The profession of Jack the Ripper.

[SuspectZero]

Hi Pierre,
I posted this question in another thread to you but it seems more appropriate to post it here given this thread started about JTR's profession -
Is your suspect a police surgeon?

Hi Pierre,
You've never answered my question. Is your suspect a police surgeon?
Thanks

[Hercule Poirot]

Hi Hercule,

This is what I have been trying to say several times here in the forum. The Ripper case is a cold case. It canīt be solved by giving any proof in the juridical meaning. So science has to do it if it is ever to be done.

The natural sciences have the problem of old data which can not be used any longer (DNA for instance) and so it runs the risk of using sources that are not reliable.

I think the only possible method to use is forensic history. And I donīt think so because I am a forensic historian - I am not - but I think so because the methods used within forensic history are among the methods that I have been using for finding the killer.

But I would also stress all the ordinary methods within sociology as potentially useful as well as theories within sociology.

I can understand why people are upset. Most of them donīt understand what I have been doing. And when I try to explain the importance of using scientific methods, they donīt even understand that. There are those, for instance, that confuse popular history with academic history. They get very upset when I question the value of the writings of popular history and the authors of these writings. The authors are often journalists or former policemen, who have no idea whatsoever of what academic history is. And often, not knowing what something is, means rejecting it.

I also know that there is a lot of honor thinking within this field of ripperology and the forum is a part of this field since some of the authors of ripperology post here as well. I am often told that one should have "respect" and that there are "distinguished" people here.

And I suspect that the further away from the real crime history of the killer we get, the more honorable and distinguished people become and the more defensive everyone within ripperology will get.

And since the question of who the killer was has never been solved, at least not by ripperologists, the question "Who was Jack the Ripper?" is the most important question in the field - not the most important to answer but to avoid answering. If this question is answered it will no longer be there. And if the question is no longer there, the authors will no longer be there. And then the ship is going down, and everyone will jump off.

And this fear of the destruction of ripperology makes a lot of people defend the maintenance of the question "Who was Jack the Ripper?", making sure it will not be answered.

And although I agree with Hercule on his point and have stressed it myself several times, there is also the aspect of trying to make sure that no one answers the question since it can not be answered "legally" speaking. And this strategy is what makes the field of ripperology survive.

Regards Pierre

Thank you Pierre for your response. I must point out that your interpretation of thr chevrons being police officer chevrons could eventually be true. It will all depend on the validation resulting from other componants of your theory. I simply want to point out and should have explained myself a litlle more about the difference between evidence (physical, documentary, testimonial or other forms) and the resulting interpretation one might put on it. I think you were already aware of this but I wasn't sure others were.

I also respect the need you have to gather all the pieces of the puzzle, putting them together and then analysing the overall picture before coming to a final conclusion. Refusing to offer the vampirical members of this forum some blood to feed on is understandable. Everybody wants to know more about your theory and often express in an imature way their frustrations. But you must also walk a mile or so in their shoes to better understand how they feel.

Respectfully
Hercule Poirot

[Whitechapel]

I'd just like to bring this thread back on track to the profession of JTR. The idea that JTR was a policeman reminds me of murder authors who have disguised the murderer as a waiter. All the murderer has to do is walk around with a tray and they blend into the background.

It depends on the rank of the policeman as to how much access they would have to the case. A Police Constable would be on the streets of Whitechapel walking a beat. However a more senior policeman could have seen details of the case. They could do both if they were a senior policeman that had access to a Constable's uniform. If the candidate lived in a mansion at one point, then it looks like Pierre's candidate was a senior policeman. Also it seems the candidate had an interest in medical procedures.

I'm intrigued to find out the name and the rank but I am happy to wait.

[Pierre]

Hi Pierre,
You've never answered my question. Is your suspect a police surgeon?
Thanks

Hi there,

No, he isnīt.

Regards Pierre

[Pierre]

I'd just like to bring this thread back on track to the profession of JTR. The idea that JTR was a policeman reminds me of murder authors who have disguised the murderer as a waiter. All the murderer has to do is walk around with a tray and they blend into the background.

It depends on the rank of the policeman as to how much access they would have to the case. A Police Constable would be on the streets of Whitechapel walking a beat. However a more senior policeman could have seen details of the case. They could do both if they were a senior policeman that had access to a Constable's uniform. If the candidate lived in a mansion at one point, then it looks like Pierre's candidate was a senior policeman. Also it seems the candidate had an interest in medical procedures.

I'm intrigued to find out the name and the rank but I am happy to wait.

Thanks for clear and meaningful comments.

Regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

Thank you Pierre for your response. I must point out that your interpretation of thr chevrons being police officer chevrons could eventually be true. It will all depend on the validation resulting from other componants of your theory. I simply want to point out and should have explained myself a litlle more about the difference between evidence (physical, documentary, testimonial or other forms) and the resulting interpretation one might put on it. I think you were already aware of this but I wasn't sure others were.

I also respect the need you have to gather all the pieces of the puzzle, putting them together and then analysing the overall picture before coming to a final conclusion. Refusing to offer the vampirical members of this forum some blood to feed on is understandable. Everybody wants to know more about your theory and often express in an imature way their frustrations. But you must also walk a mile or so in their shoes to better understand how they feel.

Respectfully
Hercule Poirot

Thanks Hercule Poirot,

I appreciate everything you are saying here.

Regards, Pierre

[Mayerling]

Hi Pierre:

Do you happen to know what was the rule regarding who was supposed to take care of the maintenance of a police constable or officer's or official's uniforms? Was it the police person himself (with the assistance of his own family) or was there a central laundry for the department's men (and, if they had any) women to take care of this matter?

Reason I ask, I am aware that for many decades a certain group of organized professional were in charge of the wear and tear of their own uniforms in the United States.

Jeff

[Pierre]

Hi Pierre:

Do you happen to know what was the rule regarding who was supposed to take care of the maintenance of a police constable or officer's or official's uniforms? Was it the police person himself (with the assistance of his own family) or was there a central laundry for the department's men (and, if they had any) women to take care of this matter?

Reason I ask, I am aware that for many decades a certain group of organized professional were in charge of the wear and tear of their own uniforms in the United States.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

No, I donīt know that and have had no reason to look into it. Perhaps someone else can answer you question.

Regards Pierre

[Pcdunn]

Forensic History

I think the only possible method to use is forensic history. And I donīt think so because I am a forensic historian - I am not - but I think so because the methods used within forensic history are among the methods that I have been using for finding the killer.

But I would also stress all the ordinary methods within sociology as potentially useful as well as theories within sociology.

Regards Pierre

I was curious about the term "Forensic history", so I did a browse. Most hits were about the history of forensic science, but I did locate this interesting explanation at a site related to a little-known event in 18th century America:

http://gaspee.info/history/forensicReconstruction.htm

I think the site is a personal one, and it isn't possible without further examination to determine the academic qualifications of the author, but I did think the information on forensic history (also called "historic reconstruction") to be illuminating and perhaps related to Pierre's approach.

[David Orsam]

I was curious about the term "Forensic history", so I did a browse. Most hits were about the history of forensic science, but I did locate this interesting explanation at a site related to a little-known event in 18th century America:

http://gaspee.info/history/forensicReconstruction.htm

I think the site is a personal one, and it isn't possible without further examination to determine the academic qualifications of the author, but I did think the information on forensic history (also called "historic reconstruction") to be illuminating and perhaps related to Pierre's approach.

Yes, I see. One takes the word "history" and adds the word "forensic" before it which automatically makes the conclusions scientific.

[Pcdunn]

Hello, David.

History, as a subject, is generally classed as one of the humanities; it may be included in some broader classes of the social sciences.

Like the more traditional sciences, history deals with facts, but there is also the "softer" aspect of interpretation to consider, whereby the bias of the historian may come into play. (Here conclude the librarian's observations.)

[Mirandola]

Surely this charade has gone far enough?

I've trawled through much - as much as I could stomach - of this ongoing saga and I will add one further remark in response to "Pierre"'s recent brilliant dismissal of the seriousness of every Ripper researcher but himself: as a former professional Criminologist and Media Studies Lecturer, my interests are in the sociological ramifications of the effects of these crimes on a public only recently introduced to mass popular media, and on the psychological factors involved both in the criminal and his audience; to me, it doesn't matter a tinker's dam who he was, or if we ever find out.
All this persistent irritant has done is bolster his own self-image by coyly flaunting a 'secret' he won't reveal, and reviving a load of long-discredited interpretations of evidence that (he says) contribute oblique clues to his solution.
Surely it is time this whole charade was brought to a close and we can get back to serious study?

[Mayerling]

Hi Jeff,

No, I donīt know that and have had no reason to look into it.
Really. Well it seemed to me it should have...forensically speaking.

Perhaps someone else can answer you question.

Well of course they may if they wish...but I was addressing it to you due to your abilities. Maybe you will think about it.

Regards Pierre

Thank you for your response so far.

Jeff

[Harriet the Student]

Hello Pierre -
I totally think that whether or not a police officer was responsible for washing his uniform is relevant to your idea that a member of the police force was responsible for the Jack the Ripper murders. It raises a number of issues. If the department were responsible, surely a bloody uniform (or a missing one had the suspect discarded it to avoid being caught) would have been noted. Also, if he was a police officer, would he have even committed the murders in uniform? While it would give him an excellent disguise for getting away, he would have run the risk of a bloody uniform, with all its implications.

And while I'm here; the data sources I asked you to identify for me?
Many thanks,
Harriet

[Elamarna]

Dear Mirandola

Its great to have People like yourself and Kookingpot on board.
It seems both of you are the type of person Pierre claims are the only ones he can discuss with on a level who understand him, the rest of us just being Amateurs.

I hope some of the people here who are buying into Pierre's story will listen to the both of you, and not take his utterings at face value.

Again I point people in the direction of posts 223,227 and 229 on the "Pierre’s research so far" thread. its very enlightening.

For Everyone else:

its very hard when people spend hours trying to engage with him, have serious discussions with a view to expanding our knowledge on the period of the murders, and trying very hard to see his viewpoint to then get replies such a:

"Because you try to discuss scientific questions while the case is only a hobby for you"


I have asked Pierre several times, why he sees the word hobby as such a low thing, never had a reply?

Asked him, assuming this is not a payed job for him, and he spends a fair amount of time online here, how he sees his relationship to the subject matter?
Obviously it is of interest to him, why does he not see his involvement as a hobby too?
That is an honest question, if he is going to denigrate peoples reasons for being here, how are they different from his?
Again he has never given me a reply.

For anyone saying lets get back on thread, how can we all that has been said is:

"The person I have found and think was the killer was a police official. I am sorry about this."

there has been not one shred of evidence presented to back this up.


Pierre if you truly want to provide a theory and a name, which will in your opinion:

1. Solve the 127 year old mystery as you keep calling it.
2. Cause sites such as this to disappear, you openly attack this site and its users, saying what a disgrace we all are, a view you of course are entitled too. However it does make one ponder you true aim.

if you do really want to provide a name and a reasonable theory then actually do it. so that maybe we can put the case to bed, or place your theory alongside all the other unproven ones.

Elamarna