What do we really know about Jack?

[BTCG]

It's what Sherlock Holmes wore, and it must work quite well.
I mean, when was the last time you saw any deer in Whitechapel?

Yeah...must work.

[BTCG]

They must have come up with that while eating French fries.... err... make that 'crisps'.

The correct term is 'muffin-top.'

Worked with a Brit once, in an electronics shop. The others in the shop would tease him; telling him that Davey Jones was considered the greatest musician to ever come out of England... that the sound Davey made were second to none on the instrument.

AND... they took to wearing something I kept on my bench to treat old smelly units: Old Spice. Drove the Brit right up the wall.

[John Wheat]

To BTCG

Are you sure Sherlock Holmes wasn't the Ripper?

[Sam Flynn]

I believe cheesecutter (as an alternative term for flatcap) is used throughout the British Isles.

They're known as "Dai-caps" in Wales.

[BTCG]

To BTCG

Are you sure Sherlock Holmes wasn't the Ripper?

The first person to raise his voice or hurl an insult has already lost the argument.

[John Wheat]

The first person to raise his voice or hurl an insult has already lost the argument.

No the person who's wrong will eventually lose the argument. The person who relies on non existent evidence or purely circumstantial evidence will lose the argument. The person with a ludicrous theory will lose the argument.

[curious4]

Sherlock the ripper

To BTCG

Are you sure Sherlock Holmes wasn't the Ripper?

Actually just looking into that. We have the phrase "on the right track" in "A study in scarlet", foreign royalty dressed suspiciously like astrachan man and Dartmoor prison referred to as Princetown (ok, it is IN Princetown). "A study in scarlet" written of course before the murders (possibly read by JTR?), but I have started to wonder whether Conan Doyle had his own ideas about just who JTR was.

Best wishes,
C4

[BTCG]

No the person who's wrong will eventually lose the argument. The person who relies on non existent evidence or purely circumstantial evidence will lose the argument. The person with a ludicrous theory will lose the argument.

I imagine you're desperate to unring the bell. Too late.

[John Wheat]

To BTCG

All you are doing is blindly following Cornwell. You've given no real proof as to Sickert being the Ripper. The only proof you have is that Sickert might have written one or two of the Ripper letters. Either show some proof or shut up.

Cheers John