Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

An authorship analysis of the Jack the Ripper letters (Andrea Nini, 2018)

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
    No a portion was severed, note a portion of an ear, not ears plural stop changing the goalposts

    Have you stopped taking the anti delusion pills ?

    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
    Trevor

    No-ones claiming both ears were severed.
    But someone swiped one off. Look at Fosters sketch
    Attached Files

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
      If it was a hoax, Whoever hoaxed and sent the the letter, would have been already been ready with any journalistic piece about the letter, since they they wrote the letter!

      And you were a detective? Lol!
      You are deluded ! your answer was the same answer I put forward in the post to which you made this reply

      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
        Trevor

        No-ones claiming both ears were severed.
        But someone swiped one off. Look at Fosters sketch
        No they didnt, a piece was cut off, and the simple explanation to that is quite simple, it was cut whilst the killer was attemtping to cut her throat, with the likelihood she was resisting the knife.

        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
          Hi Robert,
          Letters from Hell has pictures of the Dear Boss letter and envelope. I can't see any punched holes (was your version created from the police facsimile perhaps?), but the fold lines are clearly visible on the letter and the resultant rectangle matches the envelope.
          Thanks Joshua. I was using the facsimile. I can see the actual letter in the book, and how the creases match. Dear Boss is just one page, front and back, right?
          there,s nothing new, only the unexplored

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
            No they didnt, a piece was cut off, and the simple explanation to that is quite simple, it was cut whilst the killer was attemtping to cut her throat, with the likelihood she was resisting the knife.
            If it was the other ear that had been sliced off you may have a point about it being connected to the throat cut.

            So, you`re saying it`s just coincidence that the killer did commence a couple of days after the Dear Boss warning, and an ear was clipped off, as promised.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
              Nevertheless an ear was severed. Period.
              I'm not denying that, but please consider what else I said. I don't write this stuff for fun. Look at the broader picture - ONE ear, not TWO ears, NEITHER taken away nor ANYTHING sent to police. Likewise, not a hint of a claim that he'd tried to do anything with the ears except in connection with the "first one" (Stride)
              Kind regards, Sam Flynn

              "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
                If it was the other ear that had been sliced off you may have a point about it being connected to the throat cut.

                So, you`re saying it`s just coincidence that the killer did commence a couple of days after the Dear Boss warning, and an ear was clipped off, as promised.
                But he specifically said ears did he not ? So you can accept what you want, the contents of the letter did not relate to a specific murder or murders it was a hoax, and what about all the other letter which contained similar ramblings?

                www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
                  If it was the other ear that had been sliced off you may have a point about it being connected to the throat cut.

                  So, you`re saying it`s just coincidence that the killer did commence a couple of days after the Dear Boss warning, and an ear was clipped off, as promised.
                  To me it looks more like the edge of her ear was accidentally shaved off, perhaps when the knife-point slipped down her cheek while attempting to saw her nose off.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Robert St Devil View Post
                    Thanks Joshua. I was using the facsimile. I can see the actual letter in the book, and how the creases match. Dear Boss is just one page, front and back, right?
                    Yes, I think so. Although there appears to be a (2) and (3) pencilled in the top right corners - presumably the envelope was (1), although it's not visible as far as I can see.
                    The post script line, as someone said previously, is written perpendicular to the main text on the blank lower half of side 2 - or (3) - which makes sense if it was written after having been folded.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                      But he specifically said ears did he not ? So you can accept what you want, the contents of the letter did not relate to a specific murder or murders it was a hoax, and what about all the other letter which contained similar ramblings?
                      Oh okay, so because only one of the ears was taken off instead of both as promised, it`s a hoax.

                      Yes, I will accept what I want, and for me, there too many coincidences to just simply pass it off as a hoax.

                      Which other letters have similar ramblings ? There none similar are there. I am aware that the rest of the following letters are bollocks.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
                        Oh okay, so because only one of the ears was taken off instead of both as promised, it`s a hoax.
                        Was it taken away? Was it sent to the police? Did the postcard refer to Eddowes at all, never mind the killer's (apparently only partial) success with her (one) ear?
                        Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                        "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                        Comment


                        • I realize that for some reason Nurse Ratched apparently hasn't been in lately to put saltpeter in some of the members' medication, or to bring new inmates into her ward, but couldn't everyone just play nice anyway?

                          Cut the personal insults!


                          Last edited by Hunter; 02-07-2018, 08:24 AM.
                          Best Wishes,
                          Hunter
                          ____________________________________________

                          When evidence is not to be had, theories abound. Even the most plausible of them do not carry conviction- London Times Nov. 10.1888

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post
                            Was it taken away? Was it sent to the police?

                            Did the postcard refer to Eddowes at all, never mind the killer's (apparently only partial) success with her (one) ear?
                            The postcard does refer to a double event, so that will include Eddowes, and I can see the full stop after number one squealed a bit couldn`t finish straight off. and then it starts a new sentence; ha not the time to get ears for the police .. was he referring to Stride ?

                            If the killer did write it, he knew that the police were aware that an ear had been sliced off, and was writing about his promise in the first letter. He didn`t have time to get both ears for police, not that he didn`t have time to cut an ear off.

                            Even the wording of clipping ears off. That is exactly what has happened to Eddowes ear.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Jon Guy View Post
                              The postcard does refer to a double event, so that will include Eddowes, and I can see the full stop after number one squealed a bit couldn`t finish straight off. and then it starts a new sentence; ha not the time to get ears for the police .. was he referring to Stride ?

                              If the killer did write it, he knew that the police were aware that an ear had been sliced off, and was writing about his promise in the first letter. He didn`t have time to get both ears for police, not that he didn`t have time to cut an ear off.

                              Even the wording of clipping ears off. That is exactly what has happened to Eddowes ear.
                              I'm not sure you can have it both ways, Jon. Are you saying that the thin sliver of ear removed when Jack's knife clipped Eddowes' ear was deliberate, and would have been sent to the police along with another sliver from the other ear, if he'd had more time?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
                                . Are you saying that the thin sliver of ear removed when Jack's knife clipped Eddowes' ear was deliberate, and would have been sent to the police along with another sliver from the other ear, if he'd had more time?
                                I think it more likely, taking into account of Dear Boss, that the ear was deliberately clipped, than accidentally removed.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X