An important discovery

[Elamarna]

If the killer was a police officer of the Metropolitan Police Force then Sir Charles Warren was (presumably) the killer's boss.

Do you think he might be heading in that direction?

Given that he has told us many times today, it is a hoax based on the 29th inst. letter i do not see how he can.

Even if he were to argue that, then surly it would be sent to the Police, as was the letter of the 24th, not the central News agency.


in addition it has been hinted at that the person was of high Social standing and the person was well educated, it would seem as if it could be a senior officer. Well in that case Macnaghten was not in the police in 1888, Monro was not in the Met, so neither of those two would address it to Warren as Boss.
steve

[GUT]

pierre

without looking too hard I point out one, written 24th September, delivered to CID of the Met on the 25th.

why can't you do your own research?

Because the great scientist has noida how to research, isn't that obvious to all who read his drivel?

[GUT]

If the killer was a police officer of the Metropolitan Police Force then Sir Charles Warren was (presumably) the killer's boss.

Do you think he might be heading in that direction?

If he is, bet he changes the direction a few times, that's his track record anyway.

[Rosella]

For all we know Pierre might be pointing at Warren himself. After all Warren was an athletic sort of fellow when he was younger, virtually surfing through sewers in Jerusalem . Maybe that's how he got away in London after each murder. Steal a police uniform from a laundry, (a black uniform, according to Pierre) then duck under a manhole cover and swim back to Scotland Yard!

[Pierre]

pierre

without looking too hard I point out one, written 24th September, delivered to CID of the Met on the 25th.

why can't you do your own research?

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

[GUT]

Can someone explain what Trollierre is saying above. Does he believe 24 Sept is real or a Hoax, does he believe "Dear Boss" is real or a Hoax.

Please no one tell him about From Hell or Saucy Jack, or any of the others for that matter, especially not the mikerscope

[Pierre]

Can someone explain what Trollierre is saying above. Does he believe 24 Sept is real or a Hoax, does he believe "Dear Boss" is real or a Hoax.

Please no one tell him about From Hell or Saucy Jack, or any of the others for that matter, especially not the mikerscope

Dear Boss is a hoax.

The letter from the 24th is not authentic.

The other letter, which I have decided to give the hypothetical name The Ripper Letter or TRL, should be authentic.

Regards, Pierre

[GUT]

The other letter, which I have decided to give the hypothetical name The Ripper Letter or TRL, should be authentic.

Regards, Pierre

should be????

By what criteria?

Oh it fts your ideas, so it should be authentic.

Now I get it.

[Pierre]

should be????

By what criteria?

Oh it fts your ideas, so it should be authentic.

Now I get it.

Hi,

Interpretation is an important part of the internal source criticism, GUT.

So using internal source criticism this should be an authentic letter by the following criteria:

1. The Ripper Letter is using a metaphorical language.

This is something we have in several of his communications. It is distinctive for his style of writing. It is connected to his tendency: He wants the police to see that he is smarter then them. He wants to give them a good chance but can not be explicit. So he must use another language.

2. It gives the information that the killer will strike around midnight on September 30th in "the Minories" were he will kill two women.

Using internal source criticism we ask if the author of the letter had a possibility to tell the truth?

The answer is yes, since the killer did strike on September 30th in the area given in this letter. He also had the possibility of telling the police the exact number of the victims on this night: two. And he also gave the time for when he would be in the area.

Given these facts (which I hereby establish, knowing that the external source criticism is pointing to the problem of the late publishing of this source) I think this is a primary source written by the killer.

So this should be the first authentic letter from him.

Regards, Pierre

[GUT]

Hi,

Interpretation is an important part of the internal source criticism, GUT.

So using internal source criticism this should be an authentic letter by the following criteria:

1. The Ripper Letter is using a metaphorical language.

This is something we have in several of his communications. It is distinctive for his style of writing. It is connected to his tendency: He wants the police to see that he is smarter then them. He wants to give the police a good chance but can not be explicit. So he must use another language.

2. It gives the information that the killer will strike on September 30th in "the Minories" were he will kill two women.

Using internal source criticism we ask if the author of the letter had a possibility to tell the truth?

The answer is yes, since the killer did strike on September 30th in the area given in this letter. He also had the possibility of telling the police the exact number of the victims on this night: two. And he also gave the time for when he would be in the area.

Given these facts (which I hereby establish, knowing that the external source criticism is pointing to the problem of the late publishing of this source) I think this is a primary source written by the killer.

So this should be the first authentic letter from him.

Regards, Pierre

Of course we only have metaphorical language in his letters if we know which letters are his.

Why not say HIS letters have no metaphoriical language therefore this can't be his.

And as has been pointed out before I think you mean coded language, like the mile rubbish.
Can anyone say Circular Reasoning.

[GUT]

Pierre you mention "Primary Source" as a historian please explain the difference to me between primary and secondary sources in an Historical sense.

[JadenCollins]

Pierre you mention "Primary Source" as a historian please explain the difference to me between primary and secondary sources in an Historical sense.

Primary source: the original source/evidence, provide first-hand accounts of documents. For instance, the Dear Boss letter.
Secondary source: documents( analyses of the primary source ) they're written after an event has occurred, provide second-hand accounts of that document, event whatsoever.

As far as I know, Pierre has no primary sources, because someone has already written them down, meaning > all secondary sources! I mean we "hobbyists" all have secondary sources, books/documents/pictures that have been written, analyzed by a Primiary researcher. And good old Pierre's definitely not a primary researcher. His so called theory is actually based on someone else's study.

Sorry GUT, as a history student, I had too.

[David Orsam]

2. It gives the information that the killer will strike around midnight on September 30th in "the Minories" were he will kill two women.

No, it doesn't. The letter says nothing at all about "September". That month is not mentioned in the letter. It follows that the letter does not give the information that the killer will strike around midnight on September 30th in the Minories. (I leave aside the fact that the 30th of any month isn't mentioned because it talks about being at work on the 1st or 2nd).

Even if you were somehow to imagine that the word "September" was in the letter this could simply be a reference to September 1889.

[Mirandola]

A unique discovery!

I'm intrigued by the nonsensical comment that the letter is using a 'metaphorical language', since all language is metaphorical by definition (ie a sound or pattern of signs 'stands for' an object, a thought, a concept in a relation of d/replacement); it seems to me that the discovery of language which does not use metaphor is a much more academically astounding thing than the mere identification of a long dead serial killer could ever be.
It should be added - once and for all - that, in the exhaustive definitions developed over many years by the Behavioural Analysis Unit of the FBI and published, for example, in their manual 'Serial Murder: Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives for Investigators' (2006), the 'Ripper' belongs very firmly in the category of 'Disorganized Serial Killers', of which key elements are that there are no coherent elements of ritual, no 'replaying or extending' of the actual crimes (by, for example, taunting investigators), and no communications with the authorities - this doesn't play any part in the obscure gratification they get from their acts. Thus, the letters have to be looked at in another light (my own is that they play a part in the communal construction of the 'Ripper' narrative by his audience, but that's another story).

[Wickerman]

.... Thus, the letters have to be looked at in another light (my own is that they play a part in the communal construction of the 'Ripper' narrative by his audience, but that's another story).

Agreed, not written by the killer.