No announcement yet.

Need some help for school

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Suzi View Post
    From mi bed of flu/pain-...... Where's Brian L ?
    Despite the flu- I'M PeterPan! x
    Get well soon Suzi... try reading Robert's deadpan, pardon the pun, jokes... quality assurance

    New blood indeed... that was clever ! :-)

    best wishes

    Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙

    Justice for the 96 = achieved
    Accountability? ....


    • #17
      Suzi, sorry to hear you have the flu.

      Why did you catch it? You're not supposed to do that.

      Can't you see that catching flu is a mistake?


      • #18
        this paper is kicking my but... there are so many factors that play into this case...

        again thanks all for your help, this is gonna take A LOT of work... LOONNGGG week ahead


        • #19
          im sorry for reviving such an old thread but i come hoping for a little assistance.

          before i ask my questions, let me tell you where i'm at:

          I picked Joseph Barnett as who i believe did it. In reality, i dont actually know if he did it or not but it seemed like one of the easier suspects to pick to be able to write my paper on. i detailed the FBI profile done in 1988 and then related it to the killings and Barnett.

          i made clear the three characteristics that fit most (if not all) murder crimes. Motive, method, and opportunity.

          I then used some of the eye witness accounts that could support Barnett being JTR.

          From there i spent a decent portion of the paper discrediting Walter Sickert. The only background my teacher had on the case is from Cromwell and he bought into it just as so many others have.

          Now i am completely stumped as to what to say next and still need a full 2-3 pages...

          I was going to find why many people like to say Barnett was not JTR and then prove why those opinions are not entirely valid, but i was having a hard time formulating my thoughts...

          Again, all help is greatly appreciated, and i CANNOT wait until this paper is done... When it is complete if you would like to read it and weigh in with your opinions or just see what i have laid out there, i would be happy to email it to anyone.


          • #20

            Hello Brian. One argument I have seen against Barnett is based on the common notion that he killed the first 4 as a warning to Mary. These were supposed to scare her out of her life of prostitution. When they failed to change her, he decided to kill Mary.

            The argument is this. Why not just kill them? Why the unnecessary mutilation?

            I hope this grossly oversimplified snippet is of service.

            The best.


            • #21
              Hi Brian.

              Almost ANYONE, regardless of experience, would have a hard job approaching suspectology from the direction you've chosen. To show why someone could be the Ripper (whilst ignoring evidence to the contrary) has been the number one game since 1888. To show why someone CAN'T be Jack the Ripper is what a lot of us here like to do. To show why someone WAS Jack the Ripper by disproving the reasons why they can't be is going to be virtually impossible. I'd suggest you backtrack as the road ahead is going to be blocked.

              To follow on from Lynn's post, if this stupid notion that Joe killed prostitutes to stop Mary from selling herself is true, you could go even further and say 'Why KILL them?' - why not just assault them, extort money - anything minor to stop your beloved from doing it? It is, of course, a very silly theory as to concur with it, you have to accept someone would be comfortable being a serial killer just to prevent someone doing something they disapproved of and then, when it didn't work, kill them as well. You would have to swing from a love so strong they would kill others to prove a point, to an exasperation so intense they would then waste all that 'work' and kill the very reason why they'd done it in the first place.

              Tour guides do it loudly in front of a crowd.


              • #22
                good point

                Hello George. Good point, well taken. Even more reason to chuck that silly theory.

                The best.


                • #23
                  Originally posted by George Hutchinson View Post
                  Hi Brian.

                  To show why someone CAN'T be Jack the Ripper is what a lot of us here like to do.


                  ok so in that case, let me ask you this...

                  what are everyones favorite arguments against Francis Tumblety? He was my second choice so as part of my paper I'm explaining why he wasn't the Ripper...
                  Last edited by BrianL; 11-27-2009, 02:33 AM. Reason: ::::


                  • #24

                    Hello Brian. Many of the purported ripper sightings indicate a chap about 5' 6" plus or minus an inch. Tumblety was close to 6'. He was also about 15-20 years older than the ripper was thought to be--again, based on reported sightings.

                    Then, too, his being gay is thought, in some quarters, to count against his candidacy.

                    The best.


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by BrianL View Post
                      When it is complete if you would like to read it and weigh in with your opinions or just see what i have laid out there, i would be happy to email it to anyone.
                      Well I'd certainly like to read it. Barnett isn't, perhaps, the best suspect you could have picked; on the other hand, he's a long way from being the worst.


                      • #26

                        ♣Jack the ℜipper♣I am a ripperologist, a expert or junior expert
                        on the "jack the ripper" murder spree of 1888."jack the ripper" lived
                        in East End , London during the murders. Eleven murders were under the
                        classification of the "whitechapel murders". Five of those eleven
                        became known as the "jack the ripper" victems. These victems;Mary Ann
                        nichols killed on august 31 on bucks row,Annie chapmen killed on
                        September 8th in the backyard of No.29 hanbury street,Elizabeth stride
                        found on berner street and Catherine eddowes found in mitre square
                        both killed on September 30th,and finaly Mary Jane Kelly killed on
                        November 9th in her home at No.13 millers court on dorset street.
                        Those five are called by most ripperologists as the 'canonical five'.
                        The 'canonical' were linked by a cut throat and in four of the five
                        differing degrees of abdominal mutilations. The only victem to not
                        suffer from post-mortem abdominal mutilation was Elizabeth
                        stride,which I assume that the ripper was interupted and didn't get to
                        finish his "ritual aspect of the crime" so he searched for another
                        victem who is Catherine eddowes who was killed a quater of a mile away
                        from stride. All murders but the eddowes murder fell into the
                        metropolitan police juristiction. Eddowes was killed in the city of
                        London police boundary and the two forces teamed in the hunt for the
                        ripper. The murders of "jack the ripper" spanned over nine weeks and
                        all murders took place on the week end.(I.e. Friday Saturday Sunday)
                        which points out that whoever the ripper was held a weekly job.
                        Descriptions of the ripper came in as usually 5'7" tall with a small
                        mustache. Some report he is shabbily dressed then others report well
                        dressed. The degree of the mutilations increased with experiance
                        resulting in the last victem to be unreconisable. The unsub took
                        various "trophies" from his victems(various organs) and kept them. The
                        mutations showed that the ripper held some anatomical knowledge.
                        There were over 100 alledged "ripper letters" sent into the police,
                        most of them deemed hoaxs but three in particular strike an errie
                        remenisince to the killer. The three being named the "dear
                        boss","saucy Jacky",and "from hell" aka"lusk letter" are by some
                        experts believed to be real. The one striking the most is the "lusk
                        letter" which was sent to George lusk the president of the whitechapel
                        vilegence commity at the time along with a portion of a left kidney.
                        This is strangly similar to the report of how the ripper removed
                        Catherine eddowes left kidney. The name "jack the ripper" was first
                        used in the letter "dear boss". This would later be used as a
                        signiture in future ripper letters. There are various suspects,three
                        belived to be the Scotland yards top suspects at the time as mentioned
                        in the "macnaughten memoranda". These suspects:dr.Francis
                        tumberty,montigue druitt,and arron kosminski.back to the victems,the
                        ripper picked his victems from these critera;prostitute and heavy
                        drinker.he murdered them in the early morning hours. Jack the ripper
                        was never apprihended. I believe the metrapoliton and city police
                        departments did all they could but they weren't ready for such a
                        series of serial murders. They were unprepared and caught off gaurd
                        without the experence and knowledge to catch the perpetrater. I am
                        writing this as a basis for new ripperologist as it is the basics of
                        the case. Thank you for reading. May you have much luck on the case.
                        Yours truly
                        Corey J. Browning
                        Washington Irving:

                        "To a homeless man, who has no spot on this wide world which he can truly call his own, there is a momentary feeling of something like independence and territorial consequence, when, after a weary day's travel, he kicks off his boots, thrusts his feet into slippers, and stretches himself before an inn fire. Let the world without go as it may; let kingdoms rise and fall, so long as he has the wherewithal to pay his bills, he is, for the time being, the very monarch of all he surveys. The arm chair in his throne; the poker his sceptre, and the little parlour of some twelve feet square, his undisputed empire. "



                        • #27
                          Dear everybody,

                          I am happy to say I am FINALLY done with the writing portion if my paper. I now have to focus on editing and formatting it correctly, but that can wait. Now that the bulk of the work is done, I need to focus on a couple other projects so I'm pushing this paper to a back burner for about a week. It is due on Monday the 7th so sometime before then I will come on and contact those of you interested in reading it. I only ask that those of you who I share it with take it easy on me. I admittedly didn't do sufficient research to actually solve the case, I just did enough to complete the assignment. I am glad I chose JTR as my research topic but holy **** was it tough!

                          Thank you to everyone who weighed in advice, it was REALLY helpful.

                          I will be back in about a week!!

                          ByeBye Casebook until then!



                          • #28
                            Originally posted by BrianL View Post
                            Dear everybody,

                            I am happy to say I am FINALLY done with the writing portion if my paper. ...

                            Thank you to everyone who weighed in advice, it was REALLY helpful.

                            I will be back in about a week!!

                            ByeBye Casebook until then!

                            Now there is one seriously satisfied customer.

                            Too much to hope that Maybrick made it in right at the last, I guess?