September 17th Letter

[mac-the-kipper]

I spent many years researching my family tree and found several documents, especially wills, that 'cracked' when opened. When paper or card is stacked one on top of the other it applies pressure. If these wills or other documents haven't been examined for over a hundred years they do tend to stick slightly.

The Sept 17th letter was found in a very thin brown folder, not paper, nor a report envelope as stated on the photo's page. The folder having the appearance of a didvider of which there are several in the file also not on microfilm.

There are also several other letters from Joe Public that bear no 'Received' stamp or any other initialling or 'official' marks. Also fake?

Has anyone attempted to question the NA as to their stance on this letter?

[auspirograph]

I spent many years researching my family tree and found several documents, especially wills, that 'cracked' when opened. When paper or card is stacked one on top of the other it applies pressure. If these wills or other documents haven't been examined for over a hundred years they do tend to stick slightly.

Well Mac, that's wonderful to hear that Jack the Ripper may possibly have been an ancestral member of your family and no doubt a curiosity but, surely, even if the letter is genuine does not mean it came from the killer.

And if that is indeed the case, it goes directly into the curiosity bin, Maybrick debacles and Cornwell batter for yummy pasties as it has little significance or priority as a historical source document on the Whitechapel murders.

Get over it mate, someone is pulling someone's leg either modern or Victorian and you discovered it, congratulations. When you or anyone else can furnish proof for its authenticity apart from appearing in what was the porous Public Records Office then I am sure others will consider it objectively in study of the Jack the Ripper case.

[mac-the-kipper]

Well Mac, that's wonderful to hear that Jack the Ripper may possibly have been an ancestral member of your family and no doubt a curiosity but, surely, even if the letter is genuine does not mean it came from the killer.

And if that is indeed the case, it goes directly into the curiosity bin, Maybrick debacles and Cornwell batter for yummy pasties as it has little significance or priority as a historical source document on the Whitechapel murders.

Get over it mate, someone is pulling someone's leg either modern or Victorian and you discovered it, congratulations. When you or anyone else can furnish proof for its authenticity apart from appearing in what was the porous Public Records Office then I am sure others will consider it objectively in study of the Jack the Ripper case.

And it's also wonderful that some of the more 'reputable' members of this closed circle love to take the piss out of others' scant and inept research. I hope you glow with your ridiculous sense of victory.

Do we have a Scottish suspect for JTR? Who said I was in the NA researching my family? Doesn't your tiny mind have the capability to figure out that I've done different research on different subjects?

I've never claimed the letter genuine or fake. But would rather wait and see what Keith Skinner and Paul Begg have to say about it and see whether they agree with the NA's own decision from their tests.

[Cap'n Jack]

As I said, Mac, you gotta get used to the smell of old cod around here... and pickled herrings. Just like you I'll bide my time until such a time as the document has been examined and evaluated.
Your open-minded attitude towards this document over many years now has to be remarked upon, and for my money is the best indicator we have that the document is indeed genuine.

[Natalie Severn]

Well Mac, that's wonderful to hear that Jack the Ripper may possibly have been an ancestral member of your family and no doubt a curiosity but, surely, even if the letter is genuine does not mean it came from the killer.

And if that is indeed the case, it goes directly into the curiosity bin, Maybrick debacles and Cornwell batter for yummy pasties as it has little significance or priority as a historical source document on the Whitechapel murders.

Get over it mate, someone is pulling someone's leg either modern or Victorian and you discovered it, congratulations. When you or anyone else can furnish proof for its authenticity apart from appearing in what was the porous Public Records Office then I am sure others will consider it objectively in study of the Jack the Ripper case.

Well all I can say is that it seems to be the luck of the drawer-or should that be "the top drawer "-that determines what may be viewed as bogus and what authentic by certain posters on here.
A few weeks back I was discussing whether or not ,given differences in pencil colouring and letter shapes ,between the marginalia and the end notes,the Swanson marginalia could have been a hoax .
Now it has to be remembered that these "marginalia and end notes ",just like the September 17th letter, "surfaced" in 1988 in a most disconcertingly "coincidental "manner ,ie they both coincided with the "Centenary "of the Whitechapel murders of 1888.
In the case of the marginalia ,the owners presented it ,first off,for sale to the editor of the News of the World newspaper,the claim being made that the marginalia,combined with the "end notes" written in the different coloured pencil,actually " named" Jack the Ripper .
Now its clear to me that before such a claim can be presented as genuine to the public,it would normally need the most advanced forensics and microscopic examination to have any credibility whatsoever,yet,no less a Ripper researcher than Martin Fido,is on record, as recently having stated that the Swanson Marginalia and the end notes that accompany it, are of "unimpeachable provenance".----because Swanson"s grandson was such a dear old chap!

So you see Mac,its not who you are but whose well connected grandson you may be that appears to determine whether you will be believed or not!
Hooey---thats what I say.
The provenance of the Swanson Marginalia is every bit as up for question as is the September 17th letter -more so in my view.

[mac-the-kipper]

Happy Birthday!

[Tom_Wescott]

Nor is there one piece of evidence to prove its a fake.

Of course there is, the reams of contemporary documentation naming the 'Dear Boss' letter as the first Ripper communique. Then you also have the Dear Boss letter itself, apologizing for the 'trade name' because it was the first time he used it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Cap'n Jack]

Tom, I would have thought that the writer of the 'Dear Boss' letter made it absolutely clear when he used the actual phrase 'Dont mind me giving the trade name', that he had used the 'trade name' in a previous letter, for he writes 'the trade name' rather than 'my trade name'; which is a strong indication of expected familiaratity on the part of the writer in regard to his 'trade name'.

[Sam Flynn]

for he writes 'the trade name' rather than 'my trade name'; which is a strong indication of expected familiaratity...

...I must introduce you to the wife one day, AP

PS: I think Tom has made a good point there.

[Cap'n Jack]

Not the first time I met her, Sam, it would be your wife rather than the wife.
Only after we had sunk a few at the Seven Stars would it be 'the' wife.

[mac-the-kipper]

Of course there is, the reams of contemporary documentation naming the 'Dear Boss' letter as the first Ripper communique. Then you also have the Dear Boss letter itself, apologizing for the 'trade name' because it was the first time he used it.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Thats LACK of evidence not proof.
Please remind me never to hire you as a solicitor if I get into any trouble.

[Dan Norder]

Thats LACK of evidence not proof.

The substantial lack of evidence that the Sept. 17th letter was real and the first letter signed Jack the Ripper combined with plenty of existing evidence showing that the Dear Boss letter was real and the first to be signed Jack the Ripper does constitute proof.

[mac-the-kipper]

The substantial lack of evidence that the Sept. 17th letter was real and the first letter signed Jack the Ripper combined with plenty of existing evidence showing that the Dear Boss letter was real and the first to be signed Jack the Ripper does constitute proof.

Oh dear, I wouldn't want you in my corner either;

Judge..'Did he murder the victim'?

Prosecutor... 'There's no evidence to say he didn't m'lud' !

Guilty!

[Tom_Wescott]

Oh dear, I wouldn't want you in my corner either;

Not to worry. I'm getting the picture your corner will be a very lonely one.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Cap'n Jack]

Not with me around it won't.