I think I have found him.

[pinkmoon]

Hi.
The trouble is guys, we are feeding the troll with the carrots to dangle, by responding..
Unless we have verified material , to browse over, all the carrot juice in the world is irrelevant.
I say to the said Gentleman..either respond to Casebook with a case for your suspect, or inform us,that you are waiting on a possible book deal..in which case leave it at that for the moment.
Regards Richard.

Richard this is going to turn out to be a load of old Victorian shoemakers(cobblers)

[Mayerling]

Belinda,

one must think very carefully about your question. It is an important one.

Did he want to be caught? Why?/Why not?
Did he think he could be caught? Why/ Why not?
Could he gain or loose anything by being caught?
What could have happened if he was being caught?
And if he wasn't?

I don't mean for you to answer these questions. But if you really want to know the answer of your own question, start researching on it. Because it is important.

Pierre

Hi Pierre,

First I am beginning to sympathize quite a bit with what this thread has become for you. I am taking it for granted you have been doing a bit of real research but find you cannot reveal it yet, and while making this perfectly clear to everyone, many of us are starting a new guessing game hoping they can make you make a mistake and actually say something that you did not plan to say that gives all or part of your work away before it is complete.

Secondly, I actually can think of a situation where an extraordinary killer might very well want to get caught - if he/she knew his/her capture would be only made in a public setting and would shake up society. It is quite rare, and suggests the killer has a self-sacrificial nature that most of us just don't have, but it is not totally impossible.

Whatever it is, I do really hope this works out (research wise) for you and you can eventually tell us.

Jeff

[Mayerling]

It looks like a conspiracy of the highest order to me. Maybe it is Churchill.

Hi Sally,

There have been others who have built up cases against Lord Randolph Churchill, probably due to his relatively early death in 1895 when his mind was destroyed by some illness (most likely syphilis). My problem with that in thinking of Pierre's possible candidate is that in 1888-1890 while the revelation of Lord Randolph as the Ripper would have been a national shocker (after all, in his remarkably meteoric career in politics he had reached the cabinet rank of Chancellor of Exchequer - second to the Prime Minister, Lord Salisbury - only just before his career fell apart), in that same period nobody else in his family had quite the clout he did with the public! His wife, Jennie, was a popular upper crust social figure, but considered just another American born heiress who was marrying into British social - political life (like the second Mrs. Joseph Chamberlain). His two sons, Winston and Jack, were too young to matter yet with the public (Winston would matter more and more after 1898). His brother was a titled non-entity (unlike his father, who had been Viceroy of Ireland in the late 1870s).
So no, I can see while Lord Randolph is an intriguing candidate he would not have the really thunderclap effect Pierre is hinting at.

Jeff

Sorry if I momentarily joined the guessing game, but this seemed too interesting to pass.

[belinda]

Belinda,

one must think very carefully about your question. It is an important one.

Did he want to be caught? Why?/Why not?
Did he think he could be caught? Why/ Why not?
Could he gain or loose anything by being caught?
What could have happened if he was being caught?
And if he wasn't?

I don't mean for you to answer these questions. But if you really want to know the answer of your own question, start researching on it. Because it is important.

Pierre

I can say with certainty that had he been caught he would undoubtedly have been hanged.

[Rosella]

I think the sort of thunderclap Pierre is hinting about as something which would impact Britain even now would have to be a conspiracy on the highest levels of society, ie royalty, government, the highest ranks of Scotland Yard.

Unless it's a very much admired and loved figure in Victorian England who is still known today.

[Pcdunn]

Unless it's a very much admired and loved figure in Victorian England who is still known today.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, perhaps. He did write letters about the case-- but so did most Victorian intellectuals. And was too uptight to be a serial killer, in my opinion.

I like the Lord Randolph Churchill idea-- he was vile to Jenny, and had had an outburst in Parilament before resigning, according to a biography I saw on Jenny Churchill.

[belinda]

Churchill is not a new suspect. Pierre seems to be promoting a conspiracy theory

[RivkahChaya]

Exactly this. The repeated comments that the suspect will be greatly upsetting to people, hope that his theory is wrong, that people need to research his rhetorical questions themselves & even once flat out saying it was a conspiracy. A published letter that gave explicit details of a murder the day before it happened and no one has noticed it before.
I'm fairly interested in who it is, if there's a theory that is. Even if its a joke, which feels most likely to me, I think it'll be a solid punchline. They have set it up impressively.

He also reminds me of those "blind item" gossip columnists, who make up stuff, promise to reveal the details, then sit back, while people speculate on the who and how, and finally, the columnist cobbles together a story from the details the readers have provided.

[Pcdunn]

Churchill is not a new suspect. Pierre seems to be promoting a conspiracy theory

Yes, that's true. Perhaps G. B. Shaw was involved in a socialist or anarchist plot, then.

Evidence is unlikely, I fear...

[belinda]

Yes, that's true. Perhaps G. B. Shaw was involved in a socialist or anarchist plot, then.

Evidence is unlikely, I fear...

That all elusive evidence

Churchill actually tried to blackmail Bertie, the Prince Of Wales, caused an enormous scandal!

[Mayerling]

That all elusive evidence

Churchill actually tried to blackmail Bertie, the Prince Of Wales, caused an enormous scandal!

Hi Belinda,

The thing that you refer to is an 1876 scandal, the "Mordaunt Divorce Case", where Lady Mordaunt was being divorced by her husband, and named the Prince of Wales as one of the lovers - Bertie tried to get out of it in some way (I can't recall how) that threw the blame on another lover, Lord Randolph's older brother who would eventually become 9th Duke of Marleborough. In retaliation Lord Randolph threatened to publish some letters Bertie sent to Lady Mordaunt. In the end the Prince of Wales had to testify in the case (to the mortification of Queen Victoria - by the way Bertie got stuck again in 1891 in the Tranby Croft Case, about cheating in an illegal game of baccarat he was a participant in). As a result of the blackmail threat Lord Randolph and Jennie were dropped socially by Bertie and the Marleborough House Circle (the most deluxe social group in the country). However, Queen Victoria and Prime Minister Disraeli did not wish to disgrace the Spencer-Churchill Family so they had the father of Lord Randolph (the
8th Duke of Marleborough) appointed Viceroy to Ireland. After Randolph's death in 1895 Jennie was readmitted to the Marleborough House set.

But keep in mind this blackmail action is a decade before the Whitechapel Murders.

Jeff

[Pierre]

Hi Pierre,

First I am beginning to sympathize quite a bit with what this thread has become for you. I am taking it for granted you have been doing a bit of real research but find you cannot reveal it yet, and while making this perfectly clear to everyone, many of us are starting a new guessing game hoping they can make you make a mistake and actually say something that you did not plan to say that gives all or part of your work away before it is complete.

Secondly, I actually can think of a situation where an extraordinary killer might very well want to get caught - if he/she knew his/her capture would be only made in a public setting and would shake up society. It is quite rare, and suggests the killer has a self-sacrificial nature that most of us just don't have, but it is not totally impossible.

Whatever it is, I do really hope this works out (research wise) for you and you can eventually tell us.

Jeff

Thanks Jeff and I know they are trying to make me make a mistake. But it is very difficult to guess who the killer could be, since they donīt know of his existence, so they would not even notice if i actually made a mistake, which of course I avoid doing.

I only started posting because I wanted to get some relief from the burden of having found who I think is the murderer and knowing how he performed his crimes and why.

Now he follows me 24/7 and I theorize about him even in my sleep. So, as somebody put it, "it sucks you in". But the fact is that I have only allowed the most sparse data to be connected to him. I have an extremely high degree of criticism doing this research and therefore I also trust I am onto something meaningful.

The worst kind of so called ripperology I can think of is Patricia Cornwells writings. She said in some TV-program that Jack the Ripper / Sickert could have written all the letters that exist. Very meaningless.

People like her does more damage than good to the search for this killer.

And the guy with the shawl and DNA, thatīs a laugh. Actually, I found out that it was a journalist in 1888 who wrote some small romantic peace of text in a paper, where he fantasized about Eddowes wearing a shawl on her head while walking into a dark alley and meeting the killer. This article has of course become myth.

And it isnīt sufficient anyway to connect one piece of data to one victim. You must have a connection to some of the others as well.

If you really want to find the killer you cannot start by letting every piece of data be "interesting" and you canīt start from old myths produced during the time of the crimes. You must be prepared to sort out all stuff that does not explicitly point to the real killer. The more you sort out and throw away, the more valid and reliable data you might get.

I do not believe in the method of "rubbish in, rubbish out". No. Get rid of your preknowledge if you have one, get rid of bias and of meningless sources.

Also, the more steps you take from the sources and the more elaborate your theory gets, the more ad hocs you have to put in, the more useless the result gets.

And there is no use fantasizing about the dark alleys in Spitalfields and trying to understand the "envorinment" and getting ideas of a "local guy" and knowing each little step the individual PC:s took.

One has to look for the sources left by the killer and forget the rest. These sources can be very unexpected but when you find them, it can be shocking.

Pierre

[Pierre]

He also reminds me of those "blind item" gossip columnists, who make up stuff, promise to reveal the details, then sit back, while people speculate on the who and how, and finally, the columnist cobbles together a story from the details the readers have provided.

So perhaps one should avoid speculating and do oneīs homework instead?

Pierre

[RivkahChaya]

My homework is done.

[belinda]

Hi Belinda,

The thing that you refer to is an 1876 scandal, the "Mordaunt Divorce Case", where Lady Mordaunt was being divorced by her husband, and named the Prince of Wales as one of the lovers - Bertie tried to get out of it in some way (I can't recall how) that threw the blame on another lover, Lord Randolph's older brother who would eventually become 9th Duke of Marleborough. In retaliation Lord Randolph threatened to publish some letters Bertie sent to Lady Mordaunt. In the end the Prince of Wales had to testify in the case (to the mortification of Queen Victoria - by the way Bertie got stuck again in 1891 in the Tranby Croft Case, about cheating in an illegal game of baccarat he was a participant in). As a result of the blackmail threat Lord Randolph and Jennie were dropped socially by Bertie and the Marleborough House Circle (the most deluxe social group in the country). However, Queen Victoria and Prime Minister Disraeli did not wish to disgrace the Spencer-Churchill Family so they had the father of Lord Randolph (the
8th Duke of Marleborough) appointed Viceroy to Ireland. After Randolph's death in 1895 Jennie was readmitted to the Marleborough House set.

But keep in mind this blackmail action is a decade before the Whitechapel Murders.

Jeff

Actually I was thinking of one where he sent letters written by Bertie to one of his mistresses to Alexandra or threatened to I'm a little hazy on the details but it caused a big stir. Not a very nice man at all