He gave the police his name

[Pierre]

so we have another new thread saying exactly what every other thread says

"i can't tell you yet"

for a moment i almost believed you had concrete evidence, but no nothing so clear, shame because i want to someone to find it.

why start another thread Pierre, surly you could have said this on any of your other threads?

Steve

Hi Steve,

OK. I understand that it is difficult for you (and perhaps for anyone) to understand why I am starting a new thread. But imagine that you have a small set of data pointing to one person as being a serial killer. Each of these data sources gives his ID. Now, you are convinced that what you have found is very unique and that there is nothing left to be found. But suddenly you have a new piece of evidence. The new evidence strengthens the theory, naturally. And therefore you want to tell people about the existence of this new evidence.

Regards, Pierre

[Pcdunn]

The Pierre Relativity Theory

Well he could be, but it appears that admin does not want to make the decision.

Admin has indicated that Pierre hasn't really broken any rules of the forum, besides annoy people with his/her insufferable attitude of "I know something you don't know!", and I think this is true, having been here long enough to see a few personal attacks which were of banning quality. (Remember the poster who had an obsession with the correct spelling of British English words?)

I think Casebook has lately become less about finding the identity of Jack the Ripper, and more about finding the identity of Pierre the Poster.

I will admit I share John G.'s curiousity about Pierre's motivations, but I think we need to perhaps start a boycott of his threads, and ignore his posts in other threads. Trying to debate him, joking about him, etc., isn't working-- so let's simply stop responding.

[Pierre]

Does anyone else feel as though they're going through a bit of an existentialist crises? I mean, I'm starting to get the feeling that I might be an unwitting participant in some sort of social media experiment.

Perhaps it will conclude with the publication of a thesis by, say, an existentialist with several degrees, entitled: A study Defining Symbolic Interactionism's Place Within Social Media: A Postmodern Existentialist Perspective.

Or then again, perhaps not [at least regarding the 'several degrees part"!]

Hi John,

I think it is just the field of ripperology going through a small disturbance period and this is what you experience. It is not yet an existentialist crisis for the field and itīs producers and consumers, but perhaps it soon will be. I think I will first have to publish a book and then we will se the field slowly die. I would not like to be any part of that, I think the field of ripperology it is a great "playground" for those that like ripperology and know a lot about it, but as a researcher I have the duty to present the results when I am finished with the last bit of evidence.

Kind regards, Pierre

Regards Pierre

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Rosemary;366682]

So will this be just a probability stat, or an actual name?

I will give you the probability that my interpretation is wrong.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

Hi.
Casebook is the worlds best crime site, it has/had a lot of credibility, it has been a joy to belong to this site,for all the years I have, very informative, and very entertaining.
But seriously Pierre is turning this site into a farce, If the said gentleman has something'worthwhile' to say, let him post , or if he intends to publish in the future, fair enough, but to continue to post in the way he does , is extremely childish, very annoying, and insults the intelligence of fellow members.
I have seen many posters like him , over the years, but none so prolific in their postings, I find it amusing , albeit irritating, but my fear is for the continuation of Casebook, as surely prospective new members, are somewhat perplexed by this non informative method.
Regards Richard.

Great Richard! Casebook is the worlds best crime site, you say - so where else would people be able to follow a researcher who thinks he has found Jack the Ripper? And where else would people be the first to know if he has?

Kind regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

Happy New Year Abby!

I recall when "Pierre" started his first thread-many moons ago now- entitled "I think I Have Found Him," you replied, "Great, who is it?" I bet you didn't think you'd be waiting this long for a reply, especially as it now seems that the "suspect" is "Metaphorical"!

Hi John,

the "suspect" is not "metaphorical". He was a police official.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

I will give you the probability that my interpretation is wrong.

No need, I've already calculated it.

It's 99.9%.

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Pierre;366680]

Hi Steve,

Donīt worry. I am going to do a statistical analysis of the probability that his name could be in the source. You will know the result as soon as it is done, which will probably next week (I have other work to do as well).

Regards, Pierre

is that not akin to a trial system where the same judge(no jury) makes a decision and then lodges an appeal against his own decision. Hears the appeal, but he also presents the case for the prosecution.

That is YOU are going to tell us if YOU are wrong.

you are doing your own peer review - thats really impartial!

[Elamarna]

Hi Steve,

OK. I understand that it is difficult for you (and perhaps for anyone) to understand why I am starting a new thread. But imagine that you have a small set of data pointing to one person as being a serial killer. Each of these data sources gives his ID. Now, you are convinced that what you have found is very unique and that there is nothing left to be found. But suddenly you have a new piece of evidence. The new evidence strengthens the theory, naturally. And therefore you want to tell people about the existence of this new evidence.

Regards, Pierre

Of course,
but firstly you don't tell anyone anything , secondly you could do it in the thread you started only an hours or so before, or in the police thread.

I did not ask why you posted this "information" just why you needed to start another thread.
Once again you don't answer the question you are asked.

still waiting on why "blatantly" is belittling and an apology.

[Rosemary]

Perchance to dream

[QUOTE=Pierre;366686]

I will give you the probability that my interpretation is wrong.

Regards, Pierre

Which means nada.
Hopelessly hoping,

Rosemary's granddaughter

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Elamarna;366693]

is that not akin to a trial system where the same judge(no jury) makes a decision and then lodges an appeal against his own decision. Hears the appeal, but he also presents the case for the prosecution.

That is YOU are going to tell us if YOU are wrong.

you are doing your own peer review - thats really impartial!

Hi,

I hear that you presume I am not interested in knowing the risk of being wrong.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

Of course,
but firstly you don't tell anyone anything , secondly you could do it in the thread you started only an hours or so before, or in the police thread.

I did not ask why you posted this "information" just why you needed to start another thread.
Once again you don't answer the question you are asked.

still waiting on why "blatantly" is belittling and an apology.

Steve,

If you want to go off topic like this over and over again why donīt you just send me an e-mail? It is easy.

Regards, Pierre

[John G]

Hi John,

the "suspect" is not "metaphorical". He was a police official.

Regards, Pierre

Hi "Pierre"

Okay, so to summarize: You are conducting statistical analysis of the metaphorical support that you have found for your "suspect"!

[Elamarna]

Pierre

you did not answer my question with regards the need for a new thread ?

How is that off topic?


The comments you obviously object to are at the end of a legitimate question ?
If you make allegations against someone in public you should be prepared to be to be challenged in public about the allegations.


I see no reason for me to contact you, if however you want to say sorry in private go ahead.

For the record I will no longer ask you anything, it is a waste of time.

I may however still make comments on the contents of your posts.

[John G]

Hi John,

I think it is just the field of ripperology going through a small disturbance period and this is what you experience. It is not yet an existentialist crisis for the field and itīs producers and consumers, but perhaps it soon will be. I think I will first have to publish a book and then we will se the field slowly die. I would not like to be any part of that, I think the field of ripperology it is a great "playground" for those that like ripperology and know a lot about it, but as a researcher I have the duty to present the results when I am finished with the last bit of evidence.

Kind regards, Pierre

Regards Pierre

Hi "Pierre",

I am starting to feel that I'm taking part in the "Truman Show"! If so, what is your role I wonder. By the way, you say you know a lot about "Ripperology", but you didn't know that police officers wear blue uniforms!

I have asked this before, and you have failed to respond, so I will ask again: please provide a selection of the academic works that you've had published so that I can assess your credibility. I'm sorry to keep asking this, but I'm sure that you'll acknowledge that your posts hitherto have been less than academic, although I will concede that they have a certain Lewis Carroll quality about them.