His so-called Diary

[DVV]

Are we really to believe that as Abberline surveyed the 1888 carnage in Whitechapel he thought to himself, "Aha! Undoubtedly the work of a poisoner."

Simon

Gwad Simon,

you know Abberline never had such thought.

Amitiés,
David

[Simon Wood]

I know that, David, but the idea paints such a wonderful picture.

[Gman992]

If I knew who the JtR was, I would arrest him...do you know how much press...not to mention a sweet book deal (and maybe a feature film deal) I would get. I am the man who caught and arrested Jack the Ripper. I'm going to be as famous as J. Edgar Hoover, Melvin Purvis, Wyatt Earp, etc...If he know who it was, he would've arrested him, and made him sweat it out.

[Vanillaman]

It is this simple, show the evidence to the world, submit it for independent tests, or it is a fake.

You mention the word 'parasites' in relation to proven researchers on this subject, at the same time as defending a book that has almost no basis in fact. Flawed logic there my friend.

Okay. Well, here's the simple answer to that. What do Stewart Evans, Paul Begg, Kieth Skinner, Martin Fido, and Donald Rumbelow all have in common?

They all ascerbically attack any suggestion of a Royal connection, which is why I respond in the same way. Any dissenters from that are immediately savaged, as they guard that old ascertion that "No Englishman would do such things". They would have all believe that it was a Polish Jew, named Aaron Kosminski.

I'm angry because these bastards think that anyone elses opinion isn't worth entertaining. Despite the fact that Melvyn Fairclough may have got it wrong as far as the Abberline diaries were concerned, in addition to the mispelling Abberline's name, they jumped all over him. Paul Begg in particular was vicious in his attack on Fairclough. They and their little cabal ruined him.

NOTE: It is so typical that forums do tend to invite nasty, immature idiots with nothing constructive to contribute but insults. It shows how sad they really are, as they don't seem to have anything better to do with their time.

Forums are supposed to be there to offer help, so that we may learn something new, which is why I joined. So, if anyone can possibly answer my queries, I'd love to know please. No more childish crap from sad, lonely idiots like DW, as it will just get ignored.

[Vanillaman]

It is this simple, show the evidence to the world, submit it for independent tests, or it is a fake.

You mention the word 'parasites' in relation to proven researchers on this subject, at the same time as defending a book that has almost no basis in fact. Flawed logic there my friend.

Its amusing that you don't even see your contradition, my friend :0)

[Ally]

NOTE: It is so typical that forums do tend to invite nasty, immature idiots with nothing constructive to contribute but insults. It shows how sad they really are, as they don't seem to have anything better to do with their time.
.

So let me see if I get this straight. It'everyone else who is a nasty immature idiot, but you, who right out of the gate start insulting posters calling them idiots, and five of them bastards, YOU are the person who is above all the nasty immature crap that is such a waste of the time?

It's amusing that you don't see the irony, my friend.

Are you retarded or just clinically deranged?

[John Bennett]

Not wishing to get myself embroiled in anything heavy, but in 'The Ripper and the Royals' page 213, is a copy of a letter allegedly written by Harry Jonas confirming Joseph Gorman's meeting with the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe.

Look at the handwriting - now look at the handwriting in the 'Abberline diaries' (in front of the foreword). Make of it what you will.

[Chris]

Okay. Well, here's the simple answer to that. What do Stewart Evans, Paul Begg, Kieth Skinner, Martin Fido, and Donald Rumbelow all have in common?

They all ascerbically attack any suggestion of a Royal connection, which is why I respond in the same way. Any dissenters from that are immediately savaged, as they guard that old ascertion that "No Englishman would do such things". They would have all believe that it was a Polish Jew, named Aaron Kosminski.

In fact, of those five, only one is particularly sympathetic to the idea that Aaron Kozminski was the Ripper. The others are either "agnostic", "atheist" or actually favour other suspects.

[Vanillaman]

So let me see if I get this straight. It'everyone else who is a nasty immature idiot, but you, who right out of the gate start insulting posters calling them idiots, and five of them bastards, YOU are the person who is above all the nasty immature crap that is such a waste of the time?

It's amusing that you don't see the irony, my friend.

Are you retarded or just clinically deranged?

"Right out of the gate?" Hmmm. Either you have a very selective memory, or you didn't even bother to read the original posts to which I was responding to. Also, these authors vitriolically attack anyone supporting the Joseph Sickert case, without even a hint of justification, other than to say that Sickert recanted his story as told to Stephen Knight, without even acknowledging "why" he recanted it. They also gave Melvyn Fairclough a hard time. They character assassinate all who point the finger at the royals and Gull. Even Fido has that condescending snear every time he's interviewed, laughing at anyone else theories. Yeah, I refer to the authors as bastards. Because that's what bullies are. Just because they've written books on the subject. All of which "tow the same line" and god help anyone else who doesn't. Try reading Philip Sugdens book, in which he openly ridicules and mocks anyone else who has a theory on the ripper murders. I've researched the case for 30 years. I've also challenged some of the authors in public tours, and they couldn't even answer the questions I put to them, despite my being supported by other tourists.

So, before you go mouthing off, trying to sound clever in rebuking me, try reading back to what I was originally responding to. And, if you haven't got anything sensible to say, say nothing at all, as we've all got better things to do and to contribute constructively than tolerate the likes of you.

[Vanillaman]

I don't think so, Trevor,

he is merely hammering that the blind alleys explored by Knight and Fairclough lead to the truth.
Read his posts again...tell me he's not a (royal) troll...

Amitiés,
David

Would you give it up fool? You obviously don't read yourself........

[Vanillaman]

Suspecting a man who was known to have killed several women and who had some medical training doesn't seem like nonsense to me. It was also a view shared by two other Scotland Yard detectives, Godley and Neil. Chapman is also the preferred suspect of Philip Sugden. So at least Abberline was in good company.

c.d.

That TV documentary which pointed the finger at Chapman was pretty good. But, after watching it, the question that came to mind was, "Do serial killers change their MO so drastically?" And, there doesn't seem to be any solid evidence that Abberline actually did say outright that he believed that Chapman was the ripper, only the word of one other witness at Chapman's execution. Altho, I may be wrong on the latter. But, it would be interesting to know if any serial killers do change their methods, as FBI profilers seem to indicate that they don't???

[Vanillaman]

Not wishing to get myself embroiled in anything heavy, but in 'The Ripper and the Royals' page 213, is a copy of a letter allegedly written by Harry Jonas confirming Joseph Gorman's meeting with the Yorkshire Ripper, Peter Sutcliffe.

Look at the handwriting - now look at the handwriting in the 'Abberline diaries' (in front of the foreword). Make of it what you will.

On the subject of handwriting, there was a recent analysis of one of the ripper letters and a known letter from Walter Sickert. Both were a match. Also, the watermarked paper on which both were written were proven to have come from the same stock, so it would be interesting to hear what people make of that?

[Vanillaman]

Would you give it up fool? You obviously don't read yourself........

PS. ......Knight & Fairclough as opposed to what? That Jack was a Polish, Jewish immigrant, who was insane? I think the most obvious thing about Jack The Ripper is that someone who could outsmart 2 police forces and generations for over a 100 years has to be clever and it seems an obvious conclusion that he couldn't have possibly done it on his own. Fido and the rest avoid this and instead attack a man who is dead and can no longer defend himself and avoid taking up the issues put forward by Fairclough, apart from the misspelling of Abberlines name in his alleged diaries.

[m rowley]

Hello, now i don't even pretend to have any of your guys knowledge on the case but i did read the said book many years ago.

The point that always stuck with me is that if they were trying to silence these women why didnt they use the weight of the freemasons to take them all out in one fatefull go? Surely if it was a conspiricy they run the risk of the women talking to other prostitutes? I mean to take them out one at a time over a series of months surely would set the alarm bells ringing for the ones left alive, and wouldnt this encourage the remaining women to seek an insurance policy of writing letters to family? - ''incase of my death open this''

These ladies were known to fancy a tipple and its hard to imagine that they never breathed a word of it while under the influence, and there was enough anti-establishment organisations around who would have loved the sniff of a scandal of this magnitude. And a rumour like this would have spread like wild fire in the pubs of the East End.

but like i always say - what do i know

[Suzi]

On the subject of handwriting, there was a recent analysis of one of the ripper letters and a known letter from Walter Sickert. Both were a match. Also, the watermarked paper on which both were written were proven to have come from the same stock, so it would be interesting to hear what people make of that?

Not wanting to get involved here either- but 'A Match' and 'watermarked paper from the same stock' ??? you jest sir!