Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dr Barnardo is the Ripper...?

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

  • The Prophet
    started a topic Dr Barnardo is the Ripper...?

    Dr Barnardo is the Ripper...?

    I have posted other messages, but have now found the appropriate board to post this thread. I originally started discussions at:

    http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=874

    and

    http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=650

    and

    http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=903

    hopefully the above links work.
    Please excuse my added interest in Diana’s death, this may well be included in my Ripper book after all, in the meantime I will shelve this until later in the year – unfortunately due to waning interest…but the devastating truth will eventually come [watch this space].

    As for Dr Barnardo being the killer I welcome any thoughts? I’m not here to get over argument-bashy with anyone, I am just a slowly emerging author who would like to get some opinions. Of course I fully believe Barnardo to be the Whitechapel killer, but remaining objective is always my first intention. Thanks for reading this.

    Regards,
    A.J Prophet.

  • Uncle Jack
    replied
    So when will we see the book A.J? It can't be any worse than Vanessa Hayes. Oh, speaking of which, did we ever find her or was she really bumped off by Barnardos!?!?! Seriously, I would love to read the new book, just to see what points can be given to prove Barnardo's guilt.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Prophet
    replied
    And that is an argument for what exactly? Because a guy wrote some books about genealogy and heraldry, I have to believe his Ripper theories? If Paul McCartney thought Lewis Carroll did it, does that somehow create validity? Who cares? Insane. Really insane.
    It is not an argument per say, but a statement of fact, or rather a challenge of sorts I guess to anyone who may know of other examples.
    I figure from your last post you perhaps missed that point Mike?
    How you can construe anyway that I said Gillian Wagner’s husband had anything to do with any ripper theories is the only really insane thing here!
    Actually your sentiment Mike and that of others is what generally worries me about Ripper studies today, in that it relays a sort of twisted reality where poking fun at celebrities and supplying supposedly fantastic evidence to back up ridiculous theories are the name of the game! My book is not about that…

    Regards,
    A.J

    Leave a comment:


  • The Good Michael
    replied
    Originally posted by The Prophet View Post

    Yet if anyone here can state (which I doubt) any other suspect that has this claim to being included among the list of suspects prior to 1983 by someone of high society status like Wagner – then come hither – it would be of great importance to the field of Ripper studies.
    And that is an argument for what exactly? Because a guy wrote some books about genealogy and heraldry, I have to believe his Ripper theories? If Paul McCartney thought Lewis Carroll did it, does that somehow create validity? Who cares? Insane. Really insane.

    Mike

    Leave a comment:


  • Suzi
    replied
    Interesting- another famous suspect is always worth a read..Not to sound sarcastic there- Dr B has always been a bit dodgy in my humble opinion
    Looking forward to the new year publication.. What's the title? (You probably posted earlier but I'm too lazy to go back and check!:/)

    LOL Just gone back to check and realised I'd had quite a lot to say! :/:/:/.....OK more details on this book please- even if he's not our man- it must be worth a read
    Last edited by Suzi; 12-06-2009, 07:42 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Prophet
    replied
    Hello everyone,

    At the time Gillian Wagner was researching her book on Dr Barnardo, she had been married for over 25 years to Sir Anthony Wagner, and he was one of the most prolific authors of the 20th century on subjects of heraldry and genealogy.
    She has been awarded an OBE and DBE for her commitment to society, and is a well respected author in her field of child welfare and is Vice-President of Britain’s children’s charity –BARNARDOS. I doubt very much she would have stated what she did if her “Private Information”, concerning Dr Barnardo’s inclusion on the suspect list didn’t mean she had got this information from someone officially in the know who wanted to remain anonymous. In fact it is the only source throughout her entire book which receives this special treatment as being “Private” – Wagner is not the sort of person who would just make this up!
    In fact this trumps pretty much any other riff raff writer who has come along during the 1970’s claiming it was this or that who committed those crimes – did they state Sickert, Prince Albert or any other ridiculous suspect as being amongst the suspect list? Quick answer – NO!
    It seems to be that when responsible research is taken for granted in the field of Ripperology, and is pointed out years later – Whoops you missed that one guys! And in particular involves a very unusual but famous suspect people seem to close ranks and assume that this is just a farce! Well sorry it is not.
    Of course this does not mean Dr Barnardo is the killer, I will not be the last to point that out, however I am drawing attention to the fact he was named by someone with huge influence and connections within the “Establishment”, and whose credibility has never been questioned. Not forgetting and I must reiterate, Wagner categorically states Barnardo amongst the suspect list, and this was before the suspect files are officially noted as missing in 1983!
    Hope this is crystal clear, and sufficient for those who should no better than to remain dangling in the realms of fiction and sensationalism – oh by the way Dr Barnardo’s favourite children’s writer was Robert Louis Stevenson – go figure that!

    So I believe his name was most assuredly seen and recorded before 1979, and officially stated as such prior to suspect files going missing in 1983. Unfortunately I do not know if Wagner was given any photocopies of such etc, it is by her authority alone which should be sufficient enough. Apart from the suspects noted in the A-Z book from 1991 by Begg, Fido and Skinner, that form the basis of those from the missing suspect list that did get copied before they were most definitely stolen (though Rumbelow likes to state otherwise – typical ex-cop style protecting his own!), it must be considered extremely lucky we know this much so far about Dr Barnardo!

    Yet if anyone here can state (which I doubt) any other suspect that has this claim to being included among the list of suspects prior to 1983 by someone of high society status like Wagner – then come hither – it would be of great importance to the field of Ripper studies.

    By the way…my book has been put on hold until after the New Year due to commitments…but the truth is coming…and it is scary!

    Yours truly,
    A.J

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Covell
    replied
    So the main claim for his candidacy is that he was mentioned in the missing files although no one saw his name.

    When is the book out?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Prophet
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • Limehouse
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


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

    Cheers,
    B.

    Leave a comment:


  • Phil Carter
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • chrisjd
    replied
    Hi Adam

    Leave a comment:


  • Mike Covell
    replied
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • The Prophet
    replied
    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…

    Leave a comment:


  • Christine1932
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X