Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So......who do you think it was?

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

  • So......who do you think it was?

    massive fan of casebook, and just the history/mystique of the whole JTR saga, the wifes bought me a JTR tour for some time this year (via Virgin? No idea if its any good!) and i'm on the hunt for some good JTR "kindle" reading material for when we go on holiday in April.

    Anyway, i digress.....

    So many threads, and so much information, i thought i'd just ask a nice simple question....who do YOU think JTR was? There are so many arguments, theorys, evidence and false facts, we seem to forget the most important question.....who do you think JTR was?

    Doesn't have to be an indepth answer (although always welcome), just be interested to see what the general populus would say if they were pressed for an answer!
    Last edited by evertonmarc; 01-16-2014, 04:43 PM.

  • #2
    G'Day evertonmarc

    and Welcome.

    To answer your question.

    Someone we have never heard of.
    G U T

    There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

    Comment


    • #3
      G'day GUT!

      Interesting answer.....and most probably correct!

      Comment


      • #4
        It'll either be that, or someone we have heard of.

        Comment


        • #5
          or maybe somewhere inbetween......

          i see where this thread is going...!!!

          Comment


          • #6
            G'Day Lechmere

            Or both!
            G U T

            There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by evertonmarc View Post
              massive fan of casebook, and just the history/mystique of the whole JTR saga, the wifes bought me a JTR tour for some time this year (via Virgin? No idea if its any good!) and i'm on the hunt for some good JTR "kindle" reading material for when we go on holiday in April.

              Anyway, i digress.....

              So many threads, and so much information, i thought i'd just ask a nice simple question....who do YOU think JTR was? There are so many arguments, theorys, evidence and false facts, we seem to forget the most important question.....who do you think JTR was?

              Doesn't have to be an indepth answer (although always welcome), just be interested to see what the general populus would say if they were pressed for an answer!
              Hi EM
              And welcome.

              I Beleive that Mary Kelly is the key to this mystery, as the circumstances seem to indicate that she knew her killer.

              According to the witness statements she was seen with four men that night and I would posit that their is a good chance that one of them was her killer( and thus JtR):
              Barnett, blotchy, hutch and his "suspect" Aman.

              Barnett was interogated by police and cleared and also his other circs seem to clear him (although I still don't rule him totally out). Aman IMHO is probably a fictional invention of hutch.

              That leaves Blotchy and hutch and I rate them 1 and 1a. I also think that chapman, koz, bury, and James Kelly are viable candidates and with this group of six men I think we have a slightly better than 50/50 chance of having the ripper. But I admit, there are no strong suspects, only the better of a weak lot.
              "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


              • #8
                I don't think it's any of the named suspects and I think it's also possible that no one actually saw the Ripper. I think, by openly interacting with the ladies, he would have taken a big risk of being seen and identified.
                There are persons of great interest though, in my opinion. Jacob Levy, to my mind, is overlooked by some of the more popular names and is the most interesting.
                Who I don't think it was, well, certainly not Maybrick, Druitt or Chapman. Koz, Bury and Kelly are certainly interesting but as I've already stated, I don't think it's anyone we know.

                Comment


                • #9
                  G'Day Amanda

                  I don't think it's any of the named suspects and I think it's also possible that no one actually saw the Ripper.
                  Couldn't agree more

                  I think, by openly interacting with the ladies, he would have taken a big risk of being seen and identified.
                  So do you believe that he didn't engage with them and possibly just attacked? [Just trying to clarify].
                  G U T

                  There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I sincerely believe that he was a guy a lot of the beat cops at the time knew, because this nobody special was buying them drinks and pumping them for information about the case. Some guy who clearly was not a reporter.

                    I think Jack is a guy in desperate need of control, and he HAD to know what the cops knew, to try and stay in control. I always picture a mousy little nervous guy. But he could be whatever the British version of a good ol' boy is.
                    The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      James Kelly. It's a really good story so it must be true.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        ILevy is an interesting fella. And I'd bet a little bit of money Jack is prob somewhere in the case files, even if only benign. Wish they were around. Let's be serious for a second, local, employed, didn't raise suspicions. Regular type fella with some sort of disfunction that doesn't provide any direct correlation to the deed. Control prob an important element, whatever it had to do with. Kinda doesn't matter. One should also respect the notion of different individuals for different victims. Who was the Ripper? To give the inane poorly attempted existential college turd answer, "We all are man, we all are." Sorry, feeling a little rowdy currently. Excelsior!!!
                        Last edited by Digalittledeeperwatson; 01-16-2014, 11:56 PM.
                        Valour pleases Crom.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hi,
                          I also believe Mary Kelly to have been the key.and believe the Ripper was known to her.
                          I believe Hutchinson's statement, and I would say its near enough a certainty that Mary would not have taken a man dressed like that , and she had just met,back to her room, unless she had no reason to suspect him of any abuse.
                          I have a inkling that the Lord mayors show is a factor in this.
                          I have a suspicion that this man had previously told Kelly, that he would escort her to the show, and that is why he was dressed that way, I also feel that Mrs Harvey left her bonnet with Mary the previous night, for the purpose of Kelly wearing it the following morning .
                          So did ''A man'' kill Mary..logic says yes.
                          Why was he dressed like that?..to gain Kelly's trust.
                          Why was he waiting on the corner when Hutch saw him...'waiting for Mary who had arranged to met him, and escort him back through Dorset street.
                          Why not kill her on the streets?
                          Because he wanted to afford the luxury of time on this one,
                          That's my take on it.
                          But just one possibility out of many.
                          Regards Richard.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Victim relevance.

                            Not with complete certainty of course, but if it was just one individual who perpetrated these acts, I think it highly unlikely any of the victims were of any particular significance other than being available to be murdered. They might have symbolized something to the murderer of course, but other than that they were effectively just meat. I think anyone would've sufficed so long as the needed conditions/criteria for success were met. Or close enough to acceptable working parameters. Another reason I can't just exclude Stride. Error of judgement of the scenario.
                            Valour pleases Crom.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              subjunctive

                              Hello DLDW.

                              ". . . but if it was just one individual who perpetrated these acts . . ."

                              Excellent!

                              Cheers.
                              LC

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X