'it was nice' Observation

[mariab]

Well, pretty imaginative and clever. Or do you see it as a genuine communication from the killer?
Also, does anybody know if body parts in hospitals and morgues were preserved in ginger beer in the Victorian era, cuz I seriously doubt it? :-) Do we happen to know if Dr. Openshaw established in what kind of alcohol the kidney in question was preserved? (I'm willing to bet Hunter will have the answer to the latter.)

[Hunter]

It was rather imaginative that a hoaxer would send part of a kidney, rather than the whole, and declare that the 'tother piece' he fried and ate... wouldn't you say?

[mariab]

I'd rather not respond too much to Mr. Vanderlinden's post, as Tom would kick my face, and technically/legally he'd be entitled to do so. Just wanna say, there's evidence that speaks for Aarons/Le Grand being involved in the supposed hoax, and there's evidence of Lusk not having been involved! And now

But I still have a question, to all, but predominantly to Mr. Vanderlinden and to Tom: Pertaining to the kidney, if it was another one (as in, not from Eddowes), would you rather say grave-robbing, or contacts to a hospital/morgue? (The contacts to a morgue unpleasantly reminds me too much of an old theory by Trevor Marriott.)
I for myself would rather imagine grave-robbing or even (drum-roll) the possibility that the kidney came indeed from Eddowes, which in this instance would solve the case, but this is totally a premature thought and not to be discussed presently. :-)

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

Tom and Maria

Well, I don’t actually have a theory for who hoaxed the ‘From Hell’ letter, although the idea that it might have been someone in the Vigilance Committee is not new. I have just been struck by the fact that no one seems to comment, or even know of, the news report (the Star 20 October, 1888) that states:

“…We are now informed that the information of the receipt of the parcel was sold at a high figure, so that the hoax does not appear so stupid as it seemed at first.”

This indicates, to me at least, the possibility that there was an ulterior motive for the hoax. Tom suggests Aarons and Le Grand, something I can’t really comment on, but I would agree that Lusk was probably not involved simply because he seems to have discussed the letter with his family. If he had been involved in the hoax I think he would just have kept quiet about the whole affair.

Adam.

I have to disagree with any notion that the WVC was in any way involved with the hoaxing of From Hell and the kidney - they had a lot more to lose should they somehow be busted for it than some random citizen or medical student did, presuming it was a fake.

I’m not sure how they could be busted. The only way, if vigilance committee members kept quiet because they had a lot to loose, was if the person who actually supplied the kidney, let’s say a paid medical student or mortuary attendant, decided to go to the press or police. However, that would probably get them into more trouble than it was worth. Would the student be expelled, or the attendant fired? Possibly, so why would they jeopardize their positions?

The newspapers are full of wealthy, important or influential people who do things that they shouldn’t even though they have a lot to loose. It seems to be human nature to want gratification without consideration of the consequences, or at least to think you’ll never get caught.

As for the GSG, I agree with Stewart Evans who stated something on the lines of “another wall, another bit of graffiti.” In other words, there was graffiti everywhere and undue importance was given to this wall because of the apron, which could have been dropped anywhere and still have been under or near some bit of graffiti.

Wolf.

[mariab]

To Tom:
I'm glad if you're not offended, and you see that I'm not the only one supporting your theory pertaining to the letter to Lusk, as there are important Ripperologists such as Wolf Vanderlinden who seem to have come to the same conclusion, and some of the finest researchers and WVC specialists, such as Monty, have been open to the idea, as experienced in the WVC thread.

By the by, my question to Mr. Vanderlinden in post #23 was a tricky/leading one.

As for the son of the Danish servant to the British princess, I apologize again, and it recently has turned out that he was, in fact, a daughter: “Christiana“ instead of “Christian“. :-) Debs just told me.

[Abby Normal]

Greetings all,

This may have been discussed earlier, but I would like to present an observation on the ‘From Hell’ letter.

Assumptions:
1) The ‘From Hell’ letter came from the killer.
2) The Letter was written in such a way as to masquerade the author’s true writing style.
3) I know what I’m doing

If the author was attempting to hide his style of writing, it most likely occurred at the beginning. Notice that these letters tend to be vertical and wide, as if they were written slowly and deliberately. Starting around the phrase ‘it was nice’, notice the letters are slightly slanted to the right and narrower, as if the author was writing faster and automatically, as if he temporarily forgot to hide his writing style. One can also see it at, ‘send you the bloody knife’, and ‘if you only wait’. The fact that is occurs more than once in the short letter seems to reinforce this observation.

If true, any comparison with possible suspects should be done at these areas.

Any thoughts?

Mike

Hi Mike
It has always appeared to me that the letter was written by someone who was extremely inebriated, so perhaps indirectly it masks the writers true writing style.

[Tom_Wescott]

I apologize if it offends you so much that I agreed with your theory.

You say the strangest things sometimes. I merely pointed out that thus far only you have supported my theory. Though to be fair, no one else really knows it. I'm generally not offended when people agree with me, though often befuddled when they do not.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Tom, I have my submissive moments too, you'd be surprised.
I apologize if it offends you so much that I agreed with your theory.
And I apologize even more for having repeatedly pressed you about the son of the Danish servant to the British princess (this almost sounds like a bad joke!), who was a bit too young, but still I feel that this could be a relevant lead. Laugh all the way you want about it.
I'm really, really sorry.

And to Adam:
I didn't particularly appreciate the narrative in Portait of a killer, maybe because I'm familiar with better lit from Cornwell. Her fiction books are way better, if you haven't read them. And I don't really like the biased approach in non-fiction.

[Adam Went]

Maria:

True enough...spelt it Eddows IIRC? There's no question that there's numerous errors or fallacies in the book but from a readers point of view, I didn't find it all that bad - not as bad as I had built myself up to believe, at least.

Wolf:

I have to disagree with any notion that the WVC was in any way involved with the hoaxing of From Hell and the kidney - they had a lot more to lose should they somehow be busted for it than some random citizen or medical student did, presuming it was a fake.

Do you also include the Goulston Street Graffito in that category of communications which are not from the Whitechapel murderer? Because in that case, we would agree.

Just to clarify, I don't necessarily have a solid opinion either way on whether FH was from the killer, but I believe that out of all the Ripper communications - GSG included - it is the one which should be deemed least likely to be a hoax.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Tom_Wescott]

Without wanting to jump to any conclusions about how Wolf feels, the idea that he might actually agree with a theory of mine that has thus far been poo-pooed by everyone (mistress Maria aside), gives me a bit of the warm fuzzies. I think when Wolf sees all my evidence laid out, he'll agree it's damn near irresistable to conclude that Aarons and Le Grand were behind the letter and kidney.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

Wolf Vanderlinden agrees with an idea I've recently started to contemplate!! (The idea and subsequent research originated by Tom Wescott.)
Mr. Vanderlinden, if I might inquire, would you consider Joseph Aarons or George Lusk as the initiator of the hoax? I'd be interested in hearing your take on this.

[Wolf Vanderlinden]

Hi Adam. Sorry for the delay in answering your earlier post.

Would you agree with the statement that out of all the Ripper letters, if we are choosing the one which should be deemed the most likely to be genuine if any are, "From Hell" would top that list?

Actually, no. I don’t think that any of the letters came from the Whitechapel Murderer. As I stated, most think that the ‘From Hell’ letter is genuine because of the inclusion of the kidney but the kidney was a hoax, therefore the contents of the letter (I send you half the Kidney I took from one woman… tother piece I fried and ate) is also a hoax (and one which made the Vigilance Committee a bit of money to boot).

Wolf.

[mariab]

And I've read it online, for $0. She can't even spell “Eddowes“ or SPE right.
I've also read all her Scarpetta thrillers, and I still like the early ones. Possibly the best one might be The Body Farm. All that remains ain't bad either.

[Adam Went]

Funny you should mention about reading Cornwell's book, Maria, as it's only been in the past year or so that I have read it - spotted it in a second hand book store for $10 (Hard cover) and, based on the opinions of others, held such a low opinion of it that I didn't even bother spending the ten bucks - changed my mind overnight, went back the next day and bought it. Glad I did now - factually, and especially in regards to Sickert, it's not real crash hot but I actually found it quite an interesting read from the perspective of a simply book reader - Cornwell knows how to write a book that keeps you interested in any case.

Alas, off topic though....

Cheers,
Adam.

[mariab]

Did it not occur to you that if i'd read Cornwell's book and been aware of the tests that were carried out on the letters, then I would know who, where and when had carried out said tests?

Great that you've read Portrait of a killer, Adam, like all of us, but what can I do if you post, and I quote, “look at Patricia Cornwell's analysis of the letters, the various inks, watermarks“?
Still, I apologize.

PS.: And I find Scarpetta a fascinating character.