If the 'Dear Boss' letter is a hoax...

[Elamarna]

Yes, it is. The date is 30 September. Inst = this month. The letter was dated 29 September.
Inst therefore = 30 September.


It happened.

It happened on 30 September.

It was the last day for September after the date of the letter: 29th.

He wrote "inst": = this month.

This month was September. It had only 1 day left = 30 September.

A year is not present because there was no reason to put the year in the letter. It was at the hight of his killing spree.



As you can see above, I base the hypothesis about this letter on the facts from the letter itself.

Lets do some analysis on that post:


Yes it contains a date, but there is no idea at all of when it was posted or received.

There no historical data to say it was posted on 29th September 1888.

Indeed there is nothing to say it was posted on 29th of September of any year.


For the sake of discussion let us for the moment assume you idea is correct and the date is the 29th September 1888.

There is nothing to say it could not have been posted on the 30th or the 1st of the next month.

Let us for the sake of argument again assume it was posted on the 29th, there is no certainty that such a letter would be received the next day, and of course given the volume of post being sent to the papers at that time, there is no certainty that it would be read immediately upon arrival.

One can postulate that the writer could not expect the letter to be read until either late on the 30th or early on the 1st, in which case stating the 1st and 2nd inst is perfectly correct.

There is nothing contained in the letter to suggest the phrase applies to a number of murders, that is a person view.



The hypothesis is based on your view and nothing else. it is not backed by historical data.

It took time to find the victims. I do not presume that he believed he would come flying from above right down on them at 24.00 - or that he would walk straight on and get his victims - both! - at exactly 24.00.

He "was at work" = searched for the 1st victim, killed the 1st victim, searched for the 2nd victim, killed the 2nd victim.

No Pierre, you have claimed the letter was a message to the authorities, if the writer meant after midnight into the early hours he could have said so.
He gave a precise time, to achieve the claim he only had to start the mythical search you claim earlier.

Mitre Square is 3 minutes walk from the street called The Minories. He was in the ancient parish of the Minories during this night. There is no problem with it. It is a normative source showing his intentions.

Please show a source, other than the letter to back this claim he was in the minories, You appear to be using the letter to collaborate itself as being genuine.



In addition you claimed he would kill in the Minories:


"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."




I note that in this reply you do not address that issue yet again.

"Need" with what theory? Maslow? You have no sources showing what "need" the killer had.

Do you not understand "need" in the sense I used it.?

Let me rephrase it so you understand and cannot give spurious answers about human needs.


To move from one murder site to another it was not geographically necessary to go into the Minories as you had claimed.


What the personal needs or motivations of the postulated killer were is of no interest in this instances.

It is purely about if the killer physically had to enter the area of the Minories to travel between murder sites.

He did not!

You have paused for 128 years. And I am rather lazy. But I will not give this case a lot more time.

Great, either publish a name or stop this charade at supposed academic history, it is very tiresome.

You ignore "29th inst.".

Pierre, that gives no information of :

1. The month it is written?

2. The day it is posted?

3. The date it is received?


And most importantly certainly no date as to a proposed attack, other than what I have already posted.

Thatīs right. And the killer knew that. You are thinking just like him. Bravo.

What fools the police (native speakers of English) are!

Very good, Steve. Now you are getting back in the saddle!

Such an arrogant reply deserves no real response.

Good! Thank for bringing it up. And hear what I say now: There is an explanation for the date 30 September. And it has nothingto do with that letter. Nothing.

Once again the unspoken sources, as I will repeat: no source given then it does not exist.

We can not know the disposition of the letter. So it is a meaningless issue. It was written on the back and front of a paper or on a paper and envelope. Or on the same paper where the killer got the idea of adding a sentence or two. We do not know how the disposition looked.

I agree 100 percent, we have no idea other than what was published in 1927, yet you have extrapolated so much from that.

You do not consider the dubious provenance.
You reject what does not fit you position and accept that which you say does, even when it is highly probably that you are wrong.

As with all extrapolation it is guess work.

It is all personal opinion.

And in the rest of your post you are just repeating what you already said above.

So glad you mentioned it because:

1. No attempt made to to answer point 1.

2. Response to point 2 is far from convincing.

3. Certainly not addressed point 3.



These posts now really take little effort to give an accurate, reasonable and honest rebuttal to.



Steve

[sleekviper]

The killer would never say two victims, changes the entire dynamic of everything. Once they find Stride, and she is warm, they instantly would be on the search for a man talking to a woman, with a knife if the threat is two women. Whereas with no knowledge of a reported second victim, he is warned that a killer has struck since the pattern is one and done.

[David Orsam]

A "would-have question" again. Not possible to answer.

But you're the one who started the "would have", "could have", "might have" business in this thread.

May I remind you that you said in #45:

"the letter also contained a warning, which could have saved the victims from being murdered if taken seriously"

AND

"If the Central News Agency had given the letter to the police and they had taken it seriously, they could have increased the police surveillance in the Minories that night and Stride and Eddowes might have been saved".

The truth is that even if the letter had been taken seriously (assuming it was written on 29 September 1888), and even if the police understood it to be referring to murders at midnight in the Minories on 30 September, it could not realistically have prevented the murders of Stride and Eddowes, or saved them, could it?

[John G]

[QUOTE=Pierre;394502]

A "would-have question" again. Not possible to answer.

Goodnight.

Please give an example in world criminological history where a serial killer has informed the police where he intends to strike next, i.e. place and time?

Do you think your suspect is a total imbecile?

[Joshua Rogan]

Because if the police had not been such fools the area around the Minories should have been full of police officers that night.

I.e. if he had chosen to write:

I shall be at work tomorrow, the 30th, at midnight, in the Minories.

If the letter was written on the 29th, then wouldn't he have had to have said "tonight after midnight, on the 30th", since that's when the double event took place.

[John G]

Because if the police had not been such fools the area around the Minories should have been full of police officers that night.

I.e. if he had chosen to write:

I shall be at work tomorrow, the 30th, at midnight, in the Minories.

The"Dear Boss" letter lacks provenance and therefore shouldn't be taken seriously: Discuss.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;394501]

Well either he was communicating in the letter that he was going to commit murders on the 30th of the month or he wasn't.

If he was, then the police could have flooded the area with officers that night. If he wasn't then the police would not have known when the murders would take place.

But I must ask you Pierre. What difference would it have made if the police had flooded the Minories with officers at midnight on 30th September? Wouldn't they have simply left the area when nothing happened by 1am? Thus allowing the killer to murder Eddowes in peace?

A "would-have question" again. Not possible to answer.

Goodnight.

[David Orsam]

Because if the police had not been such fools the area around the Minories should have been full of police officers that night.

I.e. if he had chosen to write:

I shall be at work tomorrow, the 30th, at midnight, in the Minories.

Well either he was communicating in the letter that he was going to commit murders on the 30th of the month or he wasn't.

If he was, then the police could have flooded the area with officers that night. If he wasn't then the police would not have known when the murders would take place.

But I must ask you Pierre. What difference would it have made if the police had flooded the Minories with officers at midnight on 30th September? Wouldn't they have simply left the area when nothing happened by 1am? Thus allowing the killer to murder Eddowes in peace?

[David Orsam]

Was there a double murder in that are on 30th or 31st March 1889?

No, but there had been one on 30 September 1888 and the writer of the letter might simply have been predicting two new murders, one on the 1st of April 1889 and one on the 2nd of April 1889 (or, on your bizarre interpretation, one on 30 March 1889 and one on 31 March 1889). If the killer wrote the letter (unlikely) he might have intended to commit two murders on those nights but did not in fact do so. If it was a hoaxer (more likely) he might have wanted the recipient of the letter to believe that this was what the killer was going to do.

So I repeat the question: How do you know the letter was not written on 29 March 1889?

[Pierre]

No because it doesn't make any sense. Why didn't he just say "30th Sept"?

Because if the police had not been such fools the area around the Minories should have been full of police officers that night.

I.e. if he had chosen to write:

I shall be at work tomorrow, the 30th, at midnight, in the Minories.

[Pierre]

But the 29th of what?

How do you know the letter wasn't written on, for example, 29th March 1889?

Was there a double murder in that are on 30th or 31st March 1889?

[sleekviper]

It looks to me as if someone was afraid of someone else, and came up with a brainstorm in 1889 to get them in trouble. Someone says in Dear Boss that he won't stop until buckled, then in the postcard labels a double event;the writer of this seems to assume that since no one was caught, the event means annually. The real killer does not mean annually, and his problem is still there, so spits hate at police in letter two for not showing up to rid his problem. There is enough info to provide police with a local criminal element, but not enough to incriminate anyone should they crack down on it. Basically someone thought they figured out Dear Boss, would get the same attention as it had the year before when the crimes actually took place, but the killer did not return so it never brought police to solve the writers problem. Would not need to put a month then, everyone would know what was meant in 1889.

[David Orsam]

But the 29th was the date written

But the 29th of what?

How do you know the letter wasn't written on, for example, 29th March 1889?

[David Orsam]

But the 29th was the date written and the murders was done on the 30th. The 30th is therefore "inst". That is the point. Do you understand that?

No because it doesn't make any sense. Why didn't he just say "30th Sept"?

[Pierre]

No it wasn't!

September isn't mentioned in the letter.

But the 29th was the date written and the murders was done on the 30th. The 30th is therefore "inst". That is the point. Do you understand that?