I think I have found him.

[Abby Normal]

I don't post much, but I heard that Pink was bring up the 'grampton' theory, and so was naturally moved to do so. Pink, I really believe it's a mistake to discuss that right now. But I will say this - it's too strong to be called a mere 'theory'. I think of it as the 'grampton solution'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Westcott is in the house!

and apparently with a new theory to boot! is this Grampton a new suspect of yours Tom?

[Abby Normal]

Wait, the Grampton thing, that I've only heard on the peripheral, is real?? Bloody hell.

Yours,
Mister Whitechapel

The intrigue just never stops here does it?

and with so many new suspects/theories Im starting to feel I need to find one myself! LOL.

Im going to get to work on it right away!

[DJA]

Sorry DJA,
I should have qualified my comment, you have as I mentioned in a previous post should be done, submitted your theory for what amounts to peer review, you must see how for many of us this is so frustrating.

No sweat.

You want frustrating.....had my first meeting with a screenwriter 8 years 3 months ago.

One guy who has my facts is highly respected on both this and the other main site.

Actually, he did me a favour and I consequently asked if he'd like a look at my research.

Simple fact is that no one in their right mind is going to let anything like this out,unless the book or film is well under way.

You cannot copyright history.

Thanks for your interest.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

And who is Davidīs "viable" suspect?

Is it Francis Tumblety?

Has Francis Tumblety left any evidence of being the killer?

And how does David (or anyone else) explain Elizabeth Jackson, Alice McKenzie and the Pinchin Street torso?

There are two reasons that I canīt name the person I think was Jack the Ripper and I have told you about these.

And I prefere to not take part in constructing garbage in > garbage out theories about the Whitechapel killer, which also the theory of Tumblety is, not matter how "respected" their authors are considered by you to be.

I can tell you that the best ideas of who the ripper might have been are some of the ideas written here on the forum by people who are not authors. Some of those are newcomers to the forum and some of them are people who, since many years, have had an interest in who the ripper was and have not decided on a certain susupect or theory.

The are the most reliable persons to debate with since they are not stuck with a suspect that they have to defend.

So if you think that writing and selling books about "Jack the Ripper" is a good way forward to find the Whitechapel murderer, you should go on buying these books.

But if you think that going over the sources from 1888-1889 again and again is a better idea, you should do this.

And I can tell you that I will be the first to admit if I am wrong. I would do it gladly.

Regards Pierre

Hi Pierre
Tumblety? who said anything about him? You know dang well the person that David put forth on this thread, and you responded to, is William Ripper.

But whos this Grampton fellow?

[Elamarna]

Sorry DJA,
I should have qualified my comment, you have as I mentioned in a previous post should be done, submitted your theory for what amounts to peer review, you must see how for many of us this is so frustrating.
Especially that some now well respected contributors have started mentioning this Grampton thing. which seems to be known by some but not all, therefore its not a real secret, why can't the rest of us be given the slightest information on this.

[Chris2307uk]

Would anyone care to elaborate on this theory?

[Shaggyrand]

Teasing about Grampton isn't fair. You know some of us have been dying for the full details.

[Mister Whitechapel]

Wait, the Grampton thing, that I've only heard on the peripheral, is real?? Bloody hell.

Yours,
Mister Whitechapel

[DJA]

it now seems we have 3 separate suspects:
Pierre’s
DJA's
and now something called Grampton


None of whom most are allowed to know!!!
feel so fed up with this may stop reading.

I have been prepared to share my information.

Currently awaiting replies from two Ripperologists.
One has admitted there is a lot of reading involved and will get back to me when he has done that.
The other appears to be a time waster.

This Grampton Theory is just another wind up.

[Jon Guy]

so there are others, and not just me, thinking it would be a mistake to discuss certain things.

Unfortunately, it`s not stopped you, has it ?

[Elamarna]

So it now appears there is yet another secret theory, only this time a few people know about it.
why is everything secret?
I know i have not posted here much, but i have been deeply interested in JtR since the early 1970's.
what is happening here at present is so sad.
it now seems we have 3 separate suspects:
Pierre’s
DJA's
and now something called Grampton


None of whom most are allowed to know!!!
feel so fed up with this may stop reading.

[Pierre]

I don't post much, but I heard that Pink was bring up the 'grampton' theory, and so was naturally moved to do so. Pink, I really believe it's a mistake to discuss that right now. But I will say this - it's too strong to be called a mere 'theory'. I think of it as the 'grampton solution'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

so there are others, and not just me, thinking it would be a mistake to discuss certain things.

That is interesting.

Regards Pierre

[DJA]

Grampton Solution.

ROFL!

[Tom_Wescott]

I don't post much, but I heard that Pink was bring up the 'grampton' theory, and so was naturally moved to do so. Pink, I really believe it's a mistake to discuss that right now. But I will say this - it's too strong to be called a mere 'theory'. I think of it as the 'grampton solution'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Pierre]

Pinkmoon,

I didn't think the 'Grampton theory' was going to be revealed until 2016, I'd heard a rumour of a 'Ripper Conference' exclusive.
Do you know something more? Will there be a publication soon?

And Pierre, if you don't know about it, why are you still posting when these new revelations will make anything you find look trivial?

Amanda

Hi Amanda,

But how can you possibly know if anything will make anything else "look trivial" when you donīt even know what the contents of these two theories are?

Pierre