Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Most Ridiculous Theory

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

  • Most Ridiculous Theory

    So what is the most ridiculous theory you have heard regarding a suspect(s) in the Jack The Ripper case?

    Mine I think was last evening when it was suggested to me the reason he/she didn't get caught was because they were a time traveller and they had just gone back to a different time zone after the Kelly murder. So even if any valuable evidence was left behind there was no one there to tie it too.. mmmm

    (I'm off to write a book about it....)

  • #2
    That a woman would rip her only clothing for sanitary use when she had multiple items already on her that could be used for such a purpose.

    It might not be the most crazy suggestion but it was the point I realised this case will never be solved.
    My opinion is all I have to offer here,

    Dave.

    Smilies are canned laughter.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by DirectorDave View Post
      That a woman would rip her only clothing for sanitary use when she had multiple items already on her that could be used for such a purpose.

      It might not be the most crazy suggestion but it was the point I realised this case will never be solved.
      The multiple items you refer to I would suggest were kept as items for sale. There were all the same and all neatly folded. Eddowes was known to have been a hawker, so would she destroy something which might bring her some financial reward?

      It is also not crazy if Eddowes was not wearing an apron, but simply been in possession of two old pieces of apron, which at some point in time had come from a full apron. There is no evidence to show that the two pieces of apron ever made up a full apron, adding corroboration of the aforementioned.

      This issue has been discussed over and over again, and I dont intend to go back over it all again. I just wanted to put you right, as you are clearly not up to speed on the discussions on this topic.

      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

      Comment


      • #4
        Winner,winner! Chicken dinner!
        My name is Dave. You cannot reach me through Debs email account

        Comment


        • #5
          Undoubtedly for me the one that suggests that Vincent Van Gogh, living in Arles at the time of the murders totally reliant on occaisional donations of money from his brother so that he could eat and buy paint, managed to get over to England (finding money from somewhere for transport to the harbour, a return boat ticket and money for accommodation and food) for nearly three months without anyone noticing that he’d gone. Despite the fact that he was well known in the area as an ‘eccentric’ and the fact that he wrote letters from Arles at the time of the murders.

          And this brilliant theory came about because it’s author saw hidden images in Van Gogh’s paintings. Images that no one else can see!

          At least Lewis Carroll was in England at the time!
          Regards

          Herlock






          "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

          Comment


          • #6
            The 'Lords of Spitalfields' et al.

            Comment


            • #7
              Van Gough followed by all those theories that turn witnesses into suspects.

              Comment


              • #8
                There’s the travesty of a book on Conan Doyle as the ripper of course. A waste of paper and ink!
                Regards

                Herlock






                "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi.
                  Have to agree with John Wheat.
                  Regards Richard.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Geddy2112 View Post
                    So what is the most ridiculous theory you have heard regarding a suspect(s) in the Jack The Ripper case?

                    Mine I think was last evening when it was suggested to me the reason he/she didn't get caught was because they were a time traveller and they had just gone back to a different time zone after the Kelly murder. So even if any valuable evidence was left behind there was no one there to tie it too.. mmmm

                    (I'm off to write a book about it....)
                    Hi,
                    To late.....its been done, well at least in film for.
                    Regards

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by spyglass View Post
                      Hi,
                      To late.....its been done, well at least in film form.
                      Regards
                      I know but I've got my time machine revved up and I'm going back to write the book before the film came out.... I think.. so confusing.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Accusations against Macnaghten, Warren, Monro, Abberline and other officials involved in the case.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by DJA View Post
                          Winner,winner! Chicken dinner!
                          Not so fast
                          https://www.casebook.org/ripper_medi...jmorley/7.html

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Then of course there are the ‘well they were alive in the area at the time’ suspects like Robert Mann and Albert Bachert. I recall reading the book on Mann at the time and thinking that there wasn’t a scintilla of evidence to suspect him. I also recall thinking ‘is this what we’ve come to?’

                            Then there was that pitiful attempt by documentary to make HH Holmes into Jack!

                            Personally, I think that if we rigorously trimmed the herd by eliminating the impossible (Van Gogh, Cream etc) then the ludicrous (like Lewis Carroll, HH Holmes and William Gull) then the extremely unlikely (like Sickert) then the ‘not a single smidgeon of evidence against’ (like Mann, Bachert) were are left with quite a small ‘batch.’

                            This leaves the mentioned suspects like Kosminski/Cohen, Druitt, Bury and Tumblety. And of course recently ‘re-examined’ witnesses like Lechmere and Hutchinson (who despite person opinions [like my own] cannot be summarily dismissed). Not to mention Maybrick of course (but that’s really turned into the almost separate field of ‘diary’ debate.

                            I still go for Mr Unknown as the likeliest though.
                            Regards

                            Herlock






                            "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact!"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                              Then of course there are the ‘well they were alive in the area at the time’ suspects like Robert Mann and Albert Bachert. I recall reading the book on Mann at the time and thinking that there wasn’t a scintilla of evidence to suspect him. I also recall thinking ‘is this what we’ve come to?’

                              Then there was that pitiful attempt by documentary to make HH Holmes into Jack!

                              Personally, I think that if we rigorously trimmed the herd by eliminating the impossible (Van Gogh, Cream etc) then the ludicrous (like Lewis Carroll, HH Holmes and William Gull) then the extremely unlikely (like Sickert) then the ‘not a single smidgeon of evidence against’ (like Mann, Bachert) were are left with quite a small ‘batch.’

                              This leaves the mentioned suspects like Kosminski/Cohen, Druitt, Bury and Tumblety. And of course recently ‘re-examined’ witnesses like Lechmere and Hutchinson (who despite person opinions [like my own] cannot be summarily dismissed). Not to mention Maybrick of course (but that’s really turned into the almost separate field of ‘diary’ debate.

                              I still go for Mr Unknown as the likeliest though.
                              Hi HS
                              good post. If you had to single it down to one person, then yes Id probably say mr unknown. However, IMHO if you include in one group who I think are the best of a bad bunch-Hutch, blotchy, koz, kelly, chapman, and Bury then i think you looking at slightly above 50/50 that the ripper is included.


                              i would toss Maybrick on the totally ridiculous with the royals, sickert, lewis carrol, HH Holmes and those of that ilk. and they are ilk.
                              "Is all that we see or seem
                              but a dream within a dream?"

                              -Edgar Allan Poe


                              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                              -Frederick G. Abberline

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X