An important discovery

[Elamarna]

"So there was only one single letter from someone claiming to have done the killings before the hoax letter "Dear Boss" and it was sent to Warren. And the source we have between these two is the one I think is authentic. I will from now on call this letter[B] The Ripper Letter or TRL."

No the one you think is authentic( I assume you mean from the killer) was the last.
you keeping saying it was before Dear Boss, is not evidence.

THE ONLY EVIDENCE, DATES SAYS YOU ARE WRONG


"A short analysis of this letter implies that this could not be the killer since he writes:

" I am the man who committed all these murders in the last six months".

This would mean that he murdered Emma Smith - but she was attacked by three or four youths. [U]So this can not be an authentic letter."


while that agrees with the general view, what does it have to do with the value of of this letter.

ALL THE LETTERS ARE PROBABLY HOAXES!

The "Dear Boss" letter was a hoax letter so this can not be an authentic letter either.


YES IT IS NOT WRITTEN BY THE KILLER, HOWEVER THAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU CAN JUST SAY IT WAS WRITTEN AT A DATE LATER THAN ON THE POST MARK, ON THE LETTER OR IN POLICE RECORDS.

"The Ripper Letter is using a metaphorical language. It gives the information that the killer will strike on September 30th in "the Minories" were he will kill two women. The Minories was an old parish covering both the murder sites."

it does not say that, it is wishful thinking on your part.


So this can be an authentic letter.

What evidence, do you have to support this, other than your view?

ALL THE LETTERS ARE PROBABLY HOAXES!

"Steve, you say that this source was somehow officially published decades later? Do you know where and by whom?"


You have been told several times so why play silly games

not only officially published, but published for the first time, do you have any evidence to the different.

published in 1927 I believe, in J Hall Richardson's book"from the city to fleet street",

[John G]

Hi Steve,

Sure I can. I just thought that you might know the answer. Thanks, Steve.

So there was only one single letter from someone claiming to have done the killings before the hoax letter "Dear Boss" and it was sent to Warren. And the source we have between these two is the one I think is authentic. I will from now on call this letter The Ripper Letter or TRL.

Now, one must argue that there are problems with these three letters. The first one goes:

"Dear sir

I do wish to give myself up I am in misery with nightmare I am the man who committed all these murders in the last six months my name is so [drawing of coffin] and so I am horse slauterer and work at Name [blacked out] address [blacked out]

I have found the woman I wanted that is chapman and I done what I called slautered her but if any one comes I will surrender but I am not going to walk to the station by myself so I am yours truly [drawing of coffin]

Keep the Boro road clear or I might take a trip up there

Photo

[drawing of knife]

of knife

this is the knife that I done these murders with it is a small handle with a large long blade sharpe both sides"

http://wiki.casebook.org/index.php/24_September_Letter

A short analysis of this letter implies that this could not be the killer since he writes:

" I am the man who committed all these murders in the last six months".

This would mean that he murdered Emma Smith - but she was attacked by three or four youths. So this can not be an authentic letter.

The "Dear Boss" letter was a hoax letter so this can not be an authentic letter either.


The Ripper Letter is using a metaphorical language. It gives the information that the killer will strike on September 30th in "the Minories" were he will kill two women. The Minories was an old parish covering both the murder sites.

So this can be an authentic letter.

Steve, you say that this source was somehow officially published decades later? Do you know where and by whom?

Kind regards, Pierre

Hello Pierre,

Why do you discount Emma Smith? After all, Walter Dew, and I believe Inspector Reid, considered the possibility that she'd been attacked by one man. And, even if she was attacked by a gang, how do you know that JtR was not a member of the gang?

[Elamarna]

The interesting thing with Pierre, is how often he says the same thing over and over again without presenting any evidence to back himself.
Its almost like the child who says something time and time again, louder and louder and thinks that makes what they say true.

There is no ability to understand evidence from sources other than his chosen ones shown.

This can all be annoying, but we are adults and can deal with it.

However, you will tell him a something, give the source to back what you say up.

He then will ask time and time again, what is the source for this. dispite it having already been given.

From what I can see
All of us give him the answer EVERYTIME he asks.

If I am wrong i will happily say so.

Yet he will ask again, its almost like he thinks our answer will change.

In general if I make a mistake, I will say so and put my hands up and apologise..

so different from Pierre himself, who rarely answers questions, obviously he considers answering below him.

now that is ANNOYING.

Steve

steve

[John G]

The interesting thing with Pierre, is how often he says the same thing over and over again without presenting any evidence to back himself.
Its almost like the child who says something time and time again, louder and louder and thinks that makes what they say true.

There is no ability to understand evidence from sources other than his chosen ones shown.

This can all be annoying, but we are adults and can deal with it.

However, you will tell him a something, give the source to back what you say up.

He then will ask time and time again, what is the source for this. dispite it having already been given.

From what I can see
All of us give him the answer EVERYTIME he asks.

If I am wrong i will happily say so.

Yet he will ask again, its almost like he thinks our answer will change.

In general if I make a mistake, I will say so and put my hands up and apologise..

so different from Pierre himself, who rarely answers questions, obviously he considers answering below him.

now that is ANNOYING.

Steve

steve

Hi Steve,

Yes, that's the problem. Pierre asserts that he's a crimonologist/ sociologist/ historian but he refuses to reveal any of his research or cite any sources.

And isn't strange that an academic historian would wish to debate an incomplete theory that has yet to be published?

By the way, I'm still waiting for him to respond to my request to supply academic texts that he has published. Strangely enough, I'm not very hopeful of getting a satisfactory response any time soon!

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

Yes, that's the problem. Pierre asserts that he's a crimonologist/ sociologist/ historian but he refuses to reveal any of his research or cite any sources.

And isn't strange that an academic historian would wish to debate an incomplete theory that has yet to be published?

By the way, I'm still waiting for him to respond to my request to supply academic texts that he has published. Strangely enough, I'm not very hopeful of getting a satisfactory response any time soon!

John


Well he has still not apologised for actually calling me a liar, which should have been easy, one word only needed, so don't hold your breath.

Steve

[Pierre]

Hello Pierre,

Why do you discount Emma Smith? After all, Walter Dew, and I believe Inspector Reid, considered the possibility that she'd been attacked by one man. And, even if she was attacked by a gang, how do you know that JtR was not a member of the gang?

The person I think was the killer was not a member of a gang.

Regards Pierre

[John G]

The person I think was the killer was not a member of a gang.

Regards Pierre

How do you know?

[Elamarna]

The person I think was the killer was not a member of a gang.

Regards Pierre

Pierre

this is the problem all the time:
You discount evidence, in this case the letter of the 24th because it does not fit your theory.

you accept the 29th inst. letter because it does.

you are Cherry picking the available evidence to fit your theory, you do it all the time.
You dismiss anything which does not fit your opinion.
That is not a scientific approach .

[JadenCollins]

How do you know?

A wild guess.

[Rosemary]

Forensic history, anyone?

I've just gone from the profusion of the possible profession(s) of JTR thread to the MJK shell/coffin/bucket to an important discovery. I have deductive reasoning whiplash. I feel as if I'm in the middle of a Paul Simon song:

"...All along along
There were incidents and accidents
There were hints and allegations.
...A man walks down the street
It's a street in a strange world...
Maybe it's his first time around
He doesn't speak the language
He holds no currency
He is a foreign man
He is surrounded by the sound
The sound..
...He looks around around
He sees angels in the architecture
Spinning in infinity."

Just for the record: I hold 2 degrees, a BA in anthropology & an MA in history. I did an MA thesis with distinction that's in the Library of Congress. On the ??? Of the non-existent field of forensic history, perhaps Pierre was thinking of the attempts of deconstructionists like Foucault or Derrida to bring that aspect of critical analysis to history. Then I thought of applying the Annales school to this vast body of work, that encompasses so many fields, requiring a multi-disciplinary approach. Would 'la longue durée' work? No, I haven't the background in Engliah social history. Perhaps the 'mentalités' the psychology of the times? No, I lack the psychology expertise. Maybe a view from below, Marxist theory approach?

Then I got a bottle of Pol Roger's Churchill in hand, got my head banged, & I'm partying-off some down-home Blues. "Every other record or two." Happy New Year to all. I know nothing, just like Jon Snow.

[Mayerling]

"Hello Pierre our old "friend"
You've come to confound us again!
Words that have no reasoning!!
Vague ideas without real seasoning!!
And the words of the Goulston Street graffiti's on the walls,
near Mary's halls
- behind the stairs, of silence." -

with apologies to Paul Simon and Art Garfunkle.

Jeff

[Rosemary]

Merci

Mayerling, I just choked on my last bit of champers . Have to open another bottle.

[Mayerling]

Mayerling, I just choked on my last bit of champers . Have to open another bottle.

Hope you enjoy it Rosemary.

Jeff

[John G]

I've just gone from the profusion of the possible profession(s) of JTR thread to the MJK shell/coffin/bucket to an important discovery. I have deductive reasoning whiplash. I feel as if I'm in the middle of a Paul Simon song:

"...All along along
There were incidents and accidents
There were hints and allegations.
...A man walks down the street
It's a street in a strange world...
Maybe it's his first time around
He doesn't speak the language
He holds no currency
He is a foreign man
He is surrounded by the sound
The sound..
...He looks around around
He sees angels in the architecture
Spinning in infinity."

Just for the record: I hold 2 degrees, a BA in anthropology & an MA in history. I did an MA thesis with distinction that's in the Library of Congress. On the ??? Of the non-existent field of forensic history, perhaps Pierre was thinking of the attempts of deconstructionists like Foucault or Derrida to bring that aspect of critical analysis to history. Then I thought of applying the Annales school to this vast body of work, that encompasses so many fields, requiring a multi-disciplinary approach. Would 'la longue durée' work? No, I haven't the background in Engliah social history. Perhaps the 'mentalités' the psychology of the times? No, I lack the psychology expertise. Maybe a view from below, Marxist theory approach?

Then I got a bottle of Pol Roger's Churchill in hand, got my head banged, & I'm partying-off some down-home Blues. "Every other record or two." Happy New Year to all. I know nothing, just like Jon Snow.

Yes, Pierre's posts do seem to assume a surreal quality after a while. As he has declared himself to be an historian, sociologist, criminologist, climatologist (okay not the last one!), I have repeatedly asked him to provide a selection of his published academic works, however, sadly I have yet to receive a response. Mind you, no doubt the lofty world of academia makes many demands on his time- ditto the monumental numbers of threads he's started on the boards.

Happy New Year, and thanks for the Game of Thrones reference!

[JadenCollins]

Mayerling, I just choked on my last bit of champers . Have to open another bottle.

This happens when you don't share with us!