Marriott Book

[denn034]

Trevor Marriott refers to a police sketch or photographic image in his Jack the Ripper: A Twenty-first Century Investigation book. This is to point out that that sketch or image can be viewed as being the same as a photo of a dark haired Walter Sickert during his acting days (i.e., compare the photos in [I]Cornwell's[I] and Marriott's book to see what I mean).

[Dan Norder]

A police sketch or photographic image? If you have seen it you should probably be able to tell whether it's a sketch or a photo, and if you haven't then how would you know that it looks like Sickert as a young man?

Do you mean the image below? If so, it has no possible connection with the Jack the Ripper case unless you believe Feigenbaum was the Ripper. If he was not the Ripper then the image is irrelevant, and if he was the Ripper then Sickert obviously wasn't.

[Mike Covell]

Please explain how Sickert got Asian eyes denn034??

I am assuming he had purchased some sort of Victorian sellotape from the arts and craft shop before his spree!

[Jdombrowski89]

Please explain how Sickert got Asian eyes denn034??

I am assuming he had purchased some sort of Victorian sellotape from the arts and craft shop before his spree!

Mike,

now now. Let's not be too quick to also forget the hair dye!

Regards,
Justin

[denn034]

Photos Compared


Here are the two composite image and Sickert photo side by side (the Sickert photo came from Cornwell's book). In other words, one didn't have to be a foreigner to look like that. Sickert, being a former actor, was skilled in make-up and could've done it. That fact alone is enough to argue that Marriott didn't prove his case regarding Feigenbaum.

[Dan Norder]

The fundamental problem here is that this interpretation (it's not a photograph) was created from descriptions of Carl Feigenbaum after he was caught red-handed trying to escape after murdering Juliana Hoffman in New York in 1894. Unless you are claiming that they didn't have Feigenbaum at all and that it was really Walter Sickert who was captured, put on trial and was eventually executed by electric chair (and, what, Feigenbaum impersonated Sickert for the rest of his days?), then your ability to convince yourself that the image looks like Sickert is completely meaningless.

[denn034]

No

The fundamental problem here is that this interpretation (it's not a photograph) was created from descriptions of Carl Feigenbaum after he was caught red-handed trying to escape after murdering Juliana Hoffman in New York in 1894. Unless you are claiming that they didn't have Feigenbaum at all and that it was really Walter Sickert who was captured, put on trial and was eventually executed by electric chair (and, what, Feigenbaum impersonated Sickert for the rest of his days?), then your ability to convince yourself that the image looks like Sickert is completely meaningless.

No, Marriott argues in his book that Feigenbaum looks like the Police composite that they compiled from Ripper witness descriptions so, I felt the need to point out that one doesn't have to be an oriental or foreigner to look that way, the blonde caucasian Sickert's ability to change his appearance demands the view. That's all I was saying.

[DVV]

Back to the sea

Hello everybody,
reading the discussion here, I feel like considering only CF's case prevents us to go further than problems arisen by Marriott's book.
And frankly speaking, having read its review and the author's interview on casebook, I'm not sure I will buy this book...
Still, I acknowlege Marriott's work for reawaking Jack's "sea-trails". There are several Seamen's suspects: CF, Fogelma, Sadler, WG Grant...
Can I suggest to compare the weight of suspicion on them in one thread?
So, if you had to choose your favourite suspect among sailors, which one would it be, and why?
Thanks all, and forgive my broken english,
DVV (aka Fu Manchu)

[Uncle Jack]

My fave has to be the Jill the Sailor tale!

[Shelley]

Trevor Marriott

why was Trevor Marriott Banned? Sounds like he did some good stuff. I took a look at the American police Force and their coppers, i am shocked at what some of them do ~ Tazering 5 and 8 year old kids, they are just little ones, usually what happens in the GB is we have a few words, so the child can figure out what they may have done wrong, or what went wrong, any punishments needed at that age usually entails toffee or chocolate sweets intake either confiscated completely for a time period or indeed a reduction, of sweet confectionery intake. Or indeed we take around 10 - 20 minutes off bedtime allocation, the British police usually only have words with a child if neccessary ~ USA Police feel the need to tazer them. American ladies don't marry an american copper, as far as i can tell some of them would be bad parents, especially when their kids reach the age of 5 yrs & 8 yrs of age.

[Garry Wroe]

Which kind of explains what's gone wrong with the UK over the last twenty-five years. Too many social workers; too few cattle prods.

I'm shocked to learn that not a single US police officer is married, however. Have they never heard of Tai brides? They're cheap, hard working, and don't complain too much about being tazered. Ideal.