The profession of Jack the Ripper.

[Pierre]

"A police official who was officially a constable"

That would cover all ranks apart from Commissioner.

Now, why am I hungry?

Monty

You were quicker than me. Thanks.

Regards, Pierre

[John G]

"A police official who was officially a constable"

That would cover all ranks apart from Commissioner.

Now, why am I hungry?

Monty

Hello Monty,

Thanks, for this, although "Pierre" seemed blissfully unaware of this fact until you pointed it out to him in Post 450. Post 459, however, makes no sense at all, except being illustrative of someone who is blissfully ignorant of how the Metropolitan Police force operated, i.e. like the type of historian/ sociologist/ existentialist philosopher/ academic who didn't realize that police uniforms are blue!

Thus, he reasons that, "Whatever rank they [police officers] would have, they were always ordinary PCs. This means that they should always be prepared to do the dirty work, whatever their status. And a police official who was also a constable would have course have known everything about working in an area like Spitalfields."

Really? Does he actually think that someone like Assistant Commissioner Sir Robert Anderson, for example, would have concerned himself with traipsing the streets of Whitechapel on a night shift in order to show solidarity with his men? Yes, I do believe he does!

[John G]

You were quicker than me. Thanks.

Regards, Pierre

I would refer you to my latest post!

[John G]

Hi John,

You are right about the cloaking in ambiguity. Pierre thrives on it, as he is allowing all of us to do the scut work for him.

As I am beginning to see it, Pierre has no real theory. He has pointless little crumbs of information, and by pretending an intellectual superiority to us "hobbying" little mortals, he throws the crumbs at us to see what we make of it. Rest assured, at some point he will publish something - full of what he selects as the most likely connecting links between his crumbs. And, except for a handful or acolytes on the threads who admire or contact him, he won't give the rest of us any credit for what we may have accidentally given him as points that he cold use.

He'll deny this of course - why should he depend on us puny mortals when he is the great academician with the scientific approach. In the world of science and technology I am beginning to see him less an innovator than a raider and stealer of credit.

I would suggest, from now on, everybody give him erroneous information - let him fall on his face!!

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

Thanks. And, of course, cloaking things in ambiguity, and writing in riddles, and what appears at times to be surreal prose, is something a serious historian would never do.

Personally, I've not excluded the possibility that he might be a somewhat lazy postgraduate student who's trying to benefit from a bit of free research!

[Craig H]

Alexander Carmichael Bruce

I think Pierre's suspect is Alexander Carmichael Bruce, the Assistant Commissioner.

He appears to be the only police official who matches the clues Pierre provided. He was born before 1858, was well educated, smart, lived in an expensive home, was not a police constable and not a member of City of London police.

In the 1881 Census he was a Barrister living at 5 Redcliffe gardens, Fulham in a beautiful home with a number of servants.

In 1901 And 1911 Census he was the Assistant Commissioner living at 82 Lexham Gardens, Kensington - again a very expensive home - with servants.

Alexander's father was a Reverend and then a Canon for the Church.

Alexander was knighted.

He and his wife Helen had two children - Kenneth (who achieved rank of Colonel) and Phyliss.

This would explain why Pierre said revealing this could reflect poorly on institutions.

I couldn't find Alexander and Helen on the 1891 Census, but his daughter is staying with someone else. Maybe Alexander went overseas (Pierre said the killings stopped due to personal reasons).

The motive may have bee changing the police leadership as Warren was unpopular and there was poor Police discipline.

Does anyone know anything about Alexander Bruce ?

Craig

[Pierre]

Hi John,

You are right about the cloaking in ambiguity. Pierre thrives on it, as he is allowing all of us to do the scut work for him.

As I am beginning to see it, Pierre has no real theory. He has pointless little crumbs of information, and by pretending an intellectual superiority to us "hobbying" little mortals, he throws the crumbs at us to see what we make of it. Rest assured, at some point he will publish something - full of what he selects as the most likely connecting links between his crumbs. And, except for a handful or acolytes on the threads who admire or contact him, he won't give the rest of us any credit for what we may have accidentally given him as points that he cold use.

He'll deny this of course - why should he depend on us puny mortals when he is the great academician with the scientific approach. In the world of science and technology I am beginning to see him less an innovator than a raider and stealer of credit.

I would suggest, from now on, everybody give him erroneous information - let him fall on his face!!

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

the crumbs I have are given to me from the data sources and the content of the data sources are produced by the killer. There is nothing that you can add to them. They are crumbs from the past, from the past of the killer, and they are now waiting to become history.

I am not thriving but suffering. I don´t want my life to be about a f-g serial killer in the past. I have lots of other and much more interesting things to do. I hate this killer for taking my time and my interest and some of my money too. Honestly, it is disgusting.

Regards, Pierre

[Rosemary]

Well then

If this effing serial killer is taking up your time, your money, & our patience, might I suggest that you quit yanking everyone's chain & dare I say:

NAME THE BASTARD.

[Mayerling]

Hi Jeff,

the crumbs I have are given to me from the data sources and the content of the data sources are produced by the killer. There is nothing that you can add to them. They are crumbs from the past, from the past of the killer, and they are now waiting to become history.

I am not thriving but suffering. I don´t want my life to be about a f-g serial killer in the past. I have lots of other and much more interesting things to do. I hate this killer for taking my time and my interest and some of my money too. Honestly, it is disgusting.

Regards, Pierre

Hi Pierre,

They are crumbs you have managed to stumble on, and have potentially weird theories about, and you hand them to us to wrack our "puny brains" on so that you can see what best fits. I stick to that

We both hate the killer - I never suggested you liked him, but acknowledge he's a creep like I do. But as for other more interesting things for you to concentrate on, why not tell us of them? Surely it would not effect your search for the perfect final piece (as you put it) to this theory.

As another has asked on these threads, please give us the titles and citations of some of your writings so we can be aware of what you have achieved - even outside this field.

Jeff

[John G]

Hi Jeff,

the crumbs I have are given to me from the data sources and the content of the data sources are produced by the killer. There is nothing that you can add to them. They are crumbs from the past, from the past of the killer, and they are now waiting to become history.

I am not thriving but suffering. I don´t want my life to be about a f-g serial killer in the past. I have lots of other and much more interesting things to do. I hate this killer for taking my time and my interest and some of my money too. Honestly, it is disgusting.

Regards, Pierre

Hello "Pierre",

Is this a type of existential suffering by any chance? A sort of existential concussion perhaps? Well, allow me to offer some words of comfort by citing Nietzsche: " To live is to suffer, to survive is to find some meaning in the suffering."

Hope that's been of some help.

[John G]

Hi Pierre,

They are crumbs you have managed to stumble on, and have potentially weird theories about, and you hand them to us to wrack our "puny brains" on so that you can see what best fits. I stick to that

We both hate the killer - I never suggested you liked him, but acknowledge he's a creep like I do. But as for other more interesting things for you to concentrate on, why not tell us of them? Surely it would not effect your search for the perfect final piece (as you put it) to this theory.

As another has asked on these threads, please give us the titles and citations of some of your writings so we can be aware of what you have achieved - even outside this field.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

I've asked him many times to provide examples of his published academic works, I.e. text books, peer-reviewed journal articles, so that we might evaluate his standing in the academic community.

I can see no reason why a bone fide academic would refuse this perfectly reasonable request. Regrettably, "Pierre" declines to answer.

[Harry D]

I STILL can't believe the amount of attention you guys and girls have given to an obvious wind-up merchant. If people had simply ignored him then he would've stopped this nonsense or been forced to name his suspect (if he even has one in mind). Some of you really should know better. What exactly is it that you're all hanging on for? That he's going to name the REAL Ripper!?

[Mayerling]

Hi Jeff,

I've asked him many times to provide examples of his published academic works, I.e. text books, peer-reviewed journal articles, so that we might evaluate his standing in the academic community.

I can see no reason why a bone fide academic would refuse this perfectly reasonable request. Regrettably, "Pierre" declines to answer.

Hi John,

I know it was you, but I have gotten so fed up with this garbage that I was concentrating on the orchestrator of the garbage. I agree he should not have any problem answering the question if he is legitimate in his attainments. He probably isn't, and is ashamed of them.

Jeff

[GUT]

Mothers tend to love their sons even if they are serial killers. Does this mean that they approve of the murders?

Some think that Hitler built the Autobahn. Should we not drive on the Autobahn?

If a book is not a scientific book, do we have to hate the author?

Pierre

So Pierre who has David (os so he says) on his ignore list) checks before logging on to see what David has said, stranger and stranger, now can someone explain how he then quotes David after logging in. More BS from the king of BS.

[John G]

Hi John,

I know it was you, but I have gotten so fed up with this garbage that I was concentrating on the orchestrator of the garbage. I agree he should not have any problem answering the question if he is legitimate in his attainments. He probably isn't, and is ashamed of them.

Jeff

Hi Jeff,

"Ashamed of them." I'd not really thought of that. Maybe I've been too harsh, I'm starting to feel a bit sorry for him now!

I'm also reminded of a poem by Shelley:

"And on the pedestal these words appear:
'My name is Oxymandias, King of Kings
Look on my works, he mighty, and despair'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away."

[GUT]

Hi Gut,

I respect people but I do not respect bad research, not even my own.

Regards, Pierre

Must hate your research then, 'cause far as I can see any you have done (and that seems limited to casebook) has been bad.

You haven't quoted one other piece of research you have done.

All you have done is put strange interpretations on your interpretation of what's not there, like your wonderful 1320 or the now name that's given in full, but isn't.

Horse Twaddle is the best description for what you've come up with.