The BIG Poll

[Geddy2112]

1) Anderson's Suspect
2) Jacob Levy
3) Bury
4) Richardson
5) Chapman

But my real number 1 would be an unknown local man.

[Herlock Sholmes]

1) Anderson's Suspect
2) Jacob Levy
3) Bury
4) Richardson
5) Chapman

But my real number 1 would be an unknown local man.

Cheers Geddy

No Cross?

[Geddy2112]

No Cross?

Chuff off...

(oh and tell Gary I'm banned on the other forum so I can't reply to him )

[FISHY1118]

Yes I did.

Didn't seem as if you did based on your follow up post.

[FISHY1118]

Post #432 of The Mystery Finally Solved for a start Fishy:

”However, we know Thompson also spent ~6 weeks in a private hospital.”

Ok, it’s betting time again folks. What will Fishy do next?

a) Admit that he was wrong.
b) Try to claim that he was asking something else.
c) Try to change the subject.
d) Just not respond.

I favour c) or d) as they are the usuals.

You mean this one . where context was completely lost on you . ?

You’ve misunderstood both Walsh’s material and the timeline. The evidence is more nuanced than you’re suggesting.

1. Providence Row attendance – John Walsh (1967) was clear that Thompson stayed at Providence Row, and Thompson himself described the harrowing queues in his own essay. The confusion came from Walsh misplacing Providence Row in the West End due to cartography, when in reality the refuge had moved to Crispin Street, Spitalfields in 1868 – directly opposite Dorset Street, where Mary Kelly lived and died. This wasn’t “miles away,” as Herlock suggests, but in the very heart of the Ripper’s hunting ground.
2. Refuge entry conditions – Providence Row only opened for the winter months (November–May), with stays capped at six weeks. Entry required respectable clothing and a reference. For most of Thompson’s vagrancy (1885–1888) he couldn’t have qualified – he was in rags, cut off from family and friends. Only in November 1888 did circumstances align: his editor Wilfrid Meynell and Canon Carroll had given him money and clothes, and as a published poet with Catholic patrons, he could finally provide the needed reference.
3. The timing – The Row reopened on 5 November 1888, allowing a potential six-week stay. However, we know Thompson also spent ~6 weeks in a private hospital (the exact dates unrecorded, Meynell’s margin note: “Six weeks, my son!”). He was later dispatched to Storrington before New Year. Reconciling these facts, the likeliest scenario is that Thompson entered the Row at its November opening, stayed briefly (perhaps 10 days), and was then placed in hospital around mid-November. That means he was at large in Whitechapel on 9 November, the date of Kelly’s murder, before his hospital confinement.
4. Mary Kelly connection – A 1973 BBC interview with a nun recalled Kelly herself using Providence Row in the 1880s, pretending reform to get a bed. Robert Thurston Hopkins also hinted that a poet friend of Kelly’s may have known her. If true, that overlap deepens the link between Thompson and the final victim.

So no, Lewis – the “hospital” argument doesn’t exonerate Thompson for Kelly’s murder. The Providence Row calendar, Walsh’s testimony, and Meynell’s note together place him in Spitalfields precisely when the murders peaked. The hospital stay only afterwards explains his sudden disappearanc

[FISHY1118]

And that’s why you get so many people suggesting Gull as a suspect Fishy.

Well i cant help it if you and other prefer to support suspects like Cutbush and Druitt that were BOTH dismissed by the police at the time, and then want to continue to make up and invent new post so they can remain relevant. .

[Herlock Sholmes]

You mean this one . where context was completely lost on you . ?

You’ve misunderstood both Walsh’s material and the timeline. The evidence is more nuanced than you’re suggesting.

1. Providence Row attendance – John Walsh (1967) was clear that Thompson stayed at Providence Row, and Thompson himself described the harrowing queues in his own essay. The confusion came from Walsh misplacing Providence Row in the West End due to cartography, when in reality the refuge had moved to Crispin Street, Spitalfields in 1868 – directly opposite Dorset Street, where Mary Kelly lived and died. This wasn’t “miles away,” as Herlock suggests, but in the very heart of the Ripper’s hunting ground.
2. Refuge entry conditions – Providence Row only opened for the winter months (November–May), with stays capped at six weeks. Entry required respectable clothing and a reference. For most of Thompson’s vagrancy (1885–1888) he couldn’t have qualified – he was in rags, cut off from family and friends. Only in November 1888 did circumstances align: his editor Wilfrid Meynell and Canon Carroll had given him money and clothes, and as a published poet with Catholic patrons, he could finally provide the needed reference.
3. The timing – The Row reopened on 5 November 1888, allowing a potential six-week stay. However, we know Thompson also spent ~6 weeks in a private hospital (the exact dates unrecorded, Meynell’s margin note: “Six weeks, my son!”). He was later dispatched to Storrington before New Year. Reconciling these facts, the likeliest scenario is that Thompson entered the Row at its November opening, stayed briefly (perhaps 10 days), and was then placed in hospital around mid-November. That means he was at large in Whitechapel on 9 November, the date of Kelly’s murder, before his hospital confinement.
4. Mary Kelly connection – A 1973 BBC interview with a nun recalled Kelly herself using Providence Row in the 1880s, pretending reform to get a bed. Robert Thurston Hopkins also hinted that a poet friend of Kelly’s may have known her. If true, that overlap deepens the link between Thompson and the final victim.

So no, Lewis – the “hospital” argument doesn’t exonerate Thompson for Kelly’s murder. The Providence Row calendar, Walsh’s testimony, and Meynell’s note together place him in Spitalfields precisely when the murders peaked. The hospital stay only afterwards explains his sudden disappearanc

Unless your memory is poor Fishy you said this:

“Tell me Herlock Where does Richard say ''Thompson stayed for six weeks like Walsh did ? , you can admit you stuffed up it’s ok .“

A very specific question from you to me.

I then answered but showing you where Richard had said EXACTLY this 5 times.

Are you going to admit that you were wrong. Go on Fishy…try it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Well i cant help it if you and other prefer to support suspects like Cutbush and Druitt that were BOTH dismissed by the police at the time, and then want to continue to make up and invent new post so they can remain relevant. .

You appear not to understand the difference between ‘not being charged’ and being convicted. Just for once Fishy it would be really nice if you would read the evidence.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You mean this one . where context was completely lost on you . ?

You’ve misunderstood both Walsh’s material and the timeline. The evidence is more nuanced than you’re suggesting.

1. Providence Row attendance – John Walsh (1967) was clear that Thompson stayed at Providence Row, and Thompson himself described the harrowing queues in his own essay. The confusion came from Walsh misplacing Providence Row in the West End due to cartography, when in reality the refuge had moved to Crispin Street, Spitalfields in 1868 – directly opposite Dorset Street, where Mary Kelly lived and died. This wasn’t “miles away,” as Herlock suggests, but in the very heart of the Ripper’s hunting ground.
2. Refuge entry conditions – Providence Row only opened for the winter months (November–May), with stays capped at six weeks. Entry required respectable clothing and a reference. For most of Thompson’s vagrancy (1885–1888) he couldn’t have qualified – he was in rags, cut off from family and friends. Only in November 1888 did circumstances align: his editor Wilfrid Meynell and Canon Carroll had given him money and clothes, and as a published poet with Catholic patrons, he could finally provide the needed reference.
3. The timing – The Row reopened on 5 November 1888, allowing a potential six-week stay. However, we know Thompson also spent ~6 weeks in a private hospital (the exact dates unrecorded, Meynell’s margin note: “Six weeks, my son!”). He was later dispatched to Storrington before New Year. Reconciling these facts, the likeliest scenario is that Thompson entered the Row at its November opening, stayed briefly (perhaps 10 days), and was then placed in hospital around mid-November. That means he was at large in Whitechapel on 9 November, the date of Kelly’s murder, before his hospital confinement.
4. Mary Kelly connection – A 1973 BBC interview with a nun recalled Kelly herself using Providence Row in the 1880s, pretending reform to get a bed. Robert Thurston Hopkins also hinted that a poet friend of Kelly’s may have known her. If true, that overlap deepens the link between Thompson and the final victim.

So no, Lewis – the “hospital” argument doesn’t exonerate Thompson for Kelly’s murder. The Providence Row calendar, Walsh’s testimony, and Meynell’s note together place him in Spitalfields precisely when the murders peaked. The hospital stay only afterwards explains his sudden disappearanc

I’m quite happy to explain further why you are wrong Fishy but could you do it in one of the Thompson threads please and could you perhaps, just for once, use the evidence and not just the ‘Patterson version.’

[Trevor Marriott]

You appear not to understand the difference between ‘not being charged’ and being convicted. Just for once Fishy it would be really nice if you would read the evidence.

and may I remind you and others that there is also a big difference between a person of interest and a suspect. It seems some do not know the difference.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

and may I remind you and others that there is also a big difference between a person of interest and a suspect. It seems some do not know the difference.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

On here there’s no difference whatsoever Trevor. This isn’t a police investigation. If someone suggests someone as a suspect then they are a suspect and remain a suspect until exonerated.

On here ‘suspect’ and ‘person of interest’ are the same thing.

[Trevor Marriott]

On here there’s no difference whatsoever Trevor. This isn’t a police investigation. If someone suggests someone as a suspect then they are a suspect and remain a suspect until exonerated.

On here ‘suspect’ and ‘person of interest’ are the same thing.

However, there must be some form of evidence for them to be classified or named as a suspect.

Thats why the suspect list is well over 100+ they cant all have been the killer

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

However, there must be some form of evidence for them to be classified or named as a suspect.

Thats why the suspect list is well over 100+ they cant all have been the killer

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I agree Trevor but it’s not easy to get to a point of agreement on who does or doesn’t justify consideration.

[Geddy2112]

I agree Trevor but it’s not easy to get to a point of agreement on who does or doesn’t justify consideration.

Being alive in 1888 seems to be the only qualification unfortunately....

[Lewis C]

Being alive in 1888 seems to be the only qualification unfortunately....

alive, at least 14 years old, and caucasian