Name the Name with a short answer why please :D

[Wickerman]

Too young

[Scott Nelson]

Aaron David Kozminski

[spyglass]

Druitt is probably the most likely, and way above Kosminski and Chapman......but even then I'm not totally convinced.

[Aelric]

Anderson's suspect. I remain to be convinced that Aaron Kosminski is THE Kosminski, due to the time frame discrepancy where his incarceration to the asylum is concerned and the fact that he hardly seemed to be violent enough to fit the bill. I can't help but feel that David Cohen is a good fit given how and when he ended up in the asylum and how he did die not long afterwards, but the "City & Met getting the names mixed up" explanation for why Swanson wrote "Kosminski" in his marginalia is a difficult idea to swallow.

So, Anderson's Suspect, possibly [unknown forename] Kosminski.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You will be aware of the testimony by Sarah Lewis....

https://www.casebook.org/official_documents/inquests/inquest_kelly.html

Mrs Kennedy's story is all over the press that weekend, but where she identifies Kelly at 3:00 am with that same man outside the Britannia...
"Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday."

Read the 6th paragraph down for her version of the encounter with the Bethnal Green Man - The Man with the Black Bag.

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/evening_news/18881110.html

Thats pretty much all there is. The other men seen by PC Smith, Packer, at the Bricklayers Arms, and by Bowyer could all be someone else. It's just that the Bethnal Green Man/Britannia Man had an awkward way of walking, and something wrong with his eyes.
The man seen by Bowyer, & the man seen at the Bricklayers Arms, also had something wrong with his eyes.

Cheers Wick,

I couldn't recall the details of BGM

[Wickerman]

I can assure you Jon, no sarcasm was intended in my reply to your post here:



You implied that Shirley herself was stupid and had been deceptive with her book, which was what I was responding to.

I know you weren't claiming she forged the damned thing! She still believes it to be genuine, while others still believe the Barretts created it. I believe neither.

I remember the odd two or three posters who shared Shirley's belief in the diary, but for each one there were twenty who didn't.

Love,

Caz
X

Ah, lets be clear then, my take is the Diary is false, a fraud, a deception. Shirley Harrison was taken in by it and promoted a falsehood. Numerous posters, and this is back in 1998/9 and thereabouts, believed the nonsense hook, line & sinker, and some were quite abusive at the time in pushing it.

What was amusing, if anything was, is the beating Paul B. took for trying his best to be 'on the fence' about the whole situation. He was getting pummeled from both sides, it may have affected his health, if I recall.
But, anyway, you've been on the subject much longer than I have, so there's no doubt you know far more than I do.
When something is legitimate, it doesn't take decades of scientific investigation to confirm it. It's only when an artifact is suspicious, with suspicious provenance, and contrary test results, that it will turn out to be a hoax, or fraud, whatever.

[Wickerman]

Absolutely fair enough, Jon.

Incidentally, Melvin Harris concluded that the Barretts did not create the diary [which I'm certain he got right], but were merely the handlers and placers of the hoax.

Yes, I'm good with that.

...They did handle the diary and they did place it with Rupert Crew, but at the time I am now certain that neither of them knew what Mike had.

Love,

Caz
X

That works too.

[Fiver]

Henry Gawen Sutton was being blackmailed as a homosexual by the five women.

That would require astounding levels of stupidity on the part of the victims. Only someone with the IQ of a plastic house plant would go to Mitre Square alone and unarmed to blackmail someone who had already butchered a couple other would-be blackmailers. Only someone who made the previous victim look like a supergenius would invite someone who had butchered four previous would-be blackmailers would invite the killer to where they lived for a spot of blackmail and expect to be rewarded with anything but messy death. Cartoon lemmings have more sense of self-preservation than the victims in this theory.

I also expect you will provide no evidence that Henry Gawen Sutton was a homosexual; let alone that Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, or Kelly had any reason to think Sutton was a homosexual.

[Wickerman]

Sorry, Jon, I didn't make myself clear. I meant: why plant the book in the Maybrick home, if the motive wasn't to cause mischief?

I think the plan, whatever it was, went wrong because it was meant to have been found, probably with the watch, by the occupier at the time. If both were nicked and then sold separately - Mike Barrett had the diary by March 1992 and Albert Johnson bought the watch legitimately in July 1992 - there was no easy way to track either back to the house.

Just a hunch really.

Love,

Caz
X

I had to smile when I read that previous post, I kind of knew it was not what you meant, but I couldn't think of what you did mean. So, took it at face value.

I can see you've given the possibility some thought, I am not the slightest bit concerned how it went down, or what went wrong, there's too many "ifs" to plot a sequence of events. When people plot deception, things rarely go to plan so whether by good fortune, or misfortune, who cares really. You might, but I don't.

I concluded that after 2-3 years debating it back in the late '90's, I'd had enough, it was a deception, call it fraud or fabrication, it doesn't matter.
It's a fringe subject and, although this Casebook site was created specifically to discuss the Diary, in my view, it shouldn't play any role in serious Ripper studies.
Call me a party pooper.....

[Wickerman]

Hi Wick,

Can you point me in the direction of some info on Bethnal Green man please

You will be aware of the testimony by Sarah Lewis....

https://www.casebook.org/official_documents/inquests/inquest_kelly.html

Mrs Kennedy's story is all over the press that weekend, but where she identifies Kelly at 3:00 am with that same man outside the Britannia...
"Mrs. Kennedy is confident that the man whom she noticed speaking to the woman Kelly at three o'clock on Friday morning is identical with the person who accosted her on the previous Wednesday."

Read the 6th paragraph down for her version of the encounter with the Bethnal Green Man - The Man with the Black Bag.

https://www.casebook.org/press_reports/evening_news/18881110.html

Thats pretty much all there is. The other men seen by PC Smith, Packer, at the Bricklayers Arms, and by Bowyer could all be someone else. It's just that the Bethnal Green Man/Britannia Man had an awkward way of walking, and something wrong with his eyes.
The man seen by Bowyer, & the man seen at the Bricklayers Arms, also had something wrong with his eyes.

[Scott Nelson]

Devereux died in August 1991, and the diary turned up in Battlecrease House on March 9th 1992, and was sold to Mike Barrett, who wasn't told where it came from, so he had to make something up - that's Devereux's only involvement, as Mike's cover story.

I don't know Caroline. Yes, Devereux died in 1991, but I'm not so sure about the rest. Chronology and events become confused once the Diary got into the hands of Mike Barrett.

[caz]

I would love to have surprised and questioned Blotchy. It's pretty obvious why he didn't come forward, guilty or not, but I'd want to see how he performed under interrogation. If he turned out to be a regular user of the local prostitutes, I'd have had his home and workplace searched from top to bottom before he could get back there and move anything.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Too bad this thread has altered so much...but,

Tony Devereux probably rewrote a diary found in Battlecrease House and gave it to Mike Barrett in 1990. The original (now lost) was a spoof originated by eccentric playwrite Harry Dam, ham actor George Grossmith and musician Michael Maybrick.

Hi Scotty,

Devereux died in August 1991, and the diary turned up in Battlecrease House on March 9th 1992, and was sold to Mike Barrett, who wasn't told where it came from, so he had to make something up - that's Devereux's only involvement, as Mike's cover story.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Ah, sarcasm, love it
No, I have not claimed Shirley Harrison forged the Diary, she was clearly taken in by the deception.

Neither do I recall you arguing for the acceptance of the Diary as 'real' back in the day. But you surely remember the numerous posters you blindly believed the story verbatim?

I can assure you Jon, no sarcasm was intended in my reply to your post here:

Less tolerant for stupidity the older I get.
I couldn't say which is worse, Stephen Knight's The Final Solution, Royal Conspiracy crap or, Shirley Harrison's The Diary of Jack the Ripper, deceptive nonsense.
Sorry, just passing through a senior rant here....
I just get tired of hearing about diaries, royal princes & black magic rituals.
Maybe there'll be a laxative available someday.....

You implied that Shirley herself was stupid and had been deceptive with her book, which was what I was responding to.

I know you weren't claiming she forged the damned thing! She still believes it to be genuine, while others still believe the Barretts created it. I believe neither.

I remember the odd two or three posters who shared Shirley's belief in the diary, but for each one there were twenty who didn't.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Yes, you may have forgotten but a few years ago I was talking with you about how Melvin Harris exposed a few issues claimed by Harrison &Co. You then added that Harris was not always correct in his conclusions, or something to that end.

This was the last exchange I had with anyone on Diary matters.

Absolutely fair enough, Jon.

Incidentally, Melvin Harris concluded that the Barretts did not create the diary [which I'm certain he got right], but were merely the handlers and placers of the hoax.

They did handle the diary and they did place it with Rupert Crew, but at the time I am now certain that neither of them knew what Mike had.

Love,

Caz
X