I think I have found him.

[Abby Normal]

No, David, I haven't vanished, but I simply went about other pursuits in my life.
And since you asked nicely: I didn't post the name of the suspect who is presumably championed by Pierre because laying out my reasons would be equivalent to outing him as I see it.
Maybe it was a mistake to post on this thread. I might have misjudged the degree of lightheartedness. I figured that Pierre wasn't inclined to share his theory anytime soon. So I decided to figure it out by myself and wanted to encourage those who are at least to a certain degree intrigued by Pierre to do the same.I thought that those who feel there's nothing to gain anyway by participating in this particular thread and that it is all childish wouldn't care one way or the other. Pierre isn't insulting anyone after all.
As to those who doubt my knowledge of basic Ripper facts: there will be many here whose knowledge is much more profound than mine. But please don't twist one or two half sentences into something it never meant in the first place. I'm quite well versed with the facts around the bloody shawl and the dna tests. I followed it closely and after just reading here for many years these developments motivated me finally to register in Febuary this year.

LOL.
This thread rocks. I haven't had this much fun since homecoming 97.

It's a joke folks. And pretty dam funny IMHO.

[DJA]

Thats surprising they normally like to ban anyone for absolutely no reason what so ever...

Suspect they were eaten by grizzly bears.

[EmaEm]

Agreed! Unfortunately, I've just experienced dreadful bullying on "the other site" and frankly, both sites, in my view, need to shake up their ideas about monitoring crap behaviour.

[EmaEm]

1888:

No! You've already proved you don't have a clue about the shawl and differences between mtrdna and nuclear dna.

[1888]

Hello 1888.
As a criminal psychologist, i would imagine that you could provide valuable insight to the case SO i would hope you dont always feel the need to lurk. The Pierre Theory has been a diversion mainly because, if you are new to the case & forum, it makes you learn the particulars of this massive case. Right or wrong, who cares! At least its an opportunity to walk the case at a pace i can keep up with, and develop my own theories along the way.

Robert St Devil, yes if I may and have the feeling that I have something insightful to say I will contribute to other threads in the future. Pierre simply tickled me out of my long time lurking position.

[EmaEm]

LOL.
This thread rocks. I haven't had this much fun since homecoming 97.

It's a joke folks. And pretty dam funny IMHO.

Only funny if you are 12 years old.

[1888]

No! You've alread proved you don't have a clue about the shawl and differences between mtrdna and nuclear dna.

If you say so... although I can't recall that I went into details like the difference between nuclear and mitochondrial dna as well as other intricacies of the case. Throw all the rotten tomatoes you want at me for my original post. But please don't make a case of incompetence out of a few crumbs.

[Abby Normal]

Only funny if you are 12 years old.

Sorry. I totally understand why you feel like that and I empathize. I was pissed of the first time Pierre posted and even started a new thread asking how to create a new rule to ban posts like this but over time I've just come to find the whole thing rather amusing.

But like I said I know why people are getting annoyed and I don't blame them.

[DJA]

Only funny if you are 12 years old.

Reckon some of the posters here are hitting that age for the third time around.

Really funny thing is they think it's "seniority",well it sounds similar at that stage of life.

[Rosella]

Or, God forbid, even hitting twelve for the fifth time around!

[EmaEm]

If you say so... although I can't recall that I went into details like the difference between nuclear and mitochondrial dna as well as other intricacies of the case. Throw all the rotten tomatoes you want at me for my original post. But please don't make a case of incompetence out of a few crumbs.

You said it had been proved through dna. That claim was scientically disproved over a year ago. Maybe you get your Ripper information from The Daily Mail.

[EmaEm]

[QUOTE=DJA;359865]Reckon some of the posters here are hitting that age for the third time around.

Really funny thing is they think it's "seniority",well it sounds similar at that stage of life.[/QUOTE


And you can prove my age how?

[Jeff Leahy]

Suspect they were eaten by grizzly bears.

On a serious note...and if casebook admin are listening

I wonder if sometimes a simple LIKE buton or DISLIKE button might save the casebook ... traffic.. lots of simple time and band width?

I know the Facebook method isn't always preferable but sometimes...AND LIKE THIS POST...a simple LIKE would save a lot of time.. or DISLIKE for that matter?

Just an idea

Yours Jef

[EmaEm]

Sorry. I totally understand why you feel like that and I empathize. I was pissed of the first time Pierre posted and even started a new thread asking how to create a new rule to ban posts like this but over time I've just come to find the whole thing rather amusing.

But like I said I know why people are getting annoyed and I don't blame them.

It's ok, you don't have to apologise. Laughing at it all is a valid reaction. It's just that I am Royally pissed off with both sites today (for different reasons) and they both need 24 hour monitoring and it just isn't happening. Let's face it, JtR will never be found, but what is interesting is new research. The theories have varying degrees of merit as to who he was from the ridiculous to the 'maybe'. But anyone who says they have found him (for money or self aggrandisment) is a pain in the proverbial.

[Shaggyrand]

It's just that I am Royally pissed off with both sites today (for different reasons) and they both need 24 hour monitoring and it just isn't happening. Let's face it, JtR will never be found, but what is interesting is new research. The theories have varying degrees of merit as to who he was from the ridiculous to the 'maybe'. But anyone who says they have found him (for money or self aggrandisment) is a pain in the proverbial.

A little joking shouldn't be a problem but... yeah... some get vicious. There's a bunch of threads lately that should be interesting but instead get tuned out because some are, um, let's say overenthusiastic in their arguments. Nothing says learned discourse like the need to pound someone repeatedly online.