I think I have found him.

[Robert St Devil]

I heard the man named Pierre
Say, Give me 'til end o'year
I can for a fact
Identify Jack
Or else i'm out on my rear.
(Or else i'm buying the beer. )
(Or else my work's all bum steer.)

[Craig H]

I have been reading this site, on and off, for the last 10 years.

While I have not been a frequent contributor, I have always read the posts with interest.

One of the things I have enjoyed is the passion so many of you show in trying to solve one of the great mysteries of the last 150 years.

I have seen vigorous differences in opinion as you debate your personal theories about the Ripper. However, I always believed that no matter how vigorously you disagreed with each other, that you would still have a beer or a glass of wine with each other at the end of the day.

I thought this group debated ideas, not the person.

This is why I have been so disappointed in how this group has responded to Pierre’s involvement.

Pierre has a different approach to stimulate debate. He hasn’t presented a definite theory and forcefully argued his position. Instead, he has asked provocative questions that encourage us to think.

This approach can frustrate and irritate many people, which I can understand. Personally, I’ve found it interesting.

I believe any bulletin board needs to encourage diversity.

If someone irritates you, then simply click on their user name, add them to your “ignore list” then you won’t read their comments.

When I think about this site, and the other site, I think about some of the great posters such as Nemo and Chris Scott. I can’t remember either of them resorting into personal attacks.

Today, we awoke to the terrible news about the Paris tragedy.

Life is too short for the personal attacks.

We all share something in common in our interest in solving this 125 year old mystery.

Can we focus on that, and debate the ideas not the person ?

Craig

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
Absolutely.. I would for one, love to debate the ideas, not the person.
But what ideas ?
Regards Richard,

[evertonmarc]

I have been reading this site, on and off, for the last 10 years.

While I have not been a frequent contributor, I have always read the posts with interest.

One of the things I have enjoyed is the passion so many of you show in trying to solve one of the great mysteries of the last 150 years.

I have seen vigorous differences in opinion as you debate your personal theories about the Ripper. However, I always believed that no matter how vigorously you disagreed with each other, that you would still have a beer or a glass of wine with each other at the end of the day.

I thought this group debated ideas, not the person.

This is why I have been so disappointed in how this group has responded to Pierre’s involvement.

Pierre has a different approach to stimulate debate. He hasn’t presented a definite theory and forcefully argued his position. Instead, he has asked provocative questions that encourage us to think.

This approach can frustrate and irritate many people, which I can understand. Personally, I’ve found it interesting.

I believe any bulletin board needs to encourage diversity.

If someone irritates you, then simply click on their user name, add them to your “ignore list” then you won’t read their comments.

When I think about this site, and the other site, I think about some of the great posters such as Nemo and Chris Scott. I can’t remember either of them resorting into personal attacks.

Today, we awoke to the terrible news about the Paris tragedy.

Life is too short for the personal attacks.

We all share something in common in our interest in solving this 125 year old mystery.

Can we focus on that, and debate the ideas not the person ?

Craig

Well said Craig

[GUT]

Hi,
Absolutely.. I would for one, love to debate the ideas, not the person.
But what ideas ?
Regards Richard,

Agree

[Wickerman]

Adopt the old English idiom - Play the ball not the man!

[David Orsam]

I wasn't asking you where the evidence is being held. I was asking you how it could be destroyed by you posting in this forum.

Pierre, any response to this?

I was asking how the evidence you refer to could be destroyed by you posting in this forum.

[paul g]

Re craig

Hi craig you sound similar to myself in being here for years but hardly ever posting.
I started a thread regarding pierres research and the contents of his posts. The reason being i was annoyed by the teasing and constant lack of substance to his suspect.
The point i am trying to make is after his original post which in a nut shell goes like this ...
I have a suspect he may be known by some but is not a main suspect but I won, t be able to reveal anything for a year.
Unless i have missed anything added by Pierre nothing has been added to that so though pierre may be genuine and his research genuine i cant see the point of his original post.
Yes there has been debate but debate on what?
Accedemically i may not be as sharp as sime on here but all i gained from pierres posts is that his suspect is male, but accept there may be further clues that i have missed.
I do take your point about personell insults towards pierre .I am pretty sure I have not stooped to that level but some of the posts that have been posted i certainly dont condone.
For me and me alone it is the nagging thought of why post at all.
I may have missed or not taken everything in but if anyone can enlighten me in laymens terms this is what i understand so far.
Pierres suspect is male.
Pierres suspect is not a known or well known suspect
He was not in the police force.
He was not in goverment or a member of a political party.

I must admit that since pierre has stated that even if his further research prives his suspicions wrong he will still post who the suspect was has mellowed me.
It does seem such a shame that possibly pierre posting his suspect now with so many people on here with all the experts on various subjects it epuld not br advantagous to him and his research.

[paul g]

Spelling

Apolgies after the event regarding spelling. In process of moving house so relying on intermitent 3g for internet and i old i phone which is my only way of connecting to the web.
Currently stood on my roof typing with one hand while the other is holding the tv ariel. Did manage to change pissibly which should of been possibly 😀

[David Orsam]

I must admit that since pierre has stated that even if his further research prives his suspicions wrong he will still post who the suspect was has mellowed me.

Sorry Paul but I can't help being amused by that statement.

I mean, assuming he is being sincere, what's to stop him changing his mind?

[paul g]

David

Hi David, nothing can stop Pierre changing his mind I guess just maybe me taking everyone at there word which is rather nieve.
At the time of writing the above I had not read any other threads started today.
After getting up to date I now think different and think and I know this will sound double dutch but Pierre is genuine in the sense that he has research a theory etc or will be gone as quickly as he arrived.
Probally not ecplained that very well but i know what i mean 😀

[Craig H]

I’m also still grappling with his theory.

The reason why it resonates with me is it explains some of the mysteries.

My understanding is Pierre’s candidate is someone from a respected institution whose credibility would be tarnished if it was revealed. That suggests the legal courts, police, respected charity / church. He had previously said his candidate was not royalty or a senior Scotland Yard official.

This could explain why Macnaghten destroyed files, and why Monro allegedly said the Ripper should have been caught, but the issue was a “hot potato”.

The Police seemed to quietly shut down the Ripper case. This doesn’t make sense if the Ripper was a Jew or Druitt. However, it does make sense if the Ripper was someone of status.

Pierre’s recent posts about why there were no killings in October, was due to wanting to embarrass the sitting Mayor who called the Ripper a mad lunatic in an interview, also makes sense.

I don’t have the detailed knowledge that many other folk here have. Maybe it is all an elaborate hoax. For the time being, I can see how it could make sense.

There is an interesting discussion on the other thread (“Social Class of Jack the Ripper”) about the letter which the Ripper wrote to newspapers giving information on Mary Kelly’s murder.

It would be interesting if anyone with access to digital archives of newspapers can find the letter which Pierre is referring.

Craig

[Craig H]

Apolgies after the event regarding spelling. In process of moving house so relying on intermitent 3g for internet and i old i phone which is my only way of connecting to the web.
Currently stood on my roof typing with one hand while the other is holding the tv ariel. Did manage to change pissibly which should of been possibly 😀

Hi Paul,
I'm impressed ...... who said blokes can't do two things at the one time ???
Craig

[paul g]

Two things at once

Hi I cant remember exactly when those words were first spoken and by whom . But i can guarentee that they were first spoken by a woman and sadly the words are correct. Every time i type the tv loses it' s picture or at least im told that .
I have been told to stop posting on the forum when strictly does jungle is on 😜

[DJA]

Strange. I would have placed you and your fellow carrot-waver in Sweden, judging by your English, but what do I know? Just the impression I got, could be wrong.

C4

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Brassau#/media/File:Brassau.jpg

Bingo!