Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Abberline's rantings

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

  • DVV
    replied
    Imo, Lynn, we'll never need to know. I'll put that into the "Nobody knows more than I do..." category.
    En franšais : "Je sais tout mais je dirais rien". Ou encore : "Retenez-moi ou je fais un malheur..."

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    no se

    Hello David. Unfortunately, we may never know.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Hi Lynn. I don't think Monro had any plausible theory at all.
    He pretended he had formed one ("decidedly"!!!!)... but...errr... admitted that the police had "nothing positive".
    So how could he have something positive ?

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Whom?

    Hello David. Abberline? Sure. Monro? No, he remained reticent.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    In my opinion he exposed his theory quite meticulously.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Monro

    Hello CD. Good point. As I recall, Monro was asked a similar question. Recall his artful brush off?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • c.d.
    replied
    The problem is that we do not know in what context the question was asked. As Wagstaff pointed out, the reporter's question might have been along the lines of "do you have a gut feeling about the case?" "You know, maybe something in the case that you think is significant?"

    I think we need to cut Abberline some slack in this instance.

    c.d.

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Originally posted by Supe View Post
    The sensational press -- then and now -- would seem to have nothing on Casebook thread starters. That is, whatever else they may have been, Aberline's comments to the press in 1903 were most assuredly not rants.

    Don.
    Don, my tailor is rich but my English is poor. The Ripper, in Abberline's words, was an expert surgeon that committed crimes in America. How this should be qualified ?

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    agreeing again

    Hello Neil. Are we agreeing again? Don't look now but I think Parousia is around the corner. (heh-heh)

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    You're welcome Fish.

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • D.B.Wagstaff
    replied
    Let's be honest with ourselves, here. Do you really think these articles would even exist had Abberline said: "Look, I really don't have any idea who committed the White Chapel Murders, nor have any of my interpretations of evidence, including my belief the killer had surgical skill, been proven to be valid."

    He had a theory. A lot of people had theories. But nobody had the evidence for a definitive answer. He was an ex-cop who gave the newspaper reporter his best shot, and might have (but not necessarily) liked getting a little attention besides.

    Leave a comment:


  • Supe
    replied
    The sensational press -- then and now -- would seem to have nothing on Casebook thread starters. That is, whatever else they may have been, Aberline's comments to the press in 1903 were most assuredly not rants.

    Don.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fisherman
    replied
    Monty!

    You CHANGED your sign-off signature...??

    Wow. Thanks. And I was not even being all that serious.

    What can I do for you?

    Fisherman
    in awe

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Originally posted by DVV View Post
    Just felt the need to quote that. Before Neil jump at me with his truncheon.
    Steady now.

    Why are you getting hung up over a 1903 article which was obviously a sensational report rather than something substantial?

    Abberline is doing nothing more than going with the hype. Its what Ex Coppers on major cases do.

    Monty


    PS For the benefit of Maria and anyone else who is interested .

    http://www.casebook.org/press_report.../19030324.html

    http://www.casebook.org/press_report.../19030331.html
    Last edited by Monty; 03-02-2012, 11:44 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Originally posted by ChrisGeorge View Post
    Hi David

    As Neil can attest, Abberline was a very experienced Metropolitan police officer, by the standards of the day.

    That's not to say though that his understanding of the medical aspects of the case might have been on the simplistic or deluded side, and nor that he might not have accepted some wrong ideas about the killer.

    Abberline probably accepted early on the prevailing idea that the Ripper had surgical skill. Such prejudices took hold early on in the case, despite the later heated denial by the medical community that the killer had any surgical skill whatsoever.

    Let's face it, because the police had so little actual evidence to work with, and they were constantly bombarded with information and leads that often had little to do with the actual killer, all types of theories and ideas took hold.

    Then as now, your theory is as good as mine, and the Ripper can be whomever you want him to be.

    Best regards

    Chris
    Agreed, Chris, and this thread is in no way another stupid attempt to blame the police.
    Indeed, the more experienced Abberline was, the more extraordinary the case seems, and is - thanks to the experienced Abberline's "rantings".
    Last edited by DVV; 03-02-2012, 08:03 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X