Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How did he know?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Hi Sally
    I can see if the description of strides murder in the paper was detailed enough that it described just a cut throat that the letter writer would have been able to know from that to write "could not finish straight off".

    however, how did he know "she squealed a bit"? This comes from Israel Scwartz testimoney which i beleive was not in any of the papers before the Saucey jacky postcard was sent. So ,how did he know? Lucky guess? Was the Israel Scwartz testimoney traveling word of mouth and in such detail
    Hi Abby - possibly - maybe that's right - the postcard writer had heard about it. Or maybe he was the killer. Or, look at it another way - perhaps the squealing concurrence isn't as significant as it seems. It's a fairly common term. The writer knew about the 'Double Event', obviously.

    Of course, the question is, how? This is why it's important to know which, if any, papers were out on the streets in time to be read before that postcard was written - for if none, then it effectively rules out an ordinary, paper-reading member of the public.

    If that were the case, you would be left with a journalist, or other person with privileged knowledge. One such person could, of course, be the killer himself.

    Regards

    Sally

    Comment


    • #17
      If that were the case, you would be left with a journalist, or other person with privileged knowledge. One such person could, of course, be the killer himself.
      Another could be one of the two private investigators who latched on to Schwartz quite early in the piece.

      Regards, Bridewell.
      Regards, Bridewell.

      Comment


      • #18
        Regarding the bit about "number one squealed a bit", I thought that Philip Sugden dealt with this well when he pointed out that

        1. We don't know for sure that Stride did cry out. Of all four witnesses, only Schwartz claimed she cried out and Schwartz may have been unreliable (e,g. he could have been mistaken about the time. Even if he was only 10 minutes out then he probably did not see Stride with her killer).

        2. Even if Stride did cry out, this is the typical kind of vagueness that hoaxers rely on as it can be easily adapted/interpreted to fit a favoured theory.

        I think we might as well ask why, if Schwartz was right, the postcard made no mention of any witnesses. You might have expected a boast. The point is, I think, that none of the details provided were specific enough to be very convincing, not to the police at the time or to most modern researchers.

        Comment


        • #19
          I believed for over 25 years that this and the dear boss letter were genuine sadly I've come to the conclusion they are fake.If the killer wrote these communications to add to the shock value he could quite easily enclose something like a small piece of the victims clothes or indeed an ear or two to prove beyond doubt it is genuine.who would know about news agencies a journalist would the average man in the street would address the communications to a well known paper something like"the Times London" would get it there .Also would our killer give the police his handwriting I don't think so .
          Three things in life that don't stay hidden for to long ones the sun ones the moon and the other is the truth

          Comment


          • #20
            Pinkmoon I agree. I also initially thought the letters were from the real killer. But my first book on JTR by Colin Wilson and Robin Odell and while I absolutely loved it, a lot of the impressions it made turned out to be canards.

            I now think that the Saucy Jack Postcard and Dear Boss letters are hoaxes by admittedly enterprising journalists. The Lusk Letter is more likely to be genuine, simply because there is something more concrete to go on, but I wouldn't bet my house on it.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Haskins View Post
              Pinkmoon I agree. I also initially thought the letters were from the real killer. But my first book on JTR by Colin Wilson and Robin Odell and while I absolutely loved it, a lot of the impressions it made turned out to be canards.

              I now think that the Saucy Jack Postcard and Dear Boss letters are hoaxes by admittedly enterprising journalists. The Lusk Letter is more likely to be genuine, simply because there is something more concrete to go on, but I wouldn't bet my house on it.
              I think a lot of people like me wanted the letters to be genuine because it adds a fantastic element to the whole case .If the lusk letter was fake then it would possibly cost the faker a lot of money how much would you have to pay for a kidney on the black market in those days also to gain maximum publicity for the letter send it to a major newspaper.One possibility could Mr lusk have sent the kidney to himself?
              Last edited by pinkmoon; 10-10-2013, 01:36 PM.
              Three things in life that don't stay hidden for to long ones the sun ones the moon and the other is the truth

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by pinkmoon View Post
                I think a lot of people like me wanted the letters to be genuine because it adds a fantastic element to the whole case .If the lusk letter was fake then it would possibly cost the faker a lot of money how much would you have to pay for a kidney on the black market in those days also to gain maximum publicity for the letter send it to a major newspaper.One possibility could Mr lusk have sent the kidney to himself?
                Yes because Mr Lusk at least had something to gain, it threw a lot of light on him. Vanity often persuades. I always recall George Oldfield, head of the Yorkshire Ripper Investigation, placing so much emphasis on the Yorkshire Ripper tape and i recall wondering if personal nature of it, I have the greatest respect for you George, somehow clouded his judgement so that he placed all his chips on double zero.

                But still it would have been a risk for Mr Lusk to write in his own handwriting, and an even bigger risk to pay someone else to write it for him.

                If the Lusk letter was a hoax, them the hoaxer seems to have got lucky with the ginny kidney.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Haskins View Post
                  Yes because Mr Lusk at least had something to gain, it threw a lot of light on him. Vanity often persuades. I always recall George Oldfield, head of the Yorkshire Ripper Investigation, placing so much emphasis on the Yorkshire Ripper tape and i recall wondering if personal nature of it, I have the greatest respect for you George, somehow clouded his judgement so that he placed all his chips on double zero.

                  But still it would have been a risk for Mr Lusk to write in his own handwriting, and an even bigger risk to pay someone else to write it for him.

                  If the Lusk letter was a hoax, them the hoaxer seems to have got lucky with the ginny kidney.
                  I should imagine the press would pay a good price for Mr Lusks exclusive story it was a bit strange he waited two days before contacting police.
                  Three things in life that don't stay hidden for to long ones the sun ones the moon and the other is the truth

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X