A New Theory as to the Killer's Identity

[David Orsam]

And what is the point of the sociological experiment?

What sociological experiment?

We are on the trail of the Ripper here.

The World editorial is only part of it.

You still haven't worked out his name.

[David Orsam]

The World editorial is only part of it.

I should say that I can't positively link my candidate with the World editorial but only the killer himself could have known that an unfortunate would be murdered the very next time 9 November came around so that my candidate must have been responsible for it somehow. It's not an important part of my theory though.

[Pierre]

What sociological experiment?

We are on the trail of the Ripper here.

The World editorial is only part of it.

You still haven't worked out his name.

I thought perhaps we would learn something from you, David.

But you are only asking questions and you want me to answer. Just as you have done in all the other threads.

I have shared what little knowledge I can share with you. But obviously you are just fooling around and wasting my time.

Pierre

[David Orsam]

I thought perhaps we would learn something from you, David.

I am trying to teach you something Pierre.

[David Orsam]

I have shared what little knowledge I can share with you. But obviously you are just fooling around and wasting my time.

You have shared precisely no knowledge Pierre.

There's no good reason why you can't reproduce the letter which you say contains a prediction of MJK's murder. There's no good reason you can't tell us the name of your candidate. And there's no good reason why you can't reveal what your purported 'sources' are.

The unfortunate fact is that you are highly likely to be wrong in your interpretation of all your 'sources' and all your 'data'.

So you are wasting the time of everyone who is reading your posts.

[Pierre]

You have shared precisely no knowledge Pierre.

There's no good reason why you can't reproduce the letter which you say contains a prediction of MJK's murder. There's no good reason you can't tell us the name of your candidate. And there's no good reason why you can't reveal what your purported 'sources' are.

The unfortunate fact is that you are highly likely to be wrong in your interpretation of all your 'sources' and all your 'data'.

So you are wasting the time of everyone who is reading your posts.

And here we see a new expression from you David: "unfortunate fact". Before this it was "doomed".

I am also "highly likely" to be wrong. (Not only likely.)

And that goes for "all" my sources and "all" my data.

That is some strong opinion you have there David, especially considering the fact that you don´t know any of my reasons for not giving you what you want or any of my theoretical sources.

Regards Pierre

[SirJohnFalstaff]

I thought perhaps we would learn something from you, David.

But you are only asking questions and you want me to answer. Just as you have done in all the other threads.

I have shared what little knowledge I can share with you. But obviously you are just fooling around and wasting my time.

Pierre

A Alanis Morissette song comes to mind.

[David Orsam]

And here we see a new expression from you David: "unfortunate fact". Before this it was "doomed".

I am also "highly likely" to be wrong. (Not only likely.)

And that goes for "all" my sources and "all" my data.

That is some strong opinion you have there David, especially considering the fact that you don´t know any of my reasons for not giving you what you want or any of my theoretical sources.

You know, I should revise my statement.

You are extremely unlikely to have solved the Whitechapel Murders, or even one of them, after over 125 years.

I don't need to know anything about you or your sources. or your data. It's just a matter of calculating the odds in a scientific manner (which you should love). What are the chances of you being right? Just like anyone else, less than 1% I'd say. Probably 0.01%.

And then when we add into the equation the evidence of your incomprehensible arguments on this forum on various subjects, the tenuous, nay ridiculous, points you have made about this purported letter and your shifting explanations throughout, not to mention your failure to answer most of the straightforward questions you have been asked in a clear way, we can reduce this to less than 0.01%.

I'm sorry to break it to you Pierre, but I think you might not have found him.

[Robert St Devil]

{slow sardonic applause}. Okay okay. Who left the cage open and let Dave-O out of the MEDIA section again?

[IchabodCrane]

'The Angry Ripper'

It doesn't matter. I will buy 'The Angry Ripper' by 'Pierre' , if the Kindle price is around 5 Euro.

[Brenda]

.

Wow. This is probably one of the most childish things I've ever read on Casebook.

I don't particularly like that Casebook has pretty much become "Pierrebook" over the past month either, but this borders on bullying.

We get it, David. You don't think there's anything to Pierre's theory.

[David Orsam]

Wow. This is probably one of the most childish things I've ever read on Casebook.

I don't particularly like that Casebook has pretty much become "Pierrebook" over the past month either, but this borders on bullying.

We get it, David. You don't think there's anything to Pierre's theory.

It's not bullying at all, Brenda, it's a practical demonstration for Pierre of how you anyone can extract a theory from the slimmest material.

You may get it Brenda but Pierre clearly doesn't, unless he is deliberately playing dumb.

[Graham]

Wow. This is probably one of the most childish things I've ever read on Casebook.

I don't particularly like that Casebook has pretty much become "Pierrebook" over the past month either, but this borders on bullying.

We get it, David. You don't think there's anything to Pierre's theory.

i couldn't agree more, Brenda. We now have 16 - yes SIXTEEN threads started by Pierre, and what has he told us: well, just about nothing.

It is, as you say, "Pierrebook" and I hate it. Time was when the good old A6 Case thread used to attract criticism because there were those who felt it was throttling Casebook, but it had nothing on the nonsense posted here by Pierre. And the really weird thing is that lots of posters are taking him seriously!

I don't suppose Admin or anyone else will give a bugger, but I am seriously considering taking my business elsewhere, to another Forum. Shall I be seeing some of you there?

Graham

[David Orsam]

I am seriously considering taking my business elsewhere, to another Forum.

Goodbye, then.

[Graham]

Goodbye, then.

So long, you boring git.

Graham