Tweet
I saw this show on the weekend here in Australia.
All-in-all not a "bad" show, as it did include "modern" technology to proffer their case. Presented by Emelia Fox and "starring" forensic bloke Professor David Wilson (who I've seen before on other programs about criminal psychology).
They used the computer program HOLMES which compiles related murders to provide links between victims and they used a forensic geo-profiler who looks at related murders to create an area in which the murderer resides.
The basic flaws I found with the show are as follows:
1. The result seemed "pre-ordained" in that it appeared to me that they were fitting the information to suit their suspect (Aaron Kosminski).
2. The only suspects even considered on the show's part were Prince Whatsit, James Maybrick and our mate A-a-Ron.
3. Even the Professor bloke didn't really delve into the psychological aspects of their boy, A-a-Ron.
4. They based a lot of their postulation upon flawed or incomplete data.
Although they did take the viewer on a "walk" around all the sites which was great, the show lacked a lot what appears on this web-site which is the definite site for everything JtR.
It seemed to me that they were given 45 minutes air time and see how much they could fit in to draw the conclusion that Kosminski was Jack the Ripper - very contrived.
I'd give it 5/10.
My own views on the case which disagreed with the show, are:
Tabram was the first Jack the Ripper victim upon the premise that she was stabbed 39 times. They then went on to say that because of Tom Harris' quip from the mouth of Hannibal Lecturer that "One covets that which one sees everyday" in The Silence of the Ovine Quadrupeds leading them to believe that as every murderer's first killing is committed very close to his actual residence and with A-a-Ron living in Sion Place - it-must-be-him-sort-of line. Also, given that A-a-Ron is a full-on hospital-strength nutter, that he would be able to garner the confidence of the C5 + Tabram in the first place. They didn't even consider my chum Lechcrossmere, nor the other 2/3 of those listed in the Suspects list on this site.
I don't think Tabram was a Ripper victim for reasons posted elsewhere here (too many days passed between Tabram and Nichols, Tabram stabbed from the front, et al). I don't think someone with A-a-Ron's obvious psychological problems would have the je ne sais quoi to "chat up" the ladies and gain their confidence, especially Kelly who took him inside her room when the JtR hysteria was in full flight.
And, like I said above, they limited their list of suspects to the extent that they could discount them in favour of A-a-Ron before the next ad break.
Did anyone else see it? Here's the preview from the BBC website...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/pr...ack-the-ripper
All-in-all not a "bad" show, as it did include "modern" technology to proffer their case. Presented by Emelia Fox and "starring" forensic bloke Professor David Wilson (who I've seen before on other programs about criminal psychology).
They used the computer program HOLMES which compiles related murders to provide links between victims and they used a forensic geo-profiler who looks at related murders to create an area in which the murderer resides.
The basic flaws I found with the show are as follows:
1. The result seemed "pre-ordained" in that it appeared to me that they were fitting the information to suit their suspect (Aaron Kosminski).
2. The only suspects even considered on the show's part were Prince Whatsit, James Maybrick and our mate A-a-Ron.
3. Even the Professor bloke didn't really delve into the psychological aspects of their boy, A-a-Ron.
4. They based a lot of their postulation upon flawed or incomplete data.
Although they did take the viewer on a "walk" around all the sites which was great, the show lacked a lot what appears on this web-site which is the definite site for everything JtR.
It seemed to me that they were given 45 minutes air time and see how much they could fit in to draw the conclusion that Kosminski was Jack the Ripper - very contrived.
I'd give it 5/10.
My own views on the case which disagreed with the show, are:
Tabram was the first Jack the Ripper victim upon the premise that she was stabbed 39 times. They then went on to say that because of Tom Harris' quip from the mouth of Hannibal Lecturer that "One covets that which one sees everyday" in The Silence of the Ovine Quadrupeds leading them to believe that as every murderer's first killing is committed very close to his actual residence and with A-a-Ron living in Sion Place - it-must-be-him-sort-of line. Also, given that A-a-Ron is a full-on hospital-strength nutter, that he would be able to garner the confidence of the C5 + Tabram in the first place. They didn't even consider my chum Lechcrossmere, nor the other 2/3 of those listed in the Suspects list on this site.
I don't think Tabram was a Ripper victim for reasons posted elsewhere here (too many days passed between Tabram and Nichols, Tabram stabbed from the front, et al). I don't think someone with A-a-Ron's obvious psychological problems would have the je ne sais quoi to "chat up" the ladies and gain their confidence, especially Kelly who took him inside her room when the JtR hysteria was in full flight.
And, like I said above, they limited their list of suspects to the extent that they could discount them in favour of A-a-Ron before the next ad break.
Did anyone else see it? Here's the preview from the BBC website...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/pr...ack-the-ripper
Comment