What 5 Questions Would You Like Answered?

[Mr Lucky]

I'd reserve my 6th question to Patrick Mulshaw : "Could you describe Mr Oldmanwatchman, please ?"

He would look like a slaughter man from Barbers yard.

[Abby Normal]

There is a regrettable tendency lately by some of the more abusive Canon Cultists to insult the poster who disagrees with that perspective, not that I personally find David to be that way or was posting to take one side or the other. Its just that youre little misunderstanding highlights some rather obnoxious behavior and commentary from individuals who believe their non proven-case is better than any other non-proven case.

I would really rather discuss and debate myself, heated or casual, and I wouldnt like this site to have the negative aggressive edge that it gets from these folks. I know. Ive been one on occasion.

No-one knows diddly really, we are all just poking around to see if anything is under a rock. So perhaps a Code, like an Honor Code....not needed to be enforced or monitored by the busy and generous staff here, but by us all, as individuals. United in the belief that the dialogue should be either informative, witty or constructive...or a combination of them all....but not mean spirited. Its tiresome and juvenile. And it only serves to expose the fact that the individual offering the snide remarks believes in something which 125 years of investigation and far smarter people couldnt prove...that one man killed 5.

All the best Lynn

Shut your pie hole, moron!


; )

[Abby Normal]

Shut your pie hole, moron!


; )

Just kidding. Note the winky face.

Totally agree.

[Wickerman]

There is a regrettable tendency lately by some of the more abusive Canon Cultists to insult the poster who disagrees with that perspective, not that I personally find David to be that way or was posting to take one side or the other. Its just that youre little misunderstanding highlights some rather obnoxious behavior and commentary from individuals who believe their non proven-case is better than any other non-proven case.

I would really rather discuss and debate myself, heated or casual, and I wouldnt like this site to have the negative aggressive edge that it gets from these folks. I know. Ive been one on occasion.

No-one knows diddly really, we are all just poking around to see if anything is under a rock. So perhaps a Code, like an Honor Code....not needed to be enforced or monitored by the busy and generous staff here, but by us all, as individuals. United in the belief that the dialogue should be either informative, witty or constructive...or a combination of them all....but not mean spirited. Its tiresome and juvenile. And it only serves to expose the fact that the individual offering the snide remarks believes in something which 125 years of investigation and far smarter people couldnt prove...that one man killed 5.

All the best Lynn

Well said Michael.

Though perhaps a little unfortunate, that these thoughts (in hi-lite) never occurred to you when you chose to suggest that the discrediting of Hutchinson was a "matter of record".

[Sally]

There is a regrettable tendency lately by some of the more abusive Canon Cultists to insult the poster who disagrees with that perspective, not that I personally find David to be that way or was posting to take one side or the other. Its just that youre little misunderstanding highlights some rather obnoxious behavior and commentary from individuals who believe their non proven-case is better than any other non-proven case.

I would really rather discuss and debate myself, heated or casual, and I wouldnt like this site to have the negative aggressive edge that it gets from these folks. I know. Ive been one on occasion.

No-one knows diddly really, we are all just poking around to see if anything is under a rock. So perhaps a Code, like an Honor Code....not needed to be enforced or monitored by the busy and generous staff here, but by us all, as individuals. United in the belief that the dialogue should be either informative, witty or constructive...or a combination of them all....but not mean spirited. Its tiresome and juvenile. And it only serves to expose the fact that the individual offering the snide remarks believes in something which 125 years of investigation and far smarter people couldnt prove...that one man killed 5.

All the best Lynn

Mike - great post. I think the great majority here would rather discuss and debate. And you're right - nobody knows diddly really; which makes some of the arguments we see on the site look pretty farcical from an outside perspective.

I had a recent conversation (on the boards) with the currently departed Phil H regarding what made Ripperologist look like 'fringe lunatics'. My contention was (and is) that it's the protracted, obsessive, introverted posting wars that really encourage that view - far more than the odd thread started by a poster who purports to believe that Vincnt Van Gogh was Jack the Ripper (e.g.)

[DVV]

Hi Mike,

all right. I can agree to some extent.

However, it's a bit rich to brand what you call the "Canon Cultists" as stubborn and agressive, while the others would be the Open-Minded Squad.

To begin with, it appears that a great deal of the so-called "Canon-Cultists" tends to add one or several victims to the C5, which is hardly an evidence of stubborness.

I, like most, have no problem to discuss any theory or point of view, as long as it doesn't involve Van Gogh or Brueghel the Elder.
What I dislike, I admit, is to see alternative theories presented as the doxa, which they are not yet.

And this, imo, has clearly become the tendency on boards. I've seen newbyes endorsing theories that are obviously extreme, whithout realizing they were. Some even seemed to take for granted, for example, that Schwartz was a liar involved in a cover-up : as a result, Mrs Mortimer has been given an importance that she certainly doesn't deserve. This is not what I would call an improvement.

Similarly, using the expression "serial killer rot" helps little. It's well and good to suggest JtR never existed, but to radically discard the possibility that there was a serial killer in Whitechapel in 1888 is far too much.

Cheers

[Hunter]

I had a recent conversation (on the boards) with the currently departed Phil H regarding what made Ripperologist look like 'fringe lunatics'. My contention was (and is) that it's the protracted, obsessive, introverted posting wars that really encourage that view - far more than the odd thread started by a poster who purports to believe that Vincnt Van Gogh was Jack the Ripper (e.g.)

Indeed.

Sometimes folks should try to be more informative and concise as well as mannered. It does no good when people start passing over your posts because they are long and redundant. Strive to put in the best words that you can, instead of just being determined to get in the last.

And use the quote functions when addressing the message of another poster. Its easier for others to follow and understand the context of the discussion itself. Whatever you write should be for the benefit of the reader and not for oneself.

[RivkahChaya]

And use the quote functions when addressing the message of another poster. Its easier for others to follow and understand the context of the discussion itself. Whatever you write should be for the benefit of the reader and not for oneself.

Yes, but on that: it isn't necessary to quote someone's entire five paragraph-two screen post. If you really want to address every point, it's better to at least break into the post and address each point. Otherwise, snip the post to the key point you are addressing. People can always click on the arrow if they want to go back and review the entire post.

[DVV]

Yes, but on that: it isn't necessary to quote someone's entire five paragraph-two screen post.

True. Some tend to make each of their posts a conference.
They're on my boring list.

[Bridewell]

There aren't many people who gladly sit around in police cells.

There are more than you might suppose:

those who don't have anywhere better to go; those who are cold and hungry; those who are in fear of something or someone. For such people a police station is a place of safety.

[Bridewell]

I doubt any killer would arrange to meet and just hang around until the police decide to let her go.

Would that not rather depend on the reason for the meeting having been arranged in the first place?

[curious4]

Casual ward and John Kelly

Hello Lynn,

Sorry, I haven't been able to find anything strange about Kelly which can't be explained by differences/mistakes in reporting and the natural confusion of a man in shock.I believe that at the time "afternoon" could stretch to 8 p.m.? Couldn't find much on this but I did find something on american farm workers working "eight hours in the forenoon and eight hours in the afternoon".

Hello Simon,

If you mean that Kate was home earlier than would be expected from the Casual ward, I can only refer you to the piece I posted a day or so ago (sorry it was so long, if I had just given the link, you would have had to look long and hard for it). If something of this kind had happened, it would explain why Kelly was angry with the Casual ward (can't put my finger on where I read this, but it is there).

Hello all,

I did come across this from Dr Sedgewick Saunders, who I believe examined the stomach of Kate Eddowes for narcotic substances, giving quite a different account of the state of Kate's kidneys."You may take it that the right kidney of the woman Eddowes was perfectly normal in its structure and healthy, and, by parity of reasoning, you would not get much disease in the left. The liver was healthy and gave no indications that the woman drank." Echo 19th Oct. 1888

Expect the more experienced among you already know this but it is interesting.

Best wishes,
Gwyneth C4

[Observer]

Hi Curious

Hello Lynn,

Sorry, I haven't been able to find anything strange about Kelly which can't be explained by differences/mistakes in reporting and the natural confusion of a man in shock.

Neither can the majority of us.

The liver was healthy and gave no indications that the woman drank." Echo 19th Oct. 1888

Must of been made of rhino hide!

Regards

Observer

[curious4]

Livers

Hi Curious



Neither can the majority of us.




Must of been made of rhino hide!

Regards

Observer

Hello Observer,

Shame they couldn't clone it!

Cheers,
C4

[Observer]

What? Common sense? haha There are a few in here who would benefit from a good sized injection of that.

Oh, sorry Kate Eddowes cast iron liver



The distillers, and brewers would applaud this move!