Could Jack have been a rogue copper?

[AdamWalsh]

You are correct, JtR could have dressed himself as a police officer but if he did so then we have to reject all witnesses of him since none described him in police garb.

You are also correct in saying that you did not say that all of the victims were found by Policemen, but you plainly suggested that a policeman who first found a body would be a likely suspect. I pointed out that that would be the City PC Watkins, and asked you for evidence. You have been silent

Why ?

jbarntt

you still miss my point, lets just say for arguments sake - Jack was a policeman ,killing done he flees into the night, PC Watkins then finds the body, just because a policeman found the first body is not saying he was the one that killed her, many police operated in that area.
Anyway, none of this is my favourite theory, just going along with the original poster of the thread, this is after all a discussion board.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello Mitch!

The reason, why I thought in the 1970s - though my interest at the time was just a fast scratch on the surface - to be a PC, was;

JtR seemed to know the police movements pretty well.

Today I find a PC being JtR possible, but unlikely!

All the best
Jukka

[Mitch Rowe]

While I dont wish to speak for Suzi I believe what she meant by Concept PC is because its usually the first answer I hear from my friends when I explain how JTR killed in such highly populated areas without getting caught.
They conceive it must have been a PC because a PC could be trusted and have reason for being there. For this reason I believe many PCs have been accused over the years.

The only accusation that concerns me though is of William Thick.

http://www.casebook.org/ripper_media/book_reviews/non-fiction/cjmorley/183.html

[jbarntt]

Hi Suzi,

Oooooooooh Gawd jbarntt!!

'PC' Ripper was my term used to describe the 'concept' of JTR being a policeman...nothing more nothing less!!

At the end of the day- it's a tantalising concept- but to be honest we have nothing to go on...do we!!

BTW-

No -not understanding is a double negative...you didn't write anything on a wall in Goulston St did you?

I'm a bit confused about your idea of a 'concept' of JtR being a policeman. Is being a 'concept' policeman different than actually being a policeman ? The concept may be "tantalising", I don't know. It all seems very mysterious to me.

"but to be honest we have nothing to go on...do we!!"

Uh, no. We have a lot to go on. It is not enough to establish, beyond a reasonable doubt, who JtR was, but it is enough to throw out some of the most stupid and unsupported suggestions. For example, we can rule out Prince Albert Victor, Sir Wm. Gull, James Maybrick, Walter Sickert, etc., w/o any difficulty.

When we get to Druitt, Kosminski, and Hutchinson, that's where it gets interesting. Could have been any one of them, or they all could be innocent.

jbarntt

[jbarntt]

The point is that in all honesty we dont know most of the facts. We don't even "know" that Jack existed, ie that there was a serial killer on the loose in 1888. The evidence would suggest there was, but thats all we can really say. We can't say for certain how many women he killed, whether it was just the so called c5, or even if all the c5 were killed by the same person. Therefor it seems to me that all we're really left with IS speculation and conjecture.....

now donning my hardhat

Ok, so there was no serial killer responsible for the deaths of the c5, just a random sequence of accidents, murders and suicides. It does not follow from that that all we are left with is speculation and conjecture. There is the historical record that can be examined and any speculation should derive from that record.

If you simply wish to make it up as you go, why not write a book of fiction ? RLS did a pretty good job with "The Strange Case of Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde".

jbarntt

[John Casey]

Hi John,

You posed a hypothetical question which has no basis in the evidence. It is not a question of anyone's "cosy" view.

As to your second point, of course JtR could have been a "regular client, a police officer, a known night watchman", or a father, an uncle, a priest, a soldier, a sailor, a tinker or a midwife.

"of course I have no evidence that he was any of these things, just pure speculation and conjecture."

So what's the point ? Shouldn't the discussion be grounded in the facts at hand ? Maybe JtR was a UFO alien from Arcturus 9.

jbarntt

The point is that in all honesty we dont know most of the facts. We don't even "know" that Jack existed, ie that there was a serial killer on the loose in 1888. The evidence would suggest there was, but thats all we can really say. We can't say for certain how many women he killed, whether it was just the so called c5, or even if all the c5 were killed by the same person. Therefor it seems to me that all we're really left with IS speculation and conjecture.....

now donning my hardhat

[jbarntt]

Oooooooooh Gawd jbarntt!!

'PC' Ripper was my term used to describe the 'concept' of JTR being a policeman...nothing more nothing less!!

At the end of the day- it's a tantalising concept- but to be honest we have nothing to go on...do we!!

BTW-

No -not understanding is a double negative...you didn't write anything on a wall in Goulston St did you?

You seriously think JtR was a Policeman ? Based on what evidence ? But then you admit that there is nothing "to go on", so why do you even bring the idea up ?

jbarntt

[jbarntt]

"Evidence please" - christ you people on this site are serious, Im talking about thoughts, not evidence! I didnt say all bodies were found by Policemen BUT if the killer was dressed as a policeman he mightve been able to explain his way out of it, because the bodies were found by regular people doesnt mean this isnt the case.

You are correct, JtR could have dressed himself as a police officer but if he did so then we have to reject all witnesses of him since none described him in police garb.

You are also correct in saying that you did not say that all of the victims were found by Policemen, but you plainly suggested that a policeman who first found a body would be a likely suspect. I pointed out that that would be the City PC Watkins, and asked you for evidence. You have been silent

Why ?

jbarntt

[Sam Flynn]

PRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRP!

...it must be hell in there! I bet his goggles flip up and all!

[Suzi]

You're next ..PRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR P!...Sorry Punk/Perp/Punk!
Or something like that...whatever/whoever JTR was Sadly I dont think 'He was the Law'!!!

Incidently nobody can draw Dredd like Brian Bolland 'eh!!!

[Suzi]

Heeeeeee heeee exactly Sam or Judge Dredd doing a silent one in the LYCRA! You're (whatever he says) Pppppppppppppppprrrrrrrrrrrp!Oooooooooooooooooooooooooops..Lycra never the safest of clothing!!!

[Sam Flynn]

Now the 'PERP' to which you refer

What is a "perp" anyway? Is it the sound a fart makes when your arse is fitted with a silencer?

[Suzi]

Oooooooooh Gawd jbarntt!!

'PC' Ripper was my term used to describe the 'concept' of JTR being a policeman...nothing more nothing less!!

At the end of the day- it's a tantalising concept- but to be honest we have nothing to go on...do we!!

BTW-

No -not understanding is a double negative...you didn't write anything on a wall in Goulston St did you?

[jbarntt]

Hi Suzi,

I've edited your post to what I think is the part re: me. If I have made a mistake, let me know.

jbarntt- What was that all about?? Look- Policemen were obviously in, around and about -legion at this period- but OK it's a pretty illusion to go with PC Ripper but without any facts we can go...'er...nowhere!

Suzi

I'm not sure I understand you. Indeed police officers were all over the place, but I don't understand your comment about a "PC Ripper". I take "PC" to mean "Police Constable", but that makes no sense in your post, so I think I am not understanding you.

Clarify your post for me and I'll be happy to respond.

Best,

jbarntt

[Suzi]

Hi jbarntt
Now the 'PERP' to which you refer- more than likely dressed in the way of the common man rather than in the manner described by Hutchinson..Anyone wearing something worth 'having away' would have had that removed - when just two or three steps into Dorset Street...or anywhere else for that matter in the area!!