Crucial Information regarding a Ripperologist

[Robert]

Oh Jesus!

Well I suppose if you take a large enough sample of people engaged in just about any form of activity, you are going to get the normal human life things. like bereavements, marriages and so on, and you are going to get the odd very nasty thing too.

All I can say is, I hope it's not him.

[c.d.]

Please take this the right way...the article made no mention of him molesting children.

c.d.

[tnb]

JTRsickert,

I realize that for you the podcasts are the ultimate, but you need to understand that this is not limited to podcasts or even primarily about podcasts. Andy Spallek has published articles in almost every Ripper magazine and has been a member of the board and community for a long time. So there is no particular onus on Jonathon regarding this situation.


As for knowing what's among us and our community, I do agree. We are entirely too convinced of the safety of the internet and the people we meet on it. Just because you've chatted with someone in the chat room or on the boards for three whole months and met them for lunch doesn't mean you know jack crap about them really.

Quite right Ally. Jonathan does not need to apologise in any way, or make any special comment, and should not be expected to, as once that particular ball gets rolling you would have to be demanding the same of almost every editor out there, Stephen, and probably every poster who has ever said 'keep up the good work' or similar to him (if...) over the years. No one is responsible for another's actions.

This isn't exactly limited to the internet, as how many of us could say we definitively know we never worked for a week or so with someone who may have gone on to do God knows what, and maybe shared a coffee or a cigarette with them? What the internet does breed, unfortunately, is a mix of unrealistic 'familiarity' and a myriad of opportunity for devious behaviour, which is a pretty scary mix. As Ally points out, at the very least - and even if our concerns here do turn out to be unfounded, please God) - this, similar to the Griffiths case, should make us all think about that a little more.

[JTRSickert]

JTRsickert,

I realize that for you the podcasts are the ultimate, but you need to understand that this is not limited to podcasts or even primarily about podcasts. Andy Spallek has published articles in almost every Ripper magazine and has been a member of the board and community for a long time. So there is no particular onus on Jonathon regarding this situation.


As for knowing what's among us and our community, I do agree. We are entirely too convinced of the safety of the internet and the people we meet on it. Just because you've chatted with someone in the chat room or on the boards for three whole months and met them for lunch doesn't mean you know jack crap about them really.

Hi Ally,

I did know that Andy was responsible for numerous articles and what-not since I read some of them on the Ripperologist magazine. The reason I mentioned Jonathan is because I was listening to the episodes while I was at work today to pass the time. For some reason, I think it was to find any other articles about Druitt he may have written, I Googled his name and came across the article which I linked to in this forum.

I take no particular joy in bringing this to everyone's attention, but I felt it should be known. Also, I agree with 100% of everything you said.

[cappuccina]

The problem, is not only is the sentence too short, but his "lifetime" supervision doesn't mean ****. After a couple of years of that, LE really doesn't care a whole helluva lot, unfortunately. Where I am, we have these ****ers living close to schools, public parks, swimming pools, etc. (...all kinds of places where children go, and in "family"-type neighborhoods) who are RSO's on "lifetime supervision", and LE generally does NOTHING about this...

[Ally]

JTRsickert,

I realize that for you the podcasts are the ultimate, but you need to understand that this is not limited to podcasts or even primarily about podcasts. Andy Spallek has published articles in almost every Ripper magazine and has been a member of the board and community for a long time. So there is no particular onus on Jonathon regarding this situation.


As for knowing what's among us and our community, I do agree. We are entirely too convinced of the safety of the internet and the people we meet on it. Just because you've chatted with someone in the chat room or on the boards for three whole months and met them for lunch doesn't mean you know jack crap about them really.

[Zodiac]

I hope to Christ he would NOT. I for one, would leave, and ask that my account be permanently deleted if he were.

I HAVE NO TOLERANCE FOR THIS TYPE OF VIOLENT PREDATORY CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR.

Hi Capps,

My feelings exactly!!!

Looks like he won't be around for while anyway, he was sentenced to serve 3 years back in May.

http://www.globe-democrat.com/news/2010/may/11/five-men-sentenced-child-porn-missouri/

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

[JTRSickert]

Amen, cappuccina.

I wonder what Jonathan is going to say when he sees this, or if he's heard about it already.

[cappuccina]

I hope to Christ he would NOT. I for one, would leave, and ask that my account be permanently deleted if he were.

I HAVE NO TOLERANCE FOR THIS TYPE OF VIOLENT, DISTURBED, PREDATORY CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. This scumbag should be given no quarter and needs to be in prison where he belongs. These scumbags are not "fixable", and CANNOT BE REHABILITATED, EVER.

This incident should also serve to remind all of us, even those who think they "know and have seen it all", that they, in fact, haven't and that the Internet, while a wonderful tool in some respects, is always to be used with great caution vis a vis one's personal and family information.

[tnb]

tnb,

You bring up a good point. If our aspallek and the one in the article are both one and the same (as I currently think), would he be welcome back here?

Not by me. I will say (and I am still saying if) that that does not take away from the excellence of his research, which I myself have admired, but neither does the research excuse the crime. It just makes it more of a shame, if you know what I mean.

I do not wish to bring anyone into this who does not wish to be involved, as this is clearly a touchy subject, but I am sure there must be some on here who know Andrew Spallek the researcher pretty well, and could potentially make this a little clearer. Here's hoping someone can do so soon, as I think the site and all of us need it making clear, one way or the other.

[JTRSickert]

tnb,

You bring up a good point. If our aspallek and the one in the article are both one and the same (as I currently think), would he be welcome back here?

[tnb]

I am guessing if this is the man we are thinking of then site admin will know about it pretty soon, as his entire internet history will have been/ will be being dragged with a fine tooth comb, and this site will show up pretty big on that list. I just hope that the finger of suspicion does not come to point at anyone who may have corresponded with him for the best of research reasons, if so (as I did, as it happens, although I never received a reply - which the dates here might go some way to explaining). It would certainly be another unwelcome association for the whole field so soon after the Steven Griffith furore here in the UK.

However, as difficult as it is, I will try to assume that the 'aspallek' of Casebook is not guilty of being the very same person, until someone (perhaps who has met him) can confirm otherwise definitively. Innocent until proven guilty and all that. As for how any of us would feel about not only the podcasts on which he featured but his essays, photos and even his many posts remaining on here or otherwise, were it true, it is almost impossible to say.

One thing I think we can all say without any fear of jumping the gun is that the Andrew Spallek in the article above is a low, foul creature and that to my mind at least he would not be welcome on any internet platform in which I am myself involved.

It may just go to show that you never can tell. Scary stuff.

[JTRSickert]

Well, these articles are from the St. Louis area and, when I read that, I listened to my Ipod (specifically, the Druitt in Winchester podcast) and Andy did say he was from St. Louis. So, I mean, unless this guy is the victim of the worst coincidence in recent times, I think that pretty much solidifies it.

[Zodiac]

Supposedly, based on photos and location, it appears that this is him. Andy stopped posting here the same day the newspaper says this A spallek resigned from his church, the day before the indictment came down. I am with you on being at a total loss for words, for once.

Sorry about the duplication of the info Ally, our posts must have crossed.

Best wishes,

Zodiac.

[Zodiac]

I see that 14 people have viewed this and none of them has posted a response. Can't say that I blame them. I have no idea what to say. Can anyone confirm that this is Andy?

c.d.

Hi c.d,

I'm not 100% certain, but the Pastor Andrew Spallek resigned his position on 23/09/2009 and was indicted the following day. The member of these boards with the username aspallek last posted here on the 23/09/2009. and has been silent ever since. Could be coincidence??? Also the photo on his profile page does look like the one of the Andrew Spallek in the newspapers, but its just too small of a photo to be positive. Not looking too good though!

http://new.exchristian.net/2010/02/lutheran-pastor-admits-child-porn.html

Best wishes,

Zodiac.