'the biggest blunder in the search for Jack the Ripper'

[Phil Carter]

Sorry I don't buy the conflation of intelligence with knowledge here either

All the best

Dave

Hello Dave,

in addition to the few examples given to Neil-

how many of the policemen in 1888 over 30 ever went to school
answer- unknown. Today- all.
School leaving age then? 12? Children worked at a younger age. Grown illiteracy rife. General competance and standard of those adolescents who COULD read and write far lower. Money and background at base for start of any education. Police recruits from Army common. Qualifiication into Army?- age and physical ability and lack of mental illness. Education requirements? None.

Thats BEFORE they start patrolling

best wishes

Phil

[Monty]

You know me I always keep my promises

Like the promise you made about leaving the boards?

I don't deal in threats Trevor, they hold no class.

Go and try to intimidate someone who gives a sh...

Monty

[Monty]

Hello Dave,

in addition to the few examples given to Neil-

how many of the policemen in 1888 over 30 never went to school
answer- unknown. Today- all.
School leaving age then? 12? Children worked at a younger age. Grown illiteracy rife. General competance and standard of those adolescents who COULD read and write far lower. Money and background at base for start of any education. Police recruits from Army common. Qualifiication into Army?- age and physical ability and lack of mental illness. Education requirements? None.

Thats BEFORE they start patrolling

best wishes

Phil

Phil,

All newly recruited Constables were require to undertake literacy and numaracy examinations along with a physical. Those that failed were not taken on.

And as they progress through the ranks, undertake further examinations.

This under the rules and regulations.

Monty

[Bridewell]

Proof

Phil Carter

Hello all,


Lets just get some facts right here shall me?

1. There is no proof of link between the rag and the writing.
2. There is no proof of link between the writing and the killer.
3. ditto the killer and the transportation of the rag
4. Ditto the rag and WHEN it was ripped from the other piece
5. ditto the transportation of the kidney and the rag use thereof.
6. Ditto that Eddowes was soliciting
7. That the killer was seen by a witness
8. That Eddowes DIDNT visit Goulston St before Mitre Square.
9. That the killer wasnt hiding in a dark recess BEFORE Eddowes entered the square.
(just because a pc didnt see anyone previously doesnt mean the ßuare was empty)
10. ditto the rag was placed between 2.20 and 2.55
11. Ditto the rag was placed between 1.45 and 2.20
12. The writing wasnt there from much earlier than the time of murder
13. Ditto the writing was done after 1.45 am
14. The police told the truth( Long, Halse) in their statements
15 the police lied in their statements

And I'll give you no prizes for who it was that ENCOURAGED the promotion of that image! From murder 1 to the last memoir or jotting of pen. The police.

Ever wondered why? To some its obvious. But that irks the 'nothing was wrong and nothing must change' brigade.

Right, Phil,

We've seen your list of things there's no proof for and it's very interesting. Now can you give us proof of the truth of your own assertion about the attitude of the police - PROOF that they encouraged the promotion of that image?

Regards, Bridewell

[Phil Carter]

Hello Dave,

Thanks. Re Halse. Just look at where he was, when he was where he was and what he did where he was when he was.
I have no idea if he was involved.

Its all about seeing things that ARE there- not ones that are not there- ( Polish mad jew- teacher cum barrister-Russian con man- painter in disguise- Royal Prince- Queens physician)
all of whom have been 'fitted' to make the JTR thing a one man killing machine. Poppycock imho.

I dont WANT the police to be involved. I dont KNOW the answer. I just dont accept the rubbish we have been force fed. AN answer to a small part of this is my wish. Something certain. That is why I challenge the continual Merry go round proposing the 'fitted' suspects.

The game of name the Ripper was started by the police many many years ago.
Ask yourself why. Then look at what has happened since by some unscrupulous commentators driving it along.

I hope to God that what Neil and Rob have puts a stop to some of all that. We dont need more orchestral conducting to keep the rubbish going on and on. I wish them genuinely. All the very best.

Best wishes

Phil

[Hunter]

Hi Simon

It hasn't been proved by anybody that "the Ripper" did take any organs. Because the idea fits in with his alleged lightning surgical skills it has merely been assumed.

I don't attribute any kind of surgical skill to this killer. Whether he actually possessed any or not would be difficult to tell since he didn't have the availability of surgical instruments or facilities a surgeon would have available, nor a professional motive for his actions.

When was it first discovered that one of Eddowes' kidneys was missing?

Probably at the post-mortem held at 2:30 P.M. that day at the City mortuary in Golden Lane. This facility was a far cry from the 'shed' in Eagle Place where Phillips had to conduct the Chapman PM. Brown and Sequeira did conduct a preliminary examination of the body after it had reached the morgue and had been carefully stripped by the mortuary attendant, the belongings inventoried by Inspector Collard and sketches made by Mr. Foster. Phillips arrived sometime after 5:20 and was also present during this preliminary examination.

[Phil Carter]

Phil,

All newly recruited Constables were require to undertake literacy and numaracy examinations along with a physical. Those that failed were not taken on.

And as they progress through the ranks, undertake further examinations.

This under the rules and regulations.

Monty

Thanks Neil. Have we any known examples extant of literacy test requirements?
Fine if they could read and write. Could they add up and subtract. Multhply and divide?

Was it a 3 'r's requirement? Do we have examples of these tests?

Best wishes

Phil

[Trevor Marriott]

Like the promise you made about leaving the boards?

I don't deal in threats Trevor, they hold no class.

Go and try to intimidate someone who gives a sh...

Monty

I couldnt bear to leave the boards and let you continue to assert your influence on some of the less knowledgeable posters on here someone has to keep you in check.

Did I make any threats hmmmmmmmmm no i dont think so

Am I intimidating you well according to you yes and it seems I am doing a fine job.

Perhaps you will be more careful about what you post in the future. The sabre rattling may turn to pistols as dawn

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Trev. When you wrote 'You might live...' even I thought 'wow, that sounds like a threat', though I'm sure you just meant it as 'You might come to change your mind, etc'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Monty]

Did I make any threats hmmmmmmmmm no i dont think so

Am I intimidating you well according to you yes and it seems I am doing a fine job.

Perhaps you will be more careful about what you post in the future. The sabre rattling may turn to pistols as dawn

No, you don't intimidate me. You are trying to.

The fact you've admitted to doing that is, in itself, a threat.

I will post as I wish. You have an issue then you can either be a man about it or run off to admin. Whatever you need to do to make you feel good.

As I say, I really could care less about it to be honest. You should though, seeing as you walk a fine line that could end the attention you crave.

Monty

[Hunter]

In my mind and the minds of many others there is nothing to debate its only you and a handful of others who keep hanging onto this now outdated theory that the killer removed them and took them away in the apron piece.
You keep citing your exploits with dressing wild animals there is a big difference between that and the murders or women in almost total darkness. That has no relevance at all to ther murders or the removal of the organs.

I've field dressed my share of deer in the dark without the need for a light. Many times they don't come out until right at dusk.

Since you feel I am not qualified to offer reasonable counter arguments, I ought to be a pushover for you and your 'experts'. I'm still willing to debate you and let others decide.

I think you need to sit quietly in a dark room and really think about all of this. Your imagination is running wild.

We can let others decide who is using imagination and who is relying on evidence.

Forgive me for removing the Bold print. I can hear perfectly well without the shouting.

Oh, by the way... Sequeira told the press that he thought the mutilations could be done in three minutes. That is if the Star can be relied upon for quoting him right.

[Cogidubnus]

how many of the policemen in 1888 over 30 ever went to school
answer- unknown. Today- all.
School leaving age then? 12? Children worked at a younger age. Grown illiteracy rife. General competance and standard of those adolescents who COULD read and write far lower. Money and background at base for start of any education. Police recruits from Army common. Qualifiication into Army?- age and physical ability and lack of mental illness. Education requirements? None.

Thats BEFORE they start patrolling

Hi Phil

The point I'm trying to make is the difference between intelligence (ie the inborn ability to process data, solve problems, and reach conclusions) and education (the means through which the achievements, aims and habits of a group of people are passed down to following generations)...the two are distinct...

As an example, if Inspector X can reason that because suspect Y hasn't done this, has done that, did do the other, and therefore MUST be the murderer...then that's (in the real and genuine sense of the world) a demonstration of intelligence...if on the other hand, he reasons that because he knows the cousin of P and the wife of Q are in the same evening class and may have conspired, and there's a parallel in recent history, blah blah...then that's education...

(Clearly I'm excluding the narrow "intelligence received" definition here!)

All the best

Dave

[Phil Carter]

Right, Phil,

We've seen your list of things there's no proof for and it's very interesting. Now can you give us proof of the truth of your own assertion about the attitude of the police - PROOF that they encouraged the promotion of that image?

Regards, Bridewell

Hello Bridewell,

Yes,

The decision by some intelligent person to poster size examples of the Dear Boss and Saucy Jack stuff-signed- and post them outside police stations in an area populated by the many illiterate- that the literate verbally passed on- frightening the devil out of the population of the area- telling and giving all the impression that not only was it a one man kilker with insatiable blood lust- but this was JACK THE RIPPER.

Promotion and encouraged promotion of image achieved. Proof.(imho)

Now it would be nice to see some comment apart from 'interesting' of that list of mine. Dave saw it straight away. One cant argue with any of it. Its fact all the way. That was the point of my post. And that means we MUST open our minds to more possibilities.
(no offence meant Bridewell, please)
best wishes

Phil

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Phil. I hear what you're saying. As you're aware, I've put a lot of thought into the whole hoax thing, what with Le Grand and the Packer hoax, and Albert Bachert and his whole Three Tuns story. In the months that followed, the police believed these stories were true and that the descriptions give were that of the killer. This has caused me to wonder if these men were accomplices of the Ripper in the murder of Mary Kelly, who we know followed the papers. Did she let her guard down with her killer because he didn't resemble Packer or Bachert? Or, as you said, did the Dear Boss letter lead her to believe the killer was a toff and therefore not the man she was to make her final walk with?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Trevor Marriott]

No, you don't intimidate me. You are trying to.

The fact you've admitted to doing that is, in itself, a threat.

I will post as I wish. You have an issue then you can either be a man about it or run off to admin. Whatever you need to do to make you feel good.

As I say, I really could care less about it to be honest. You should though, seeing as you walk a fine line that could end the attention you crave.

Monty

I am not like you i dont go runing to admin I stay and fight my cause. I may not do that in a way that pleases all but thats me if people dont like it tough.

I dont crave any attention the ripperology tree needs a good shake. Too many people been holding onto outdated theories and are not prepared to consider anyhting new that goes against there beliefs.

You are one of those persons and I would have thought you of all persons would welcome the input of new stuff. But you dont yet you cannot produce anything concrete to support your own outdated perception of this whole mystery and everyhting connected to it.