peter F Young]

It's the way you tell 'em...

[miss marple]

Even in the mortuary photos they don't look similar, Chapman, Stride and Eddowes have completely different face structures,
Miss M

[Chris]

Seriously, if you're looking for a comment on the scan you posted, the obvious comment is that - as you seem to know already - the royal conspiracy theory has been thoroughly discredited, so people are going to be very sceptical of anything involving "Netley".

On the handwriting, I can only say that it looks nothing like any Victorian handwriting I've ever seen. It could be compared to the signature of Sarah Ixer on her marriage certificate, of course (that's if she could write).

And, of course, everyone is aware that this site has been the target of many Ripper-related hoaxes and leg-pulls over the years ...

[Peter F Young]

Seriously, if you're looking for a comment on the scan you posted, the obvious comment is that - as you seem to know already - the royal conspiracy theory has been thoroughly discredited, so people are going to be very sceptical of anything involving "Netley".

Very sceptical myself Chris, was wondering if it was written in the 80's by my Mother, the previous guardian of the bible, as a merry jape.

On the handwriting, I can only say that it looks nothing like any Victorian handwriting I've ever seen. It could be compared to the signature of Sarah Ixer on her marriage certificate, of course (that's if she could write).
Probably could, she was descended from Belgian lace-makers & was supposedly a fine needlewoman & dressmaker (euphemism for lady of easy virtue?)

And, of course, everyone is aware that this site has been the target of many Ripper-related hoaxes and leg-pulls over the years ...

I have only just returned from a break since 2003 but a couple of days reading up and nothing much has changed, usual suspects still at each others throats, glad to see we still have a few aficionados with a sense of humour.
Best Regards,
Peter.

[miss marple]

I must say I agree with Chris about the handwriting. I seen many Victorian diaries and keepsake books, and the letters are not formed the way the Victorians were taught to write. Its not a copperplate hand and I quite easily copied the writing in the note, the swirls are formed to give the impression of an antique hand but does not convince.
Miss Marple

[Sam Flynn]

Its not a copperplate hand and I quite easily copied the writing in the note, the swirls are formed to give the impression of an antique hand...

... some of the characters have been "gone-over" multiple times, particularly the "D" in "Dear" and in the signature, "Sarah" - where, indeed, the lettering is made up of several detached strokes and swirls. This suggests that whoever wrote it was not using their natural, fluid, handwriting, but "constructing" the words in a rather stilted manner.

[jmenges]

Finally.

I can't believe it took three pages for someone to mention the going-over of the script. Maybe the 'Netley' was bad enough.

JM

[Chris]

I can't believe it took three pages for someone to mention the going-over of the script. Maybe the 'Netley' was bad enough.

It can only be because of the scrupulous politeness and tolerance for which Ripperologists are famous.

[mariag]

Indeed.

I know that I for one was scrupulously careful to click out the moment I saw the name "Netley" and leave the rest to my more patient colleagues.

[Suzi]

I think we're being 'remarkably' patient don't you.......