Most important data: a wish list

[Mister Whitechapel]

Dear Pierre,

The vast majority of posters on Casebook are incredible researchers and debaters, and the wealth of knowledge of the collective should be considered as an unparalleled goldmine to be utilised. I genuinely cannot understand the stated reluctance in unveiling your suspect, unlike many, many others have done on these very boards. Granted, you would need a thick skin, and the courage of your convictions, to defend and persuade your detractors, but this would be a mere microcosm of the wider world, enabling you to be better prepared if you are correct in your allegation(s).

You say you need 'final pieces' to research before going public, and it would take you around a year to conclude it; why not ask for assistance from your peers? Directly - not in the manner of polling the community for their opinions without providing none of your own.

Yours,
Mister Whitechapel

[kookingpot]

Pierre,

As Mister Whitechapel has stated, and others, there are many, many people on these boards with lots of experience in many different areas of criminology, research, history, genealogy, and pretty much any discipline remotely related to the study of this case. Several people have even published books on the subject.

There is no point in hiding things if you want to be taken seriously. You say it will take a year to get your "final piece of evidence". Tell us what it is, and we can help you find it. It may even be something one of these people have already come across in their researches and they missed its significance because they didn't have all your data. I'm sure that with all the resources available to the various people on the forum, we can at least expedite your process. Since you have stated that you aren't a Ripperologist and don't have a lot of experience with the case, you can't be as familiar with the available sources as some of the people on the forums here who have spent decades going through sources from the time period in question. Use us.

If you really are a scientist, you should know about the importance of peer review. You need to have other people review your work, criticize it, analyze your methodology for things you missed, and verify that you covered your bases. Every actual scientist does it. You should too. Let us in on your secret, just a little. If you are waiting to publish a tell-all book, that's fine, just tell us so we can wait for it to come out. If you aren't, then holding out is stupid and pointless. Especially when there are so many resources available to you in the people on this forum.

[Pierre]

Pierre,

As Mister Whitechapel has stated, and others, there are many, many people on these boards with lots of experience in many different areas of criminology, research, history, genealogy, and pretty much any discipline remotely related to the study of this case. Several people have even published books on the subject.

There is no point in hiding things if you want to be taken seriously. You say it will take a year to get your "final piece of evidence". Tell us what it is, and we can help you find it. It may even be something one of these people have already come across in their researches and they missed its significance because they didn't have all your data. I'm sure that with all the resources available to the various people on the forum, we can at least expedite your process. Since you have stated that you aren't a Ripperologist and don't have a lot of experience with the case, you can't be as familiar with the available sources as some of the people on the forums here who have spent decades going through sources from the time period in question. Use us.

If you really are a scientist, you should know about the importance of peer review. You need to have other people review your work, criticize it, analyze your methodology for things you missed, and verify that you covered your bases. Every actual scientist does it. You should too. Let us in on your secret, just a little. If you are waiting to publish a tell-all book, that's fine, just tell us so we can wait for it to come out. If you aren't, then holding out is stupid and pointless. Especially when there are so many resources available to you in the people on this forum.

Hi,

asking for help or peer reviewing this would mean revealing the name of the killer. Won´t do that until I am sure.

Sorry.

Pierre

[Henry Flower]

OK Pierre, then that is pretty much the end of the discussion, surely. You have popped up, announced you think you have found the man, implied that your powers of analysing data are superior in comparison to run-of-the-mill researchers, asked lots of very vague questions, given lots of very vague non-answers to each and every question you're asked, and so given all of this I have one question for you: if you are not giving us a single concrete, testable, checkable fact or idea to discuss, why do you expect others to waste their time debating abstract concepts with you?

I'd be willing to put money on you having no credible 'data' whatsoever.

[Patrick S]

Hi,

asking for help or peer reviewing this would mean revealing the name of the killer. Won´t do that until I am sure.

Sorry.

Pierre

I wish you luck in this. I really do. Alas, I'm starting to feel as if this is some sort of game. I'm not sure what you're hoping to get out of it, if it is. I'm having a hard time buying this "I never wanted this responsiblity" bit. I'm also having a tough time with all the secrecy if your man is "not known to history", as you've said. Your attitude toward this "suspect" gives quite the opposite impression. When you say things like, "I hope I'm wrong", "People will be upset if I'm right", and "I don't want to believe the data", it sounds very dramatic indeed. But, if this is all applied to man whose name no one knows, it's rather nonsensical.

Again, I wish you luck. But, for the time being, I'm out.

[GUT]

OK Pierre, then that is pretty much the end of the discussion, surely. You have popped up, announced you think you have found the man, implied that your powers of analysing data are superior in comparison to run-of-the-mill researchers, asked lots of very vague questions, given lots of very vague non-answers to each and every question you're asked, and so given all of this I have one question for you: if you are not giving us a single concrete, testable, checkable fact or idea to discuss, why do you expect others to waste their time debating abstract concepts with you?

I'd be willing to put money on you having no credible 'data' whatsoever.

You forgot to add that not only is he great at analyzing data, the ripper talks to Pierre, I was sceptical upto then, not I know 100% pure garbage.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Pierre;355029]Hi,

Doing my own research and looking at different theories others have come up with I come to think of the different types of data we prefer to use.

I guess we all have our own ideas as to what types of data should be considered as really important.

So what types of data do you think would be the most important if you would try to find the killer? And what would qualify as proof?

Here are some suggestions listed in no special order and you can probably add more to it:

1. Personal motive for murdering the victims
2. DNA
3. His profession
4. A confession
5. Items found at the murder sites
6. Handwriting match with a letter
7. His adress
8. Personal motive for mutilating victims
9. A letter containing knowledge only the murderer could have had
10. Several letters containing knowledge only the murderer could have had
11. Statements from witnesses
12. A combination of some of the above
13. A combination of all of the above

I partly agree with this.

Pierre