Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dr Barnardo is the Ripper...?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Doctor??

    I find the following assertion by Prophet to be slightly mystifying:

    Dr B was not an official doctor and it may never be agreed upon whether the killer had anatomical knowledge, yet Dr B committed fraud in obtaining his place at medical school etc.

    Yet according to the information we have about him:

    It wasn't until 1876 that he resumed his studies and then sat his final examinations in Edinburgh. He registered as a medical practitioner in London, and was elected a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, Edinburgh in 1880.

    If he sat his finals, registered as a Medical Practitioner and was elected to the RCS, how come he was not an ‘official doctor’?

    Comment


    • #32
      'Not too much detail' -joel???(Do you have CAPS button on your PC?)???????? That seemed an awful lot of quotes/clips/quotes/clips and endless irrelevant detail to me...

      ...What was the point of that??

      Look -if there's a book here worth reading-we'll read it- (no matter who it names/shames etc) -End Of Story!!!!!!! ....
      ...If this is just a self publicising toot thread then so be it.......End Of Story also!!!

      At the risk of a Nunnerism..........'"We all know Joe did it so what's the problem?' hehe...................ho hum..........
      Last edited by Suzi; 06-29-2008, 09:12 PM.
      'Would you like to see my African curiosities?'

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Bob Hinton View Post
        I find the following assertion by Prophet to be slightly mystifying:

        Dr B was not an official doctor and it may never be agreed upon whether the killer had anatomical knowledge, yet Dr B committed fraud in obtaining his place at medical school etc.

        Yet according to the information we have about him:

        It wasn't until 1876 that he resumed his studies and then sat his final examinations in Edinburgh. He registered as a medical practitioner in London, and was elected a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, Edinburgh in 1880.

        If he sat his finals, registered as a Medical Practitioner and was elected to the RCS, how come he was not an ‘official doctor’?
        I fear we're stepping into Pearson territory here!!!! Doctor Doctor!!!???
        I'm beginning to wish The Tardis was closer at hand!!!

        Totally mystified now............ and as to the TWO threads..................Aaaaaaaaaagh!!

        Suz x
        Last edited by Suzi; 06-30-2008, 12:07 AM.
        'Would you like to see my African curiosities?'

        Comment


        • #34
          Did we ever find out if Vanessa Hayes was bumped off?!!?
          Best regards,
          Adam


          "They assumed Kelly was the last... they assumed wrong" - Me

          Comment


          • #35
            found this during a P.O.

            This thread seems to have died but it looks like the best place for this post. I was doing some participant observation at St. Ann's (Dawson St. Dublin) last week and found this in a piece of promotional material:

            'Thomas Barnardo (1845-1905) Philantrophist. Born in Dublin, he attended the Sunday School in St. Ann's as a boy. Having already had experience working in the slums of Dublin, he soon became involved in London's East End slums. In 1867 he founded the London East End Juvenile Mission to care for destitute children. Two years later, he opened a boys' home in Stepney, which marked the beginning of a vast organisation known as the Barnardo's Homes in Britain and Canada. It is estimated that he assisted some 250,000 children in 90 homes. His cardinal principal was 'No destitute child is ever refused admission'.'

            Other notable people the church uses in it's promotional material are General Anthony St.Leger, Laetitia Pilkington (who wrote scandalous memoirs), Oscar Wilde, Bram Stoker and Wolfe Tone (the 1798 rebel).

            Here's the church itself http://www.360cities.net/image/st-an...-dawson-street

            regards
            Chris
            Last edited by truebluedub; 04-10-2009, 04:06 PM.

            Comment


            • #36
              I too have been finding Barnardo of great interest as a suspect recently but nothing to the extent that Prophet is getting at. Even if Barnardo was the Ripper, what does that have to do with Princess Diana and Dodi??!?!
              Best regards,
              Adam


              "They assumed Kelly was the last... they assumed wrong" - Me

              Comment


              • #37
                The Plot: " The Establishment" and Two Royal Cover-Ups

                Whilst I agree Dr Thomas Barnardo just had to be a leading and obvious suspect for being JTR, I doubt " The Establishment" tarpaulin would have been big enough to keep the lid on any rumoured cover-up afterwards.
                Lovely as Dr B was, his campaign of child rescue won him countless enemies and charity rivals.Just read the books.
                ( It seems, just because people were devout Christians, this did not preclude them embracing extraordinarily rough tactics against those they thought were out to thwart their own ambitions).
                True, perhaps Dr Barnardo was tall enough to chalk the Goulston Street Graffiti, but I am sure the streets were alive with gossip and stories which any London non-self-respecting newspaper would have grasped with glee.
                A " Do-Gooder" like Barnardo would have been a perfect target for the yellow press.
                As to where Diana fits in:British Royalty are often patrons of children's charities.
                Good luck with the book Mr Prophet. JOHN RUFFELS.

                Comment


                • #38
                  I read a theory from Mammoth book of Jack the Ripper. The writer seemed to chosen Barnardo first and then searching "evidence" to blame him. Dirty dirty work.
                  Me?
                  For the memory of my sweet, ambereyed and animal-loving mother (1932-2007). Be happy in Heaven.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Dr Barnardo was original suspect?

                    Hello (Yes I am back!),

                    It is time for reiteration on a MAJOR POINT as to why Dr Barnardo should be considered a serious contender for being a Jack the Ripper suspect.

                    1) It was officially stated in 1979 by Dame Gillian Wagner, a former chairman and now vice-president of BARNARDOS charity, and I quote –

                    “As murder succeeded murder the list of suspects became increasingly long and it is hardly surprising that Barnardo’s name should have been included among them…Barnardo was probably totally unaware that his name was among the list of those suspected…”

                    Wagner states in her notes section of her book, that the Ripper information came from Donald Rumbelow’s book which was published in 1975. Where does it say in that edition or any other before 1979, that Dr Barnardo was a suspect? (The exception of McCormick's 1970 edition is not relevant here) And as every respected investigator of this case should know, the now missing Scotland Yard Suspect files MEPO 3/141 32—135) deposited at the Public Record Office were readily available to everyone before 1979! However, Wagner specifically states that Dr Barnardo as a suspect is sourced from “Private Information” – guess we’ve heard that one before? – does Macnaghten ring a bell? If Wagner is unwilling to direct her readers towards the Records Office (a place she often used in pursuit of researching her 1979 biography on Dr Barnardo) in conjunction with pointing to where she found Dr Barnardo on the now missing suspects files, one can only assume that this was passed to Wagner by PC Rumbelow (whose book she solely referenced from) or some other Police official who must have seen Dr Barnardo’s name amongst the files. In light of at least 100 suspect files now missing (as reported in December 1983), I believe other than piece-meal purloining over the years since Stephen Knight saw them in 1975, there might have been a deliberate attempt to conceal any more info on respected suspects getting out – namely Dr Barnardo! Of course the thief/s who stole the files may be salivating over them stored away in plastic sleeves in their own personal collections, thinking themselves lucky they got away with it, or a whole pile may have been stolen and destroyed to divert attention from just one - namely the killer! Remember none of this was meant to have been released until 1992!

                    Please world wake up!! Dr Barnardo killed those women, and he did it right under the noses of the Establishment, and today, as they no doubt were forced back then, they are still covering it up!

                    Yours truly,
                    A.J

                    P.S; Sorry for any inconvenience to those who are yet to see my book published…it is coming…
                    "The answer your've all been looking for...is here at last!"

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      If Barnardo was "an original suspect" how come this paper trail only leads back to 1979 and not 1888.

                      If there was information in the "Missing Suspect File" how come researchers that had access to it never copied it down, mentioned it, or wrote of it?
                      Regards Mike

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Hi Adam

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Mike Covell View Post
                          If Barnardo was "an original suspect" how come this paper trail only leads back to 1979 and not 1888.

                          If there was information in the "Missing Suspect File" how come researchers that had access to it never copied it down, mentioned it, or wrote of it?
                          Mike,

                          Totally agree. All KNOWN roads re this fellow lead only 30 years back. And we all know that during this time, so many wierd and wonderful names were put forward, mostly, I fear, in the wake of Gorman's Eddy/Sickert/Netley theory. Cashing in on JTR has been the number one reason for these "also rans" to have been suggested. Not based on factual research at all.

                          Re the missing files. I have already posted my thoughts about them on another thread, suffice to say this.

                          There are people reading this who KNOW where some of the material is. Or who has it. If the missing suspects file was handed in, I doubt we would see the name of Dr B. However, should it happen that he IS in the files, then all power to whoever gets the info out. I applaud openess and honesty.

                          Speculation as to whether Dr.B is an official suspect or not is pointless. One might as well start looking at any famous person alive in the area and put that name forward...which leads us all where?

                          Nowhere. That is where.

                          Merry Thingy and a Happy New Whatsit.

                          best wishes

                          Phil
                          Chelsea FC. TRUE BLUE. 💙


                          Justice for the 96 = achieved
                          Accountability? ....

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Adam, you're back on deck! Hope all is well and the publishing adventure is progressing favourably!

                            Cheers,
                            B.
                            Bailey
                            Wellington, New Zealand
                            hoodoo@xtra.co.nz
                            www.flickr.com/photos/eclipsephotographic/

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by The Prophet View Post
                              Hello (Yes I am back!),

                              It is time for reiteration on a MAJOR POINT as to why Dr Barnardo should be considered a serious contender for being a Jack the Ripper suspect.

                              1) It was officially stated in 1979 by Dame Gillian Wagner, a former chairman and now vice-president of BARNARDOS charity, and I quote –

                              “As murder succeeded murder the list of suspects became increasingly long and it is hardly surprising that Barnardo’s name should have been included among them…Barnardo was probably totally unaware that his name was among the list of those suspected…”

                              Wagner states in her notes section of her book, that the Ripper information came from Donald Rumbelow’s book which was published in 1975. Where does it say in that edition or any other before 1979, that Dr Barnardo was a suspect? (The exception of McCormick's 1970 edition is not relevant here) And as every respected investigator of this case should know, the now missing Scotland Yard Suspect files MEPO 3/141 32—135) deposited at the Public Record Office were readily available to everyone before 1979! However, Wagner specifically states that Dr Barnardo as a suspect is sourced from “Private Information” – guess we’ve heard that one before? – does Macnaghten ring a bell? If Wagner is unwilling to direct her readers towards the Records Office (a place she often used in pursuit of researching her 1979 biography on Dr Barnardo) in conjunction with pointing to where she found Dr Barnardo on the now missing suspects files, one can only assume that this was passed to Wagner by PC Rumbelow (whose book she solely referenced from) or some other Police official who must have seen Dr Barnardo’s name amongst the files. In light of at least 100 suspect files now missing (as reported in December 1983), I believe other than piece-meal purloining over the years since Stephen Knight saw them in 1975, there might have been a deliberate attempt to conceal any more info on respected suspects getting out – namely Dr Barnardo! Of course the thief/s who stole the files may be salivating over them stored away in plastic sleeves in their own personal collections, thinking themselves lucky they got away with it, or a whole pile may have been stolen and destroyed to divert attention from just one - namely the killer! Remember none of this was meant to have been released until 1992!

                              Please world wake up!! Dr Barnardo killed those women, and he did it right under the noses of the Establishment, and today, as they no doubt were forced back then, they are still covering it up!

                              Yours truly,
                              A.J

                              P.S; Sorry for any inconvenience to those who are yet to see my book published…it is coming…

                              All you have given us is hearsay. Absolutely no evidence - just hearsay. Even if Barnado's name WAS in one of the missing suspect files, there is no evidence that makes him a stronger suspect than any of the others. If there was, he would have been arrested or at least questioned.

                              If you really want to prove a point about Barnardo, do some proper research. Find out whether his whereabouts on the nights in question can be established.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                If Barnardo was "an original suspect" how come this paper trail only leads back to 1979 and not 1888.
                                It was only by chance prior to 1979 that Dame Wagner should be enlightened about Dr Barnardo’s original inclusion amongst the suspect list while she was researching her book. From the information that is available of what we know that once existed in the files of other suspects (thanks to early BBC journalists etc), it is only a matter of a few details per suspect on usually one accompanying file or two – of which hundreds have gone missing – there are many researchers today who used those files in the 60’s, 70’s, and 80’s that noticed files were still disappearing under their very noses!!


                                If there was information in the "Missing Suspect File" how come researchers that had access to it never copied it down, mentioned it, or wrote of it?

                                That unfortunately was due to the hype around the Royal conspiracies that existed throughout the 1970’s, who would be looking for old Dr Barnardo? Of course that goes for countless others that were not copied of which we will never know about – but thanks to a diligent researcher “Gillian Wagner”, we have one of them when she was able to confirm Dr Barnardo’s inclusion on the list before the bulk of the suspect files went missing – that is incredibly important is it not?

                                An interesting side note reveals that Donald Rumbelow was the first author and Ripper expert after Wagner to publish these findings in his 1987 edition book – and yes he does list her book in his bibliography, just like she listed his back in 79!


                                Yours truly,
                                A.J
                                "The answer your've all been looking for...is here at last!"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X