Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dr Barnardo is the killer...?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Suzi
    replied
    Exactly!!!!!!! not a lot of it being made by our 'friend' though at the mo is there!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Limehouse
    replied
    Originally posted by Dan Norder View Post
    I wonder if (or maybe this is just wishful thinking) that AJ Prophet's entire claims about Barnardo being the Ripper and coming here to talk about it might have just been an elaborate ruse to try to get a bunch of people interested in the Ripper willing to pay some insanely high amount of money for the copy of the book written by Barnardo he had up on eBay, and then when he didn't get what he wanted he just stopped bothering.

    Lots of bizarre suspect theories are based on the perceived money making potential and include knowingly false claims and subterfuge (see Uncle Jack, etc.). AJ might have just had a more blitzkrieg style attack in mind instead of a longer plan.

    Hey, the idea that he was a mere eBay scammer instead of serious about this nonsense helps me sleep a little better at night. Thieves are largely predictable, idiots not so much.

    His user name seems to suit him - but perhaps it should be spelt Profit?

    Leave a comment:


  • Justin
    replied
    I've been gone for awhile.

    I spent over a year researching Carroll for a non-Ripper project. Not that I ever took him seriously as a suspect before, but the fact that he's been ignored by posters here heartens me.

    So why does Barnardo deserve more scrutiny?

    As someone (forgive me) points out, he was a London doctor with an evangelical interest in children/prostitutes, and he spoke in the press about the murders.

    I don't favour any suspect, and I give due respect to my learned friend Alex Chisholm. But how is Barnardo anything but a vessel in which to heap scorn on Victorian charity? He wasn't a saint, and his methods wouldn't hold water today. Just like Victorian schoolmasters.

    Note the adjectives used here against Barnardo. They're everything to do with personal disgust -- no compelling circumstance, let alone evidence.

    And motive? We're left with essentially the same justification for Barnett; the crazed reformer who kills for his cause.

    I'm not rock-solid on pathology, but I believe this generally doesn't give birth to serial killers.

    Relativism is important.

    Leave a comment:


  • alex
    replied
    Hi Mike

    While I donít want to upset Bob, I want to upset my wife even less. Whatís a man to do?

    Best wishes
    alex

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Covell
    replied
    Originally posted by alex View Post
    Dear All

    While I am glad that Bob and I have settled out differences, I feel my wife might be a tad upset about the marriage proposal. Why is life so complicated?

    Best wishes
    alex chisholm
    Bob asked you first

    Leave a comment:


  • alex
    replied
    Dear All

    While I am glad that Bob and I have settled out differences, I feel my wife might be a tad upset about the marriage proposal. Why is life so complicated?

    Best wishes
    alex chisholm

    Leave a comment:


  • Dan Norder
    replied
    I wonder if (or maybe this is just wishful thinking) that AJ Prophet's entire claims about Barnardo being the Ripper and coming here to talk about it might have just been an elaborate ruse to try to get a bunch of people interested in the Ripper willing to pay some insanely high amount of money for the copy of the book written by Barnardo he had up on eBay, and then when he didn't get what he wanted he just stopped bothering.

    Lots of bizarre suspect theories are based on the perceived money making potential and include knowingly false claims and subterfuge (see Uncle Jack, etc.). AJ might have just had a more blitzkrieg style attack in mind instead of a longer plan.

    Hey, the idea that he was a mere eBay scammer instead of serious about this nonsense helps me sleep a little better at night. Thieves are largely predictable, idiots not so much.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Hinton
    replied
    Originally posted by Johnr View Post
    Greetings All,

    I feel some of the posters on this thread have been overharsh with some of the people wanting to examine Dr Barnardo as a Ripper suspect.
    He is not a sacred cow. Please, put him back on the Suspect List.
    I know some people have sought to accuse Barnardo whilst not providing chapter and verse on these threads.
    I think the emotive shouting down of Barnardo-as-Ripper posters is counter-productive.

    JOHN RUFFELS.
    Not at all. The main reason it is difficult to debate this suspect is the fact that he person who put him forward this time, Prophet, after receiving a number of questions about his theory vanished never to be seen again.

    I think you hit the nail on the head when you say that some people accuse Barnardo without providing any substantive reason for their suspicions. If they fail to do so, again it is a bit difficult to debate with them.

    I fail to detect any shouting down of anyone. But I think people have a right to expect others who wish to put forward a suspect to give us their reasons.

    Leave a comment:


  • Johnr
    replied
    Congratulations Bob and Alex.

    Yes, Limehouse,
    I can see your point. And unless A.J. Prophet is holding back on the clinchers from his book, it does look like a lame set of arguments.
    Early on in this thread I made a few points which were designed to show how Dr Barnardo - because of the area he moved in and the people he mixed with- should have been on the Ripper suspects list.But I also cautioned that these could have been merely coincidences.

    Hello Robert,
    A point well made. Killing children would have been a bigger " winner" in the battle for charity funds.Rightly or wrongly, the children were awarded more pity by the churches and the media.Whereas in reality, each group deserved a greater effort to rescue them from poverty.
    For the record, I do not think Dr Barnardo was Jack the Ripper.
    JOHN RUFFELS.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Hinton
    replied
    Announcement

    I'm sure all of you will be glad to hear that Alex and I have settled our differences and are now getting married!

    Leave a comment:


  • Robert
    replied
    Hi John

    If it's suggested that Barnardo killed because of some psychological mania, then that's one thing.

    But if the idea is that he acted from a calculated plan to draw attention to conditions in the east end, and believed that the end (the physical and spiritual salvation of children) justified the means (murder) then it seems to me that a strange thing happens : the blacker Barnardo is painted, the more ruthlessness is imputed to him, then the less likely he looks as JTR. Surely a much more effective way to pull at Victorian heart-strings, achieve publicity and accomplish his objectives would have been - I'm afraid - to kill children?

    Leave a comment:


  • Limehouse
    replied
    You may well have a point John, but how can there be a decent debate when the person who started the thread tries to link Barnardo, JtR and the death of Diana and Dodi?

    How can there be a decent debate when the evidence put forward revolves round the points that:

    Barnardo was a doctor
    He lived in London at the time
    He took photographs of children
    He spoke to prostitutes and wrote to the newspapers about it

    I am all for a decent debate but I want it to stem from some sensible evidence and not from people's dislike of Barnardo's adoption policies.

    Leave a comment:


  • Johnr
    replied
    Greetings All,

    I feel some of the posters on this thread have been overharsh with some of the people wanting to examine Dr Barnardo as a Ripper suspect.
    He is not a sacred cow. Please, put him back on the Suspect List.
    I know some people have sought to accuse Barnardo whilst not providing chapter and verse on these threads.
    I think the emotive shouting down of Barnardo-as-Ripper posters is counter-productive.
    Excluding the Bob Hinton/Alex spat which has dragged on distractingly, I think there could be a decent debate.
    JOHN RUFFELS.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Good Michael
    replied
    This discussion of Dr. Barnardo makes me think about the Orphan Train movement of ca. 1854-1929 where many orphans from the east coast of the U.S. and Canada were shipped, via rail to the midwest and western Canada for mostly agricultural purposes. Most of them had decent homes, but were worked pretty hard. I wonder if Dr. Barnardo is somehow connected to that movement. There was an interesting musical done in Minnesota called: Orphan Train a few years back. It told true stories of these children and indeed, some still live today. Most were orphans, but some were simply removed 'for their own good', something that I am not completely against.

    Cheers,

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • Bob Hinton
    replied
    Not again!

    Originally posted by alex View Post
    Evening Folks





    Bob, if you really want me to clarify the point again for you, please feel free to email me.


    Best wishes
    alex chisholm
    Alex listen to me. I've already said nothing needs to be straightened. I understand your point perfectly. You reserve the right to make slanderous remarks about anyone you feel like without backing them up. I get it - I understand. What I cannot understand is why you fail to realise that is what I find offensive. You keep protesting you've had enough of this argument, and yet you keep coming back on the boards to say "I've had enough of this".

    Then leave it or send me a PM either is fine with me. Methinks you do protest too much!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X