A cover up by the men that murdered Princess Diana

[Bob Hinton]

Oh really...

The words of a true lecturer.

And there you go again Kennyo, proving my point most adequately!

[MrTwibbs]

My whole point of the royal conspiracy is that the establishment is all powerful. Yes, It is highly likely Diana was murdered by them and you only have to read the book I have mentioned to open your minds to the fact that when orchestrating cover ups they are the worlds best. .

This is done to sell books, the more fantastic the story the better it sells as Joe public loves this stuff. Gossip, rumor and fantastic stories all make for a good interesting read. The authors who make these sweeping statements then vanish into thin air for a few years or recruit other voices to fuel their theories.

I think it could be best summed up by this statement from the suspects section on Price Albert


"In 1978, Spiering issued a challenge to Queen Elizabeth II to reveal the truth about Eddy. Either she should open the Royal archives or hold a press release detailing the Duke's activities as the Ripper. When a Buckingham Palace spokesman stated that Spiering could examine the Royal Archives (as other researchers had done) but that the accusation were "not sufficiently serious to warrant a special statement from the Queen", Spiering replied that he didn't want to see the files. Leaving Rumbelow and others to deduce that the entire episode had been orchestrated to sell copies of the book.

Since then Spiering has not made any further claims or produced any further evidence supporting his theory."

[kennyo]

And there you go again Kennyo, proving my point most adequately!

Magistrates and Mason's, can't beat them can you??? Time to go

[kennyo]

This is done to sell books, the more fantastic the story the better it sells as Joe public loves this stuff. Gossip, rumor and fantastic stories all make for a good interesting read.

I think it could be best summed up by this statement from the suspects section on Price Albert


"In 1978, Spiering issued a challenge to Queen Elizabeth II to reveal the truth about Eddy. Either she should open the Royal archives or hold a press release detailing the Duke's activities as the Ripper. When a Buckingham Palace spokesman stated that Spiering could examine the Royal Archives (as other researchers had done) but that the accusation were "not sufficiently serious to warrant a special statement from the Queen", Spiering replied that he didn't want to see the files. Leaving Rumbelow and others to deduce that the entire episode had been orchestrated to sell copies of the book.

Since then Spiering has not made any further claims or produced any further evidence supporting his theory."

It's a valid point, but might it be that Spiering will be fully aware that any incriminating evidence about a royal involvement would have been removed from the palace records long ago? Don't forget the Royal Archives are exactly that, Royal Archives, sensitive subject matter can be buried quite easily.

[kennyo]

Hi kennyo,

the Royal Conspiracy Theory and sub-plots like Prince Eddie & J.K. Stephen as a murderous duo are fascinating tales of sex and crime, tragedy, horror and political scandals that still bring fourth new fans and believers and were the starting point for many a Ripperologist's career.

Trouble is that its core elements and allegations rely on information that had been proven wrong time and again. Yes, you can explain away its gaping holes with cover-ups and the intervention of higher powers and whatnot but ignoring the facts is never a good idea, it's right what created this impenetrable jungle of fallacies, hearsay and red herrings that is the Royal Conspiracy theory in the first place.

If you haven't already, check out a few more down-to-earth books on the case by the likes of Philip Sugden, Steward P. Evans or Paul Begg, this might help you to watch things from a different angle.

Regards,

Boris

Many thanks Boris,

Good stuff, I'll take your recommendations.

Ken

[Robert]

"Another fanciful theory was that he was murdered and like Elvis Presley went onto live the life of a hermit."

Yes, well, nobody wants to know you when you're a stiff.

[kennyo]

I'm new to this forum but what i've just read in your post has no evidence and it reminds me of Bruce lee's death in 1973. After he died, so many rumors arose including those of a cover up. i.e. He was murdered due to their being connections to the chinese mafia. Another fanciful theory was that he was murdered and like Elvis Presley went onto live the life of a hermit.
All of these are just theories and it won't be long before another theory comes up telling us that Jack The Ripper was in fact an alien life form who travelled around in a star ship.
I am in no way belittling your theory but there always seems to be so many theories involving certain people. D B cooper, Hitler, Bruce Lee, Elvis, Roman Polanski.

If you can give me evidence as to why you think the Royals were involved that would be great as i'm new to this forum.

Mr Twibbs,

I'm new to this forum too, though have been interested in the jack the Ripper theories since I read my first JTR book 30 years ago. The point is that no one knows who JTR is but the interesting point is that we can all have an opinion. Opinion and freedom of speech, discussion, that's what it's all about. There are so many holes in every single suspects case (depending who you listen to) that I feel there simply had to be two Jack's, even perhaps a Jill as some people suggest.

Whilst we do not have any 'evidence' relating to the Royal Conspiracy we have lots to talk about, fingers to point, motives and madness. However the one thing I cant get away from is that how did a man (or men) manage to kill so many women, in such a short period of time, in such a confined overpopulated area. The police and vigilante presence on the streets of the east end during the Autumn of 1888 was simply unprecedented. He/they simply had to have help from an organisation or organisations with an extreme amount of power. There are three such organisations with that sort of power. The police, the Masons or the Establishment.

[Bob Hinton]

Oh really...

Magistrates and Mason's, can't beat them can you??? Time to go

And yet again, tell me this isn't Krazy Karen in disguise is it?

[Bob Hinton]

Oh really...

Mr Twibbs,
He/they simply had to have help from an organisation or organisations with an extreme amount of power. There are three such organisations with that sort of power. The police, the Masons or the Establishment.

This is exactly the sort of nonsense I am talking about. You have made a categorical statement that the killer had help from some organisation. Do you have any proof of what you are saying? Anything to back up your claim? Anything at all? And I'm sorry simply saying that he must have isn't really any good.

You cannot expect anyone to take you seriously if you make rather silly statements like that.

[kennyo]

And yet again, tell me this isn't Krazy Karen in disguise is it?

Who is crazy Karen?

[kennyo]

This is exactly the sort of nonsense I am talking about. You have made a categorical statement that the killer had help from some organisation. Do you have any proof of what you are saying? Anything to back up your claim? Anything at all? And I'm sorry simply saying that he must have isn't really any good.

You cannot expect anyone to take you seriously if you make rather silly statements like that.

Bob,

It seems to me that you are one sad, twisted, bitter individual with nothing really better to do on a Sunday afternoon than to pick faults, fights, and arguments with persons whose views do not reflect your own. If you'd read my post you would see that I am merely offering my opinion, a judgement, perhaps even a little poetic licence, after all, my publisher pays me $1,000,000 dollar advance per book for my imagination, ideas, opinions and plots. (Bob, I wouldn't get out of bed for £60 per hour) At no time did I say my opinion was fact, it's AN OPINION, AN OPINION that I want the other members of this forum to comment on. The other contributors here speak in a civilised professional honest manner and I can relate to them, they are willing to listen, possibly even change their opinions. In my opinion (remember opinions are what makes the freeworld breathe) you should be removed from this forum, you have a chip on your shoulder the size of Wales. Now, back to my book. Thanks to everyone else, you will all be mentioned in the acknowledgements, I value your opinions greatly. Lovely sounding word opinion... isn't it?

[MrTwibbs]

Mr Twibbs,

I'm new to this forum too, though have been interested in the jack the Ripper theories since I read my first JTR book 30 years ago. The point is that no one knows who JTR is but the interesting point is that we can all have an opinion. Opinion and freedom of speech, discussion, that's what it's all about. There are so many holes in every single suspects case (depending who you listen to) that I feel there simply had to be two Jack's, even perhaps a Jill as some people suggest.

Whilst we do not have any 'evidence' relating to the Royal Conspiracy we have lots to talk about, fingers to point, motives and madness. However the one thing I cant get away from is that how did a man (or men) manage to kill so many women, in such a short period of time, in such a confined overpopulated area. The police and vigilante presence on the streets of the east end during the Autumn of 1888 was simply unprecedented. He/they simply had to have help from an organisation or organisations with an extreme amount of power. There are three such organisations with that sort of power. The police, the Masons or the Establishment.

Yes of course I understand what you're saying.
I view these powerful organisation i.e. Scotland yard with a great deal of sceptism i'm afraid and it is due to the fact that the police in 1888 were just down right sloppy. Evidence to support this is the fact they removed potentia evidence from the wall, both Swanson, Mcnaughton and Anderson seem to have different stories and the eye witness reports do not appear to have been qualified properly. i.e. how far away were you standing from the victim? basic questions like this overlooked.
With that in mind it would have been easy to commit murder. i.e. in an over populated, small area. Yes very much so as cries of "murder" were common place and what witness claimed to have heard this daily.
One other theory i've heard is that John Merrick was the Ripper and that Treves was helping him. They would venture out at night to give Merrick a good time and Treves would do the cutting. It's very slanderous when good people like that have their names thrown in the dirt just for the sake of an exciting story.

[Bob Hinton]

Kennyo comes up with:

If you'd read my post you would see that I am merely offering my opinion,

I have read your post and here is what it says: “He/they simply had to have help from an organisation or organisations with an extreme amount of power.”
That my friend is a statement of fact. I’m surprised that someone getting million dollar advances for their books ( Dan Browns going to be jealous he only gets around $200,000) doesn’t recognise this simple truth.

If you were offering an opinion you would say something along the lines of “ I believe it is possible that he had help” or “It is a possibility that someone helped him” putting it the way you did is stating a fact. A complete load of rubbish it may be but you are stating it as fact and not as an opinion.

Please don’t bother putting really big letters, that doesn’t really impress me, I know you did it because Capps did it but you ought to do your own thing.
Opinion is a lovely word, now how can I use that in a sentence, how about this ”It is my opinion that the cowardly person posting under the false name of kennyo is a childish little prat who has fantasies about writing books”

I am still waiting for you to admit that the so called facts contained in your first post are totally wrong.

[kennyo]

Kennyo comes up with:

If you'd read my post you would see that I am merely offering my opinion,

I have read your post and here is what it says: “He/they simply had to have help from an organisation or organisations with an extreme amount of power.”
That my friend is a statement of fact. I’m surprised that someone getting million dollar advances for their books ( Dan Browns going to be jealous he only gets around $200,000) doesn’t recognise this simple truth.

If you were offering an opinion you would say something along the lines of “ I believe it is possible that he had help” or “It is a possibility that someone helped him” putting it the way you did is stating a fact. A complete load of rubbish it may be but you are stating it as fact and not as an opinion.

Please don’t bother putting really big letters, that doesn’t really impress me, I know you did it because Capps did it but you ought to do your own thing.
Opinion is a lovely word, now how can I use that in a sentence, how about this ”It is my opinion that the cowardly person posting under the false name of kennyo is a childish little prat who has fantasies about writing books”

I am still waiting for you to admit that the so called facts contained in your first post are totally wrong.

You sad man, alas it is you that has your facts wrong this time, my publisher is quite often in the habit of advancing six figures and I quote "Colon Powell got the biggest book advance in history from Random House. (1993) Powell's book, My American Journey, earned him an advance of $6 million US Dollars — the largest advance in history at that time. His book also became the fastest-selling book in Random House's publishing history."
I'm suggesting my good friend, Dan finds himself another agent.

[MrTwibbs]

I'm a member of many other forums mostly automotive and IT related but have to say this is the first forum i've been on that seems to be degraded down to the level of barryboys(website) with the in fighting between forum posters. I'd have liked to think that people on this website were of better reasoning and civility?

Why don't you both keep on topic instead?