I think I have found him.

[Graham]

This is just plain daft now Pierre,a pointless conversation

Agreed, and I'm slightly surprised that Admin hasn't pulled the shutters down on it.

I've said all I want to say anyway, and I'm out of it.

Graham

[Hercule Poirot]

So you hold a PhD then?

I speak with a number of PhD holders, typically in the field of archaeology and related sciences...

I do too, almost all of them serving me at McDonald's and Burger King. They're always asking the same fundamental question: "Will that be all?"

[paul g]

ripper revealed

My foot is firmly in the camp of knowing the case is solved. Intrigued me for 40 years now and no nearer knowing the truth.

[RockySullivan]

My foot is firmly in the camp of knowing the case is solved. Intrigued me for 40 years now and no nearer knowing the truth.

Yes I agree I don't think anyone interested in the case doesn't want it to be solved...in fact the whole point is we WANT to know who the ripper was. I don't agree with the interpretation that ripperologist want the case to keep on going unsolved in order to continue the "fun".

[gnote]

Yes I agree I don't think anyone interested in the case doesn't want it to be solved...in fact the whole point is we WANT to know who the ripper was. I don't agree with the interpretation that ripperologist want the case to keep on going unsolved in order to continue the "fun".

Absolutely. The other argument is that people want it to remain open because it's a money making "industry". Almost as if Ripperologists are some poor version of pharmaceutical executives deliberately holding back the the cure for cancer.

Ironically the people parroting this nonsense are often the few who've actually made money from the Jack the Ripper phenomena themselves after they've "solved" the case. When their theory is debunked they're the ones who stand to lose money.

[RockySullivan]

Another thing, I've already been reprimanded for my comments in this thread so I will try to put this delicately. There is no reason for pierre not to name his suspect, yes he probably wants a book deal and all the glory, but personally I don't respect that at all. If he named his suspect and he actually solved the case...he'd still be the ONE who solved it! But how many people have claimed to solve the case and every single one of them has been completely full of horseshit am I not right? So why should we suppose this theory is any different than all the countless others, with the evidence just as worthless as all the rest?

[Pierre]

Another thing, I've already been reprimanded for my comments in this thread so I will try to put this delicately. There is no reason for pierre not to name his suspect, yes he probably wants a book deal and all the glory, but personally I don't respect that at all. If he named his suspect and he actually solved the case...he'd still be the ONE who solved it! But how many people have claimed to solve the case and every single one of them has been completely full of horseshit am I not right? So why should we suppose this theory is any different than all the countless others, with the evidence just as worthless as all the rest?

Hi,

I havenīt claimed to solve the case. I have said that I think I have found him.

"Glory" and book deals mean nothing to me. Research does. To many ripperologists have already gone for the book deal and glory and I think thatīs part of the explanation as to why they havenīt found him. So I do understand your argument about "horseshit". I think you are right in saying that.

Regards Pierre

[Pierre]

A very small step forward

Hi,

Yesterday I made a very small step forward with a piece of data. I say small step since I will not use it to prove the killers identity. But it means that this peace of data has now its correct interpretation and that it is clearly congruent with the rest of the data. So it strenghtens the theory.

This type of research is difficult since one canīt always understand the motives of the killer on a micro level. You know his paramount motive but then there are smaller motives for certain actions connected to this grand motive. They have to be congruent. If they arenīt you must reject them.

And this is mainly how I work. I try to reject every interpretation of the data and when this is impossible to do given the rest of the data and the theory, I keep it for now.

This small step forward explains why he did what he did in a certain way a certain night and why the setting around it as well as (the most important!) the data from it looks as it does.

It also explains, in a more advanced way, why he chose a certain date. I had data for this already but the correct interpretation of data gives more support to this fact.

And it clearly connects independent sources to eachother.

I was hoping for this peace of data to be the one to get me out of this theory, but instead it kicked me back in.

For me this means I cannot yet say that this is not him, though I wish I could say that. I would like to reject the whole theory and I hope to be able to do that, but Iīm afraid I donīt think that is very likely.

Pierre

[barnflatwyngarde]

And on, and on, and on, and on, and.....................

[packers stem]

I was hoping for this peace of data to be the one to get me out of this theory, but instead it kicked me back in.

I've already given you a piece of data to get you out of your theory so you can feel free to drop it now without too many sleepless nights

[GUT]

And on, and on, and on, and on, and.....................

But hey another piece if data has been found, we should all be so happy.

As a BTW what does Pierre mean by "Data"?

[packers stem]

But hey another piece if data has been found, we should all be so happy.

As a BTW what does Pierre mean by "Data"?

Old threads and dissertations on here I think GUT

[Pierre]

Old threads and dissertations on here I think GUT

Hi,

I only have data from the time of the murders.

Pierre

[John G]

Hi,

Yesterday I made a very small step forward with a piece of data. I say small step since I will not use it to prove the killers identity. But it means that this peace of data has now its correct interpretation and that it is clearly congruent with the rest of the data. So it strenghtens the theory.

This type of research is difficult since one canīt always understand the motives of the killer on a micro level. You know his paramount motive but then there are smaller motives for certain actions connected to this grand motive. They have to be congruent. If they arenīt you must reject them.

And this is mainly how I work. I try to reject every interpretation of the data and when this is impossible to do given the rest of the data and the theory, I keep it for now.

This small step forward explains why he did what he did in a certain way a certain night and why the setting around it as well as (the most important!) the data from it looks as it does.

It also explains, in a more advanced way, why he chose a certain date. I had data for this already but the correct interpretation of data gives more support to this fact.

And it clearly connects independent sources to eachother.

I was hoping for this peace of data to be the one to get me out of this theory, but instead it kicked me back in.

For me this means I cannot yet say that this is not him, though I wish I could say that. I would like to reject the whole theory and I hope to be able to do that, but Iīm afraid I donīt think that is very likely.

Pierre

Perhaps even a case of one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind! Okay, maybe that'll eventually turn out to be an exaggeration!

[Wickerman]

Absolutely. The other argument is that people want it to remain open because it's a money making "industry". Almost as if Ripperologists are some poor version of pharmaceutical executives deliberately holding back the the cure for cancer.

Ironically the people parroting this nonsense are often the few who've actually made money from the Jack the Ripper phenomena themselves after they've "solved" the case. When their theory is debunked they're the ones who stand to lose money.

I don't know of anyone who has "struck it rich" by writing about the Ripper.

Those Ripper tours at $30 pp. might be lucrative - you do your research once, commit it to memory, and sell Ripper Walks for the rest of your life.
Solving the case would have no impact on that line of income.