Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Likely Suspect?

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

  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    I should point out as i have done on many occassions on here that his lawyer went public with his statement after the execution as he was bound by client confidentiality in the first instance.

    Secondly if he were making it up as has been suggested then what would have to gain by mentioning long forgotten murders in a land far away. Feigenbaum arrested 1894 executed 1896

    Why invite the police to check out the movments of Feigenbaum if he knew that should that be done and the enquiries did not corroborate what he had said then it would be proved he would lied

    Leave a comment:


  • Howard Brown
    replied
    Before I let a golden opportunity slip by to toss a shot at the legal profession and the Feigenbaum theory, may I add that had it not been for a lawyer coming forward AFTER his client had been executed, Feigenbaum would have been small potatoes in the scheme of things. A lawyer who went to the press first instead of the police authorities. A lawyer who was in deep doodoo about money it appears. A lawyer who committed suicide. A lawyer,period.

    I think there's at least three examples of members of that profession who have made claims that their clients were this or that after the fact, ipso fatso as they say in Latin, that spring to mind in terms of murders and identities of....and two of those were Ripper related.

    Leave a comment:


  • Howard Brown
    replied
    Yo Phil:

    Here's a link to the entire 370 page "O'Donnell Manuscript"

    http://studies.jtrforums.com/index.php

    You don't have to join or register to anything in order to read it. Let Mike or I know if you have any problems in reading it due to jpeg issues or anything of that technical nature.

    By the way,Mike is a humble sort since it was due to his efforts that showed that D'Onston was incapable of being the Ripper. He was locked in beddy-bye while all hell was breaking loose outdoors.

    Yers

    How
    Last edited by Howard Brown; 02-21-2009, 02:59 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Covell
    replied
    Hi Phil,
    It might be worth you checking out,
    1, The Stephenson threads on Casebook,
    2, The Stephenson threads on jtrforums.com
    3, My Ripper Casebook blogg, which features all my research into Stephenson, which is still ongoing, and still turning up useful snippets into his life.

    Leave a comment:


  • PABeers
    replied
    Regarding other suspects

    Having just read Jack the Ripper The 21st Century Investigation (I know, I'm a bit behind the times here!) I found the argument in favor of Feigenbaum intriguing (I rather favor the suggestion Jack the Ripper was a mariner); however, I was curious why Robert D'Onston Stephenson was not listed (and proven false) as a suspect? I've been out of the circle a bit but I thought he was a favorite of many, and yet his name was not proferred and subsequently refuted. Did I miss a memo?

    Phil B.

    Leave a comment:


  • Uncle Jack
    replied
    Is there an actual photo of Feigenbaum available or do we just have the artist rendition. If the artist rendition is what he looked like, it kind of rules him as the man seen with some of the victims.

    Leave a comment:


  • GordonH
    replied
    I read Trevor's book and I liked its methodology.

    However, where the CF theory goes awry is:

    The murder he was convicted of did not seem to have the same method as the ripper murders.

    He can not be positively placed in London at the time.

    If he was in London and on a ship then it would mean him having to go out from the docks to seek victims in areas that are difficult to navigate in the dark. Yet the murderer seems to get away from one of the murders very easily having been disturbed.

    His poor English makes it difficult to underatnd how he could put the women at ease. However, they were all fairly well drunk so maybe.... but then again for Mary Kelly to take him inside might require a lot of trust.

    I still feel its a local who was the killer, but Trevor's book is well written and doesnt really jump to too many conclusions compared to others.

    Leave a comment:


  • Moriarty
    replied
    The bias/objectivity schism is a false one. It is possible to be biased yet remain objective. Think sports commentary.

    Leave a comment:


  • Uncle Jack
    replied
    Hi Dan,

    I know a lot of the evidence in Trevor's book is circumstancial but so are every other book really. I just find Trevor's evidence a lot more convincing than others. I am not suggesting in anyway that I do think Feigenbaum is Jack the Ripper (I obviously favour my own suspect ) but I do think he provides a good theory, as do many other authors.

    Best regards Dan,

    Adam

    Leave a comment:


  • Wolf Vanderlinden
    replied
    Mr. Marriott.

    You do yourself a disservice by forgoing constructive debate and reverting to the antics of a spoiled five year old child (again). You have written a book in which you lay out your theory. I have written an article which looks at both sides of this theory, both yours and the original author of said theory. I don’t happen to agree with you but I have no axe to grind, no personal suspect to protect or put forth and I have written with no malice towards yourself. I am afraid that the same can’t be said for you. As I wrote earlier, my unbiased opinions on Carl Feigenbaum, based solely on the evidence, can be read on the Feigenbaum page of the Suspects section here on the Casebook.

    Wolf.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm unbiased how can it be unbiased if you wrote it

    Leave a comment:


  • Wolf Vanderlinden
    replied
    Anyone who wishes to read an unbiased review of the evidence for and against Feigenbaum can read a slightly edited version of my Ripper Notes article. It can be found in the Suspects section of the Casebook.

    Wolf.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trevor Marriott
    replied
    i would like to answer that there is a wealth of strong circumstantial evidence to suggest Feigenabum as being the strongest suspect to date. that comes from his attorney who stated his enquries put him in Whitechapel at the time of the murders.

    He also stated feigenabum told him of his hatred of women and he suffered from what would appear to be psycopathic tendencies.

    Feigenbaum had also spent the best part of his life as a merchant seaman working for a german merchant line which had a particular vessel in London on all of the dates bar one of the Whitechapel murders and also on one of the later murders in Whitechapel.

    feigenabum used many aliases showig he was cool calculated and cunning. He used a long bladed knife to kill the woman in New York the same type used to kill in London. the same method of killing was also used to the point of decapitation.

    Evidence of other simliar Ripper like murders in Germany and The USA all remaining undetected at a time when Feigenbaum was travelling back and forth between The USA and germany.

    These are just some of the facts that make him the best suspect to date.

    As to Wolfs article in which he has attemtped to discredit my findings. As previousy stated i have studied the article and he has quoted a number of issues which he states are incorrcet. I totally disgaree with those issues and am quite prepared to go on record stating where he is wrong. Hoewever i dont want to get into a slanging match over these issues it is un professional.

    At the end of the day it is for everyone to read both sides of the arguments and then make their own decisions as to who is right and who is wrong.

    Perhaps Wolf should start to add some positive input into the Feigenabum saga instead of being negative and dismissing him outright as he did several years ago when he started to enquire into feigenbaum but gave up. Perhaps if he had pursued the lines of enquiry i pursued he may well have been standing where i am now with Feigenbaum

    Leave a comment:


  • Dan Norder
    replied
    Hey Uncle Jack,

    What exactly even remains from the Feigenbaum theory that you think makes him sound at all like possibly Jack the Ripper, let alone one of the strongest candidates?

    He killed a woman who caught him trying to steal from her. There's no evidence he ever killed anyone else. There's no evidence he was in London at the time of the Ripper murders. If anyone who ever committed a murder anywhere around the world in the late 19th century is a Ripper suspect, that's a lot of people.

    Leave a comment:


  • Uncle Jack
    replied
    Having read Wolf's article, I admit he does make some interesting points and it convinced me that Feiganbaum was not responsable for some of the 'ripper style' murders but the article is far from proving that Feiganbaum wasn't the Ripper. Personally, I find Trevor's case one of the strongest.

    Kind regards,

    Adam

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X