Dear Boss

[Fisherman]

I would not stretch things as far as to call it a theory of mine. My theory about you, though, is that you sometimes oversimplify. And combined with your flair for pointing out that you are never wrong, well ...

But of course, if you are trying to manouvre that pimp of yours into a more Ripperish position, who am I to stand in your way? Give me a moment, and I´ll just move

The best,
Fisherman

[Tom_Wescott]

Wow, that takes the case for most preposterous post of the day, Fish. Or at least the hour. I'd say the rest of us clearly know more than you do, if you're going to suggest the Ripper just went out mad and killed the first person to cross his path - which remarkably was always a prostitute. And then was so lucky as to not have been clearly seen or caught. Fantastic theory.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Fisherman]

Tom W:

"of course the Ripper had experience with women. There has never been a prostitute serial killer who wasn't himself a john."

You do have a marvellous way of simplifying things, Tom! I am a bitof the reverse, and so I identify a few problems here:
1. We don´t know if the Ripper was an organized or a disorganized killer. He may have killed whatever came in his way at the wrong time.
2. We cannot be dead sure - no matter how good the suggestion is - that he targetted prostitutes. He may just have realized that they were easy prey.
3. Even if he was or had been a john, he may have been a failure sexually - and in that case, we do not know how much and what sort of "experience" he had had with women.

It would seem that you take it for granted that the Ripper had a history of paying for sex. Much as that is a very viable suggestion, it does not cover the whole spectre of possibilities, I think.

The best,
Fisherman

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Maria. First of all, Le Grand was not a petty criminal. Like all of the suspects, he needed to earn money to live. Because he had no conscience (unlike the known suspects) he chose to earn his money at the expense of other people. But as far as Pipeman goes, it only makes sense if he killed Stride. Both possibilities will be touched on, but of course it was for reasons that stretch outside the Stride murder that Le Grand fell under suspicion of having been the Ripper. This seems to get forgotten a lot by those who think of Le Grand as 'Wescott's suspect'. He was Scotland Yard's suspect first. And of course the Ripper had experience with women. There has never been a prostitute serial killer who wasn't himself a john. There have certainly been pimp killers. Never been a prossie killer who was a barrister, though...or a gaylord, etc.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Not that it's any of my business in any way whatsoever, but I'm convinced that it would be much cooler (and more scholarly, Sugden-like, despite Sugden's few mistakes re. Kozminsky and Stride) if the Wescott book didn't concentrate exclusively in the possibility of Le Grand being the Ripper, but somehow if the book divided the possibilites into 1) Le Grand having been Pipeman and the Ripper, 2) Le Grand having been Pipeman and NOT the Ripper, but a petty criminal scheming for financial gain and hate of the police, 3) the possibility of Schwartz's testimony having been manipulated by the IWMC, thus Pipeman having never existed. THAT would be a very scholarly and open-minded approach in a book. Of course, there will be always the people who don't accept Stride as a Ripper coup, and who would possibly accept that Le Grand possibly did JUST Stride.

Pertaining to Le Grand's so-called “profiling“ (and yes, I kinda despise that word myself), just by intuition and gut-feeling (which I'm very clear that they're not much better worth than the results of a ouija board) I'd have to line up with Fisherman and C.D. and say that the way I feel it, the Ripper was either 1) completely inexperienced with women (and here Tumblety strongly comes in as a viable suspect), 2) attained by syphilis or whatnot after encountering prostitutes. The idea that an experienced pimp, experienced both in manipulating and in attacking YOUNG prostitutes in open light might be interested in murdering OLD women appears as quite a bit atypical, but then there is 3) existing evidence that Le Grand gleefully planned to plant bombs and mutilate old women (albeit rich old women), so clearly there might have been mother-hate issues here, which completely concur with the disembowelments. I'm strictly trying to approach this from a psychiatric angle here, and I apologize for posting this on the wrong thread, but it's best if it's all kept together for once.

And a last suggestion: I have NO clue whatsoever about the bank records situation in London, but, were it possible to locate Le Grand's bank records, one might also locate his signature, and then we'd have his handwriting. (Which apparently he was capable of changing, as I've been told by Cornwell-think-alikes.) A couple years ago I've researched bank records for the 1820s in Naples (which was a HUGE, important city in early 19th century), and I've been able to locate the signatures (and thus the handwriting) of many persons of interest. I even wanna try it again for a star tenor (Adolphe Nourrit) who happened to commit suicide by jumping from his hotel balcony in Naples, similarly to good old Dr. Bond. (I have Nourrit's handwriting from letters, but it being a bit too calligraphic to be honest makes me wonder if we're dealing with a secretary here.)
I also assume that there's no point in searching for Le Grand's original threat letters to the old ladies in the London police records?
With many, many apologies for the long, chatty post.

[Tom_Wescott]

Tom, I've been thinking about it and your theory about the WVC allegedly arranging a scheme with the Lusk kidney for financial gain also fits with Le Grand's (semi-documented) schemes with the grape stalk, the flower “found“ by the sisters, the “Lodger“ and, possibly, R. Batchelor's arranged appearance at a shop as “doctor“ with a “blood dripping bag“. Do you realize that such a theory would NOT necessarily imply Le Grand as the Ripper, but simply as a petty criminal interested in financial gain? Which incidentally fits even better with Le Grand's “profile“ (and God, do I hate that term!).

I wasn't aware that anyone has prepared a 'profile' of Le Grand, but if they did they would have to conclude he was a dangerous man with homicidal tendencies. One can murder and still like money, you know. In any event, when my book comes out, some people will think he was the Ripper, some like myself will be satisfied that he is merely the best suspect to date, and some will not see him at all as the Ripper, but will be moved by other evidence, such as that Le Grand was behind the 'From hell' letter/kidney, Batty Street Lodger story, and was most likely Pipeman. Those who don't think Stride was a Ripper victim should have no trouble at least accepting Le Grand as Stride's killer. So, I'm hoping there will be something in there for everyone.

Tom, see the thread 'Author of Central News Identified -1891' which adds support for the Bulling/Moore belief. Another excellent find by Chris Scott.

Thanks, Stewart. I recall reading this some time back, but could use with a refresher. I clearly need to read more on the Best idea, because I wasn't aware that Nigel Morland played a role.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Stewart P Evans]

Tom

I must not be on the right track at all if Simon agrees with me. I suppose I need to rethink this. Okay, Bulling it is.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott

Tom, see the thread 'Author of Central News Identified -1891' which adds support for the Bulling/Moore belief. Another excellent find by Chris Scott.

[mariab]

Tom Wescott wrote:
The timing was too perfect for a group low on money and trying to muster publicity, then the letter arrives, they take it the Evening News, then you have Aarons (and notably not Lusk) in the press telling fibs about the kidney to make it appear to have come from Eddowes (and thus the Ripper). Only the WVC had anything to gain from their receipt of the kidney and letter.
Tom, I've been thinking about it and your theory about the WVC allegedly arranging a scheme with the Lusk kidney for financial gain also fits with Le Grand's (semi-documented) schemes with the grape stalk, the flower “found“ by the sisters, the “Lodger“ and, possibly, R. Batchelor's arranged appearance at a shop as “doctor“ with a “blood dripping bag“. Do you realize that such a theory would NOT necessarily imply Le Grand as the Ripper, but simply as a petty criminal interested in financial gain? Which incidentally fits even better with Le Grand's “profile“ (and God, do I hate that term!).
On the other side, I totally agree with you that one “should keep an open mind“, and I totally appreciate that you are willing to consider both Schwartz' testimony as truthful(ish), with Pipeman possibly being Le Grand and BS an accomplish, and that you're at the same time considering the possibility of the IWMC having manipulated Schwartz into a false restimony (i.e., the infamous “Lynn Cates stolen theory“). (In which case NO BS and Pipeman would have existed.)
For your Aarons/Le Grand-“scheme“-Lusk-kidney theory, I strongly suggest that you research Aarons's past. Socialist-anarchist is too generic, but was there any history of earlier schemes, any arrests, any records with the police, anything? One does not go from law abiding citizen into violating the sepulchral and sending human kidneys to the press. (And I'm NOT saying at all that I'm definitely buying that theory of yours...)

[mariab]

I'm back from my business related thing and I was totally expecting a big, long, fat debate to have taken place while I was out, perhaps new results about Bulling (produced by someone just like THAT! {insert clap of fingers}), perhaps even a nasty fight? But I see that everyone is all lovey-dovey with each other and agreeing with everybody. What's next, will you all hold hands and start singing “Kumba-ya“?
(But then again, how often does one experience people agreeing with each other on casebook?)
With many apologies to have taken up space with such a stupid comment.

[Tom_Wescott]

I must not be on the right track at all if Simon agrees with me. I suppose I need to rethink this. Okay, Bulling it is.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Simon Wood]

And so you should, Stewart, for there are many surprises in store.

Regards,

Simon

[Stewart P Evans]

Buffs

Just love those conspiracy buffs...

[Simon Wood]

Doctor! Doctor! It's happening again.

I'm agreeing with Tom Wescott.

Regards,

Simon

[mariab]

Tom, thanks so much for the infos. I have to run to a business-related thing at the Opéra (involving a singer from Ohio whom I'm trying to recruit for a project and stuff), but I would suggest to research Aarons, and to look at the death statistics (perhaps Colin Roberts could help with that?) about how often fresh bodies entered graves in VWC, because the kidney might have been a grave robbery.
Gotta run, I'll be back in about 3-4 hours...(shXt, I'm not even dressed yet!)

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Maria, that's what I'm saying, is that nothing fits with the WVC and the lusk kidney. The timing was too perfect for a group low on money and trying to muster publicity, then the letter arrives, they take it the Evening News, then you have Aarons (and notably not Lusk) in the press telling fibs about the kidney to make it appear to have come from Eddowes (and thus the Ripper). Only the WVC had anything to gain from their receipt of the kidney and letter.

As for Aarons, I once found him firing off comments in a socialist/anarchist journal, but I've since lost the source.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott