Annie Crook

[Krinoid]

[QUOTE=The Grave Maurice;148134]OK, I should, and do, apologize. Of course, everyone here is entitled to his or her opinion. I was too dismissive. It's just that some of us were talking about the Royal Conspiracy theory in the early '70s. We continued to do so until about the mid-80s. It died because of a complete lack of evidentiary support. Virtually every book on JtR, for the next ten years or so, contained a detailed refutation of the theory. It concerns me that some new members know so little of the literature.
What makes you think I and others have not read the recent books???? I quoted several time from Begg- JTR Facts book in the postings above,isn't that considered one of the best reference books? And before you jump in, I have many more books than just that one. And the Glinert books are "recent" books even 2009, that suggest the ideas also mentioned above. Doubts are starting to cross people's minds again becasue of the anomilies in this case like no other in history. I did not say it had to be the "royal " conspiracy but I believe there was one of a kind of conpiracy politically and also something masonic/knowledge of london sites going on.

[Krinoid]

If you feel strongly the women were killed elsewhere - why do you think the conspiritors took such as risk as to dispose of the bodies in busy streets rather than dumping them in the Thames?
see my thread on Ed Glinert's book for theories on why

[The Grave Maurice]

OK, I should, and do, apologize. Of course, everyone here is entitled to his or her opinion. I was too dismissive. It's just that some of us were talking about the Royal Conspiracy theory in the early '70s. We continued to do so until about the mid-80s. It died because of a complete lack of evidentiary support. Virtually every book on JtR, for the next ten years or so, contained a detailed refutation of the theory. It concerns me that some new members know so little of the literature. But, as I say, you are free to believe what you want. However, don't expect those of us who went down that road, and found it to be a dead-end, to encourage you.

[Limehouse]

No, that was only the Miller's court that quote applied to that region, not the others, so no it doesn't answer my question but it's nice looking for a quick inaccurate fix rather than thinking about it.

This was an area where people came and went at all hours. There was a constant stream of workers walking to and from the markets and slaughter houses because they opened from about 3am. People went out to buy supper after midnight. People had a 'totty' in the pub on the corner at 5am. There was potentially a lot of noise in many of the streets so it would not be unsual for people to accept this as normal and blank it out. You yourself wrote that people heard a cry of 'murder' and ignored it because it was normal for this area. That might explain why people didn't 'hear' things that they didn't expect ot hear.

If you want to know why the women didn't scream you might try screaming with your throat cut down to your windpipe. You would not make much noise.

If you feel strongly the women were killed elsewhere - why do you think the conspiritors took such as risk as to dispose of the bodies in busy streets rather than dumping them in the Thames?

If you apply your own argument to your own theories and you think the women were deposited on the streets by way of a horse and carriage - why didn't anyone report hearing the clopping of horses or the sound of a carriager being driven through the relevant streets?

[Krinoid]

wrong!

Well I think you answered your own question Krinoid. Nobody heard anything because people were used to hearing a lot of noise throughout the night.

No, that was only the Miller's court that quote applied to that region, not the others, so no it doesn't answer my question but it's nice looking for a quick inaccurate fix rather than thinking about it.

[Krinoid]

To grave maurice

Ed glinert's various books has many quotes begining w/ "some Ripperologists believe" many of the posts that I have written on this website. Again if we are only dealing with HARD evidence you cannot discuss any suspects or theories on this forum period! Prove me wrong as no one has done that with Ed glinert's theories also, the map was done WRONG!!!!!!See the other thread on Glinert's EEChronicles.

[packers stem]

Hi Graham
Yes,i've read Knights book many years ago along with a couple of dozen others.It is required reading along with many others such as the books on tumblety,barnett and Hutchinson.They will all in some way give you something to think about,even Maybrick had me hooked for a few weeks.
You're right i can not see the fire but i can see the smoke.Not having any definite suspect does not detract from the feeling of there being 'something different'.
Anderson-The Fenian expert,appointed assistant within hours of Nichols death.
Off on his jollys hours before Chapmans and coming back after the double event.
I strongly suspect that Eddowes's death should have been the end of things and that she was mistaken for Kelly.
Warren resigning hours before the millers court murder.
Warren venturing to Goulston Street in the early hours is particularly bizarre.
RIC in Millers Court.
Fluctuating names and statements from witnesses which in newspaper reports seemed to suggest a possible 'watcher' but when done officially tried to water down the importance of the watcher such as Schwartz where the knife turns into a pipe!!
Elizabeth Long couldn't identify the man or woman she saw originally then changed her mind.
The rediculously rapid final inquest,in the wrong district.
The list is endless really and i for one find it difficult to pass over too many coincidences,incorrect procedures and strange circumstances.
If i had to stick my neck out i'd go with Kelly or Fleming being some kind of informant-Strange for Fleming to be yet another who's locked up with feelings that someone's trying to kill him??
As we all know,evidence is a different matter.
We are all entitled to our thoughts.

[Graham]

Hi Grave Maurice
Would you care to pick a point showing 'uninformed' or is this the usual general dismissal through mockery without serious thought?
I was showing points surrounding the royal conspiracy that arouse suspicion and suggesting that krinoid follow these up.
I personally lean more towards a political conspiracy for reasons unknown but when you accept a conspiracy or cover up then any person/persons of importance could be central.

Hi P'sS.

Have you read Stephen Knight's book JackThe Ripper - The Final Solution? If not, it's worth a read in its own right; if so, then all I can say is that you are, the same as all of us on this forum, entitled to your opinion.

Smelling a political conspiracy for 'reasons unknown' is no answer at all nor the basis for serious discussion. If you think there's a political conspiracy going on, then you must have reasons for so thinking.

No-one is trying to 'get' to anyone else here - it's a case of suggesting that certain theories formulated over the years have little or no proveable basis in fact. They are, at best, just theories; at worst, highly-imaginitive fiction. All part of the Ripper Game, mate.

Cheers,

Graham

[Limehouse]

I MEANT THE ACTUAL "KILLING SCREAMS AND SOUNDS"ETC..,one of the first thing you hear when people discuss each victim is "nobody heard anything",all you are describing are people who saw the deceased before the murder time. How could JTR work with such privacy and pass among everyone so easily without no one noticing blood on him for example and so on?? Someone must have saw something.
From what I read the cry of murder you mentioned was always heard regularly in that area and locals ignored it and there is no direct link to that killing.

Well I think you answered your own question Krinoid. Nobody heard anything because people were used to hearing a lot of noise throughout the night.

[corey123]

Hello Stem,

Sorry Corey but were stuck with it.We can't deny they go on today so we have to presume they have always been a part of political life.

This is funny. Sorry I had to do it

Jack has my vote good sir.

[packers stem]

Sorry Corey but were stuck with it.We can't deny they go on today so we have to presume they have always been a part of political life.

[corey123]

I am starting to hate the word "conspiracy", how about it?

[packers stem]

I'm at a loss for words. I can only suggest that, perhaps, packers stem and Krinoid should go away together and create a new website for the seriously uninformed.

Hi Grave Maurice
Would you care to pick a point showing 'uninformed' or is this the usual general dismissal through mockery without serious thought?
I was showing points surrounding the royal conspiracy that arouse suspicion and suggesting that krinoid follow these up.
I personally lean more towards a political conspiracy for reasons unknown but when you accept a conspiracy or cover up then any person/persons of importance could be central.

[The Grave Maurice]

I'm at a loss for words. I can only suggest that, perhaps, packers stem and Krinoid should go away together and create a new website for the seriously uninformed.

[packers stem]

Hi Krinoid
Wow they've got you rattled,don't let them.
There are two groups of people with an interest in JTR.
There's the accepts and the dubious
The Accepts will only believe official documents and the ramblings of retired officers as absolute truth.(if there was a conspiracy it would be in the files- oh really!!!)
They will also have a firm serial killer profile in mind and will not vary from this.
The doubters will look at all evidence often favouring newspaper reports as they have doubts about the honesty of the officials.Look at how newspaper reports changed over a few days into official reports with slight differences that totally altered the complexion of the evidence.
They will also look at hearsay,circumstantial evidence and not dismiss bizarre occurances as mere coincidence.
I have no problem declaring myself in the second category as a conspiracy or at the very least a cover up is obvious to me although i'm unsure as to why.
If you truly believe it was a royal conspiracy just stick to your guns and don't let them grind you down and concentrate on these points.
1.John Netley-This man did exist and he was a driver.A man giving the name Nickley did jump in the thames in 1892 and if you say Netley in a common london accent it will sound like Neckley.
2.Don't believe the hype about the message on the wall(Graffiti it is not).
Graffiti is 'Jacks a jew' or 'it's the jews wot dunnit'.Nothing like the grammatically excellent paragraph with an apparently incorrect spelling even though all other words are spelt correctly.The word 'juwes' was ,according to the dissertation on this site, used until the early part of the century in freemasonry in england then dropped but it was continued in the US and presumably in scotland also as theres is linked more closely with the US than England(would it be the same case with Ireland also?),just because it was no longer used in england there's no need to rule it out.
3.1892-This is the biggee.In a six week spell between the middle of January and the end of February we saw the death of PAV(shouting about leading government officials on his deathbed-he clearly smelt a rat),the death of J K Stephen(delusions of persecution-similar to the above i suppose) and the closure of the case on Jack the Ripper.Quite a lot to happen in 6 weeks!
Not sure on what date Abberline got the push but i'll bet it wasn't long after,or the 'neckley incident'.
With your making connections between the murder sites try it without millers court as it's possible that the last intended murder was mitre square.You may get much more interesting solutions such as sue and andy Parlors arrow.
I live in hope that Mary Kellys diary(or that of her son?) may turn up in Ireland some day
Request from your library every listed book on walter sickert and you will find at least one very peculiar looking gull in an ennui sketch.
Don't worry about the Joseph Sickert lying stuff.Yes he did embellish,i get the feeling he was told the story in childhood and was desperately searching for a way of proving it by creating some facts,but his cousin did confirm his story and what did she have to gain from lying.If anyone lied it was probably Walter Sickert to Joseph.Once Joseph retracted his first story the 'accepts' pounced without really thinking if he was in a position to have made it all up.
As for the last two ripper victims both understood at the time of their death to be Mary Kelly.Sorry ,coincidence doesn't go that far,it just doesn't.
For any two of the five to have even the same surname would have been hugely coincidental but the last two ? and for both to use the name Mary??
Lastly on this point before someone comes on and mentions John Kelly and eddowes using his name,yes i get that but why change her first name or why not just use jane like at the pawnbrokers?
Sorry i just don't buy it ,could she have been asked to give that name by whoever bought her drinks?