Tweet
Hi all
Of all the many assumptions that have been made about the Ripper over the many years that have passed since the autumn of 1888; there is one aspect in particular that I believe is definitively accurate; that the killer had to work speedily and with relatively little light to carry out his "work."
The idea as to whether the killer had anatomical knowledge and/or surgical skill is still hotly debated; as well it should be.
But a thought came to me that I don't believe has been considered before.
And seeing how my mind works; I just felt compelled to ask...
Could the Ripper have been blind?
....
tumble weeds...
....
I ask, because there is scientific evidence to support the theory that an individual who is blind, will likely have other senses that are enhanced.
in this instance, I am referring to the potential of the Ripper having enhanced senses of hearing, and touch.
Touch...to feel his way in the dark.
Hearing...to alert him to any police presence.
A blind man would not be impacted by poor lighting conditions in the street.
If a blind man can become a world class pianist, or win Strictly Come Dancing... then why can't the killer have been blind?
That may also explain the supect in some instances appearing to have small grey eyes; reported by multiple witnesses at various times.
Imagine a scenario whereby a policeman passes by a man sitting on the step of a doorway playing his concertina...there is no way that the man would be suspected.
We know that McKenzie was associated with a blind musician.
And we know of a different couple who were involved in an altercation; whereby the blind assailant brutally assorted another individual.
And even if the Ripper wasn't blind.... what better cover to elude capture; than to feign being blind.
But IF there's a chance the Ripper was visually impaired; that may have come about as a result of a sexual disease; an ideal catalyst for seeking revenge.
Nothing is impossible, and while improbable; at least it's still a tantalising possibility.
What are the 3 best disguises to escape capture... being a vicar, being a child, or being a blind man.
Could the Ripper have been the latter?
Of all the many assumptions that have been made about the Ripper over the many years that have passed since the autumn of 1888; there is one aspect in particular that I believe is definitively accurate; that the killer had to work speedily and with relatively little light to carry out his "work."
The idea as to whether the killer had anatomical knowledge and/or surgical skill is still hotly debated; as well it should be.
But a thought came to me that I don't believe has been considered before.
And seeing how my mind works; I just felt compelled to ask...
Could the Ripper have been blind?
....
tumble weeds...
....
I ask, because there is scientific evidence to support the theory that an individual who is blind, will likely have other senses that are enhanced.
in this instance, I am referring to the potential of the Ripper having enhanced senses of hearing, and touch.
Touch...to feel his way in the dark.
Hearing...to alert him to any police presence.
A blind man would not be impacted by poor lighting conditions in the street.
If a blind man can become a world class pianist, or win Strictly Come Dancing... then why can't the killer have been blind?
That may also explain the supect in some instances appearing to have small grey eyes; reported by multiple witnesses at various times.
Imagine a scenario whereby a policeman passes by a man sitting on the step of a doorway playing his concertina...there is no way that the man would be suspected.
We know that McKenzie was associated with a blind musician.
And we know of a different couple who were involved in an altercation; whereby the blind assailant brutally assorted another individual.
And even if the Ripper wasn't blind.... what better cover to elude capture; than to feign being blind.
But IF there's a chance the Ripper was visually impaired; that may have come about as a result of a sexual disease; an ideal catalyst for seeking revenge.
Nothing is impossible, and while improbable; at least it's still a tantalising possibility.
What are the 3 best disguises to escape capture... being a vicar, being a child, or being a blind man.
Could the Ripper have been the latter?
Comment