How far they could have gone?!

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

I think, that the "Royal conspirary" is a kind romanticising nonsense.

Though, Eddie was gay. One of the weaknesses is, that he was on a trip in Scotland at the time of at least one murder.

It would have been too expensive even for The Royal Family to bribe hundreds of people, I think.

Or would they have done anything to hide, if he had been involved in the case somehow?!

All the best
Jukka

[Limehouse]

Hi Jukka,

I think stories about a Royal being JTR are highly fanciful. Most of the evidence points to Prince Eddie being hundreds of miles away when most of the murders were committed.


As for the idea that Gull and others cooked up the murders to cover up an illegal Royal marriage and baby - well how did that happen? How did a minister of the church manage to marry a leading Royal without being aware of it? And if, as you say, Eddie was gay - why would he fall in love and marry a woman? More to the point, why did the conspiritors choose such an extreme method of killing the ladies involved? Gull could have disposed of them more efficiently than spreading them across the pavements of London. They could then have been neatly dissected by his medical students at Guys.
Alternatively, they could have been weighted down and drowned in the Thames.

No, I don't favour a Royal JTR or a Royal conspiracy at all.

[Graham]

How the hell could a common street-walker 'blackmail the British Government' anyway? What would she do - knock on the door of No 10 Downing Street and ask for whoever is responsible for interviewing potential blackmailers?

The biggest mystery is how Stephen Knight was ever taken in by this nonsense in the first place. Joseph Sickert changed his story about as often as Mike Barrett.

But on the other hand, I thought Knight's book was a damn good read, to be honest! You just didn't have to believe what he was saying!

Cheers,

Graham

[Sam Flynn]

How the hell could a common street-walker 'blackmail the British Government' anyway?

Prince Albert Victor was apparently blackmailed by two (female) prostitutes in 1891 - for which he stumped up a few hundred quid in "hush money", in return for some letters he'd written. Perhaps that was the original grit in the Royal Conspiracy oyster?

Story here.

[Graham]

Prince Albert Victor was apparently blackmailed by two (female) prostitutes in 1891 - for which he stumped up a few hundred quid in "hush money", in return for some letters he'd written. Perhaps that was the original grit in the Royal Conspiracy oyster?

Story here.

Blimey, if it's that easy to make £12K, I think I'll have a bash meself!

Cheers,

Graham

[Barnaby]

More to the point, why did the conspiritors choose such an extreme method of killing the ladies involved? Gull could have disposed of them more efficiently than spreading them across the pavements of London. They could then have been neatly dissected by his medical students at Guys.
Alternatively, they could have been weighted down and drowned in the Thames.

I suppose the thinking is that the Royal Family ok'ed the killings but Gull was, in fact, deranged. Which is why they eventually had him silenced.

Not that I believe it.

[caz]

The biggest mystery is how Stephen Knight was ever taken in by this nonsense in the first place. Joseph Sickert changed his story about as often as Mike Barrett.

Hmmmmm. Well better men than Knight are still regularly taken in by Mike Barrett's nonsense about having written a certain diary.

"Go figure" (as I think the appropriate expression would be - there isn't a translation our side of the pond that quite hits the spot ).

Love,

Caz
X

[Limehouse]

Prince Albert Victor was apparently blackmailed by two (female) prostitutes in 1891 - for which he stumped up a few hundred quid in "hush money", in return for some letters he'd written. Perhaps that was the original grit in the Royal Conspiracy oyster?

Story here.

An interesting story Sam, which only goes to show that the Royal Conspiracy is bunkham because if true, then surely these two ladies would have ended up being JRTs victims number 6 and 7 (or twelve and thirteen, depending on which score yoy believe).

[BillyE]

Playing devil's advocate for a theory I absolutely have no belief in, the idea is the prostitutes who were blackmailing Eddy with compromising letters were not posing a threat to the throne, because nothing they had would call into question Eddy's right to rule, but fathering a child with a commoner, and a Catholic to boot, would negate Eddy's legitimacy to the throne. And some feared it would be the end of the monarchy itself, since this was a time ripe for revolution. At least those in power were afraid it was. I do find this unlikely, since England already went through a revolution led by Oliver Cromwell, and it didn't seem to go so well. After two years of Cromwell's son trying to lead the country they restored the monarchy, and it's been there ever since. But it's the threat against the monarchy that separates the letter blackmailing prostitutes from the baby blackmailing prostitutes. Hope that helps.

[Suzi]

Hi all-
Well to be honest I reckon that Mr Knight was responsible for a lot of us who had an earlier interest in JTR thinking.....Uh Oh ....this is interesting....Quirky and more than likely a little lacking in reality though it was!...Then of course Mr Fairclough came cantering up behind with 'The Ripper and the Royals' and we all thought Ooooh yes...mad Royals closeted away that could be a point....

Then we took a deep breath and more water with it and read 'proper' books...The A-Z,Fido,Sugden,Begg et al and took up the back seats to sneak a giggle at the very thing that may have got us going in the first place!

Joseph Sickert and all of that semi truth is probably just that- but it did tweak our curiosity I reckon......Unlike Patsy who just IMHO discredited a superb artist (Odd he may have been ....but not THAT odd!)

And-------- then there's the Barrett nastiness....but I'm NOT going there!!!

Suzi x

[BillyE]

On the subject of whether or not Joseph Gorman "Sickert" was actually the son of Walter, I know Walter was cremated, so no DNA can come from him, but what about his father, Oscar I believe his name was? I know the father passes down the same Y chromosome so that a great grandfather will have the same Y chromosome as his great grandson. It's similar to mitochondrial DNA passes from mother to daughter. If we could get Walter's father's Y chromosome we may be able to esablish once and for all if Joseph really was a Sickert.

[Christine]

On the subject of whether or not Joseph Gorman "Sickert" was actually the son of Walter, I know Walter was cremated, so no DNA can come from him, but what about his father, Oscar I believe his name was? I know the father passes down the same Y chromosome so that a great grandfather will have the same Y chromosome as his great grandson. It's similar to mitochondrial DNA passes from mother to daughter. If we could get Walter's father's Y chromosome we may be able to esablish once and for all if Joseph really was a Sickert.

It wouldn't necessarily be of any use...it's quite possible Walter Sickert had some sort of relationship with Alice Margaret and Joseph without actually being the biological father of her child. She was married to another man at the time of Joseph's conception, so who knows who thought what for what reasons? Walter may have even shared his Ripper theories (or his knowledge of the awful truth) with them, regardless of what he thought of Joseph's paternity. Or Joseph may have made the whole thing up, even if he did turn out to be Walter's biological child.

On the other hand, knowing that Walter was the biological father of Joseph would prove that Patricia Cornwell is wrong in her theories about Walter's sex life. But the Sickert believers could revise that part of the theory without too much trouble.

But if you are interested in royal conspiracies, the way to go would to see if Joseph is really the grandson of Prince Eddy. If that were true, that would be a major shocker.

[BillyE]

It would be a far more difficult task to prove Joseph the grandson of Eddy, than the son of Walter Sickert. If he were the prince's grandson being that far down the family line would delute some of the royal genetic material. Were we to get DNA from both Alice Gorman, and Prince Eddy it would be easier to make the royal connection, but still rather a stretch. However, if the Y chromosome from Walter Sickert's father could be taken, it would be able to prove if Joseph was Walter's son.

[truebluedub]

Hi Christine,
At least one Sickert supporter has already taken into account Joseph's supposed parentage. Michael Sheridan argued in Frozen Blood that Patricia Cornwell's investigation confirmed the oral tradition from Walter Sickert's son.

Kind regards
Chris Lowe

[Mitch Rowe]

Prince Albert Victor was apparently blackmailed by two (female) prostitutes in 1891 - for which he stumped up a few hundred quid in "hush money", in return for some letters he'd written. Perhaps that was the original grit in the Royal Conspiracy oyster?

Story here.

The original grit was probably the spelling Jewes. Some-one noticed this was how FreeMasons spelled it. Then after reading about the blackmailing put 2 and 2 together to come up with 5!

Its all a big joke to me. Prince Eddie/Gull/Sickert. We know better now. We know that JTR was most likely a wolf in sheeps clothing. He lived right there in Whitechapel. His life was probably more akin to Dahmers than a Prince. A very difficult Man to identify. That dont make for a best seller or even an also ran. He wasnt a needle in a haystack. He was a needle in a stack of needles. But this needle was slightly different wich means maybe someday we can identify him. Dahmer had run ins with Police. Police made a big mistake by not investigating him further. Maybe there is a clue left to help identify JTR. Maybe someday we will have the knowledge to know what that clue was. I would be looking within the general population of Whitechapel.