How to make Ripperology better?

[MrBarnett]

Ah, yes, MrB., these are presumably well-researched and admirable in themselves, but I see where our approaches potentially differ and perhaps therefore our reasons for posting as I do not find them 'interesting' in the slightest. None of these are routes towards unravelling the mystery of who Jack was, and that's fine if that's what floats your boat, but I'm only here - solely here - to understand what we can agree is categorically true about the Ripper himself. His name is the only uncertainty I seek an answer to. The moment that's done, I'm out of here. You pays your money and you makes your choice and all that. It is precisely this difference which makes it difficult to answer Ally's original question from nine years ago - what you seek from the Casebook may not be what I seek and what have you.

Hence, my point, above. Our knowledge of Jack is moribund. There is almost nothing available to us to answer that question and almost no likelihood of anything being uncovered which would help us in that specific challenge. Novelty is not waning in the peripheral analysis - that which brings us no closer to Jack but at least sheds more light on the times or on the characters involved. The novelty I am interested in is that which unravels Jack.

You'll notice I typed 'almost', however ...

Cheers,

Ike

But, Ike, how do you know that these new avenues of research might not lead to the identity of the killer or killers?

New stuff is coming through all the time. Chris Scott once said. ‘Alice McKenzie has proved as impervious to research as Mary Kelly.’ Not any more. And Alice comes with several interesting male acquaintances in tow.

We’re also gradually piecing together some interesting info of Johannes Morgenstern, once just a name, ‘Morganstone’, now a known vicious knife-wielding thug who attacked women with no compunction.

If you’re convinced you’ve already found your man, then new discoveries that don’t involve him won’t be of interest.

And I know some are so anti another suspect that if it were discovered that he had the use of a lock up butchery premises less than a minute’s walk from the Pinchin Street arch they wouldn’t entertain it’s possible significance in respect of that murder for a second. An ex police detective told me so.

[Iconoclast]

If you’re convinced you’ve already found your man, then new discoveries that don’t involve him won’t be of interest.

As ever, MrB., you make some good points.

Cheers,

Ike

[NotBlamedForNothing]

So how does this also help Ripperology's public reputation ? which is also not a good look, when we have posters spruiking theorys about organ harvesting, claiming the ripper didnt removing the organs they were done at the morge and calling it the ''real truth''

What about the theory that there was 'Noooooo Jack the Ripper at all'' ? a little less Deconstructing needed on that one im afraid.

Who can forget the Maybrick Diary ,hmmm lets not go there shall we .

Those are contentious issues. I'm talking more about 'celebrity' suspects. Does the public still associate JtR with the royal family and top hats?

My point being, just because someone doesnt like a suspect or thoery , i dont think they should be removed because to someone thinks there no longer relevant !. Where would it stop ??

Im my point will be missed on most tho, as the replys will surely attest to that , so ill say it now for those. ... you missed my point .

Your point misses my suggestion - that suspects could be determined on a more democratic basis.

[FISHY1118]

Those are contentious issues. I'm talking more about 'celebrity' suspects. Does the public still associate JtR with the royal family and top hats?



Your point misses my suggestion - that suspects could be determined on a more democratic basis.

No more or less contentious than the Royal Consprisory. Wait 30 years or so and see where the two contentsious issues are at ,they may well be subject to the same dissection as the R.C .

Whos to say what the public think about JtR ,how would we know if someone new came along what their thoughts were about them top hats .

[Wickerman]

We’re also gradually piecing together some interesting info of Johannes Morgenstern, once just a name, ‘Morganstone’, now a known vicious knife-wielding thug who attacked women with no compunction.

Huh?, so there is a legitimate reason for a JM on Kelly's wall after all?

Who'da thunk...



Sorry,.. carry on...

[Iconoclast]

Huh?, so there is a legitimate reason for a JM on Kelly's wall after all?

Who'da thunk...



Sorry,.. carry on...

Well, if this post doesn't prove my point, none ever will.

Sigh.

[John Wheat]

Huh?, so there is a legitimate reason for a JM on Kelly's wall after all?

Who'da thunk...



Sorry,.. carry on...

The alleged FM is just blood spatter. It's not a message from the killer.

[FISHY1118]

The alleged FM is just blood spatter. It's not a message from the killer.

Hooray at last. and all it took was one sentence . Thank you john wheat

[John Wheat]

Hooray at last. and all it took was one sentence . Thank you john wheat

Thanks Fishy.

[Iconoclast]

Thanks Fishy.

Sigh.

Whilst all this self-congratulation is going on, can I offer a moment of sense?

Wickerman was confused by Johannes Morgenstern's initials as they were shared with James Maybrick (obviously) but which were not the initials the latter wrote on Mary Kelly's wall. I mean, not the initials random blood splatters wrote so articulately on Mary Kell's wall.

Ike
Let's Keep It Together Here

[Abby Normal]

How to make ripperology better?
Stop with the endless blather about maybrick watches, diaries, initials on walls, tin foil hat conspiracy theories, ridiculous "suspects" and the ripper didnt exist nonsense.

would be a big first step thats for sure.

[John Wheat]

Sigh.

Whilst all this self-congratulation is going on, can I offer a moment of sense?

Wickerman was confused by Johannes Morgenstern's initials as they were shared with James Maybrick (obviously) but which were not the initials the latter wrote on Mary Kelly's wall. I mean, not the initials random blood splatters wrote so articulately on Mary Kell's wall.

Ike
Let's Keep It Together Here

A moment of sense? Come off it the killer writing initials in blood is the biggest pile of bull crap. It's clearly just random blood spatter.

[MrBarnett]

A moment of sense? Come off it the killer writing initials in blood is the biggest pile of bull crap. It's clearly just random blood spatter.

The moment of sense might have been the mention of Johannes Morgenstern in connection with the murder of Mary Kelly. Contrary to what Ike suggested earlier, I’m not pushing him as a suspect. I’m just amazed that the man who may well have been Kelly’s former pimp, a man with form for extreme violence against women, is barely ever discussed.

[Wickerman]

How to make ripperology better?
Stop with the endless blather about maybrick watches, diaries, initials on walls, tin foil hat conspiracy theories, ridiculous "suspects" and the ripper didnt exist nonsense.

would be a big first step thats for sure.

Ironically, it was because of the Diary that Stephen & Johnno put Casebook together back in the mid 90's.

Judging by some of the responses above, even sarcasm is taken too seriously.

[Wickerman]

The moment of sense might have been the mention of Johannes Morgenstern in connection with the murder of Mary Kelly. Contrary to what Ike suggested earlier, I’m not pushing him as a suspect. I’m just amazed that the man who may well have been Kelly’s former pimp, a man with form for extreme violence against women, is barely ever discussed.

If we take Morgenstern as a suspect we have to ask if he is a suspect for Kelly's murder alone, and if so, then who killed the rest?
Or, was he responsible for most of the others, and ended with Kelly?
If a connection between Morgenstern & any of the other victims should turn up then this would be a welcome turn of events.

Morgenstern would at least be a genuine suspect as opposed to most of the 'straw-men' suspects we end up being presented with.