The probability of being fed disinformation

[Simon Wood]

Hi Digalittledeeperwatson,

Great stuff. Now you're cooking with gas.

Except for the fact that the person who murdered Polly did not necessarily murder Annie.

Turn up the gas.

Regards,

Simon

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Crudely

You have one individual that, just for example, killed Polly and Annie only. Previous murders were just random violence. Call the murderer Jacob Isenschmidt. Stride is murdered and attributed to that killer when it is just another random act of violence. Eddowes is murdered for some reason unknown and made to look like a victim of the same person. "MJK" also made to appear that way. Later victims were by let's say curious folk or fans of the Ripper of something of the sort. Basically the reason there was a Jack the Ripper was because people wanted there to be one. Some people anyways. And they perpetuate it for their own benefit. Crude but one general idea.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Jeff,

The idea of disinformation is a giant and scary leap into the unknown for a lot of Ripperologists, mainly because over the past century they have been indoctrinated into believing that someone known as Jack the Ripper actually prowled the streets of Whitechapel.

Regards,

Simon

[Mayerling]

Disinformation would not surprise me, but you would have to stretch the definition of "disinformation" a bit. It is not just lying for the sake of lying. It is also giving information with part hidden (as most police departments around the globe still have to do - bits of clues that they know and the killer may know, but are witheld from the public for the sake of letting the killer incriminate him or herself. Also there is the matter that the "disinformation" may include ideas of the investigation that subsequently are shown to be incorrect or running into roadblocks that were not foreseen. When suspect "A" is caught and arrested, the police look into that suspect's antecedents and movements, and if they don't fit they have to admit they were wrong. But their investigation into suspect "A" may have been flawed, and so we are left wondering if someone is covering up for suspect "A" or were the police sloppy in their work. As for a planned campaign of disinformation, it is possible but we cannot claim it was really widespread.

Jeff

[Simon Wood]

Hi Digalittledeeperwatson,

Please share your ideas on JtR being a construct.

We'll go from there.

Regards,

Simon

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Eh.

That's a cop out. Bullet points at least please. I am not closed to the possibility that "JTR" is/was a construct. But .... Some defense of your position would be much appreciated. Many thanks in advance.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Digalittledeeperwatson,

Trust me, it would take too long to lay it all out for you.

Let me just say that all you need to know to work it out for yourself is that Jack the Ripper is exactly the same story as The Emperor's New Clothes.

Regards,

Simon

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Simon!

Hi Digalittledeeperwatson,

There was no Jack the Ripper.

You should be able to work out the rest.

Regards,

Simon

Would you be so kind as to lay it all out for me? If you don't want to tread on the thread you can pm me or whatever you see fit. Many thanks in advance.

[DVV]

If I knew the answers to your questions I'd be a wise [and possibly rich] man.

Bigre. Thought you could at least say after which murder disinformation started.

Qui est Sophie H?

Glad to see you've forgotten her.

Macnaghten [sur du papier] savait diddly-merde.

Don't say so. She will come back.

Cheers

[Simon Wood]

Hi Digalittledeeperwatson,

There was no Jack the Ripper.

You should be able to work out the rest.

Regards,

Simon

[Simon Wood]

Hi DVV,

If I knew the answers to your questions I'd be a wise [and possibly rich] man.

Qui est Sophie H?

Macnaghten [sur du papier] savait diddly-merde.

Regards,

Simon

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

I think it a good possibility that the police were way to open about the case initially then they went into damage control mode cause things got way out of hand. Unless they caught him in the act he prob couldn't be found guilty. Another point I would like to make is that if they did know who he was, it would have been a no win scenario to divuldge his identity. Best thing to do would be to keep it unknown. Damage was done, but you take if on the chin to keep the powder keg from exploding.

[DVV]

I'm happy to believe that the Whitechapel murders involved a degree of disinformation.
Simon

Hi Simon,

Then when exactly did the process start ?
What was the motive ? and the aim ?

Cheers

[DVV]

According to the legendary Sophie H, nobody knew more than Macnaghten-the-Ripper.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Phil,

A neat idea for a thread.

Many a retiring policeman had a Ripper tale to tell, and all of their tales were horsefeathers. But if it got them a few column inches in the Croydon Bugle to paste, along with their Police Medal, into the family scrapbook, then where was the harm?

Edmund Reid strikes me as the one and only no-BS kinda guy.

Errata observed that "it would have worked better if they had all gotten together and agreed on someone . . ."

Au contraire, mon brave. Consensus would have been a ruinous mistake, for at any time somebody might have demanded they provide proof. And as we all know, there was not a jot to be had.

I'm happy to believe that the Whitechapel murders involved a degree of disinformation. It makes perfect sense. But I don't believe for a moment that the whole of the Metropolitan Police was party to it. That would have been an impossible situation to control.

I would say that the main body of the police actually believed there was someone called Jack dragging his knuckles or Gladstone bag around the East End, for there are instances of them being plied with information contrary to the thinking of the higher echelons.

I would also say that there were three or four well-placed rozzers who actually knew the truth.

Regards,

Simon