A cover up by the men that murdered Princess Diana

[kennyo]

The theory I am leaning towards is Prince Albert Victor and his partner in crime, (I think) James Kenneth Stephen. Everything is there if you pit the two of them together, there are too many flaws in the argument if you point the finger at only one of them. Two... and it all fits, motive, conspiracy, a little madness, violent tendancies against women and of course the necessary means to elude capture with a little help from certain 'friends' within the establishment. Eddy is known to have connections with the East End and there is no doubt he learned the butchering of an animal on the many hunts he enjoyed in Hyde Park and St James's Park which were in fact huge wooded areas back then. Although many Ripperologists will pick holes in the theory, the holes they pick can be easily explained by two words - cover up.
No fingers were pointed at Eddy during the time of the killings. It's not surprising because the establishment had absolute power to cover up scandals using whatever means were necessary, including murder. Some of the unconnected murders not attributed to 'The Ripper' were alledged to have been carried out by agents of the Palace to silence certain individuals who were making their mouths go, even demanding a little hush money to seal their lips. One only has to look at the murder of Princess Diana, (shock horror) to see the power that the Establishment has. Whilst wholly unconnected to the Whitechapel Murders I suggest you take a look at a book quite honestly called. "The Murder of Princess Diana" by Noel Botham to see how the Establishment works. It goes on today and there is no doubt it went on during the Autumn of Horror in 1888.
Indeed when Doctor Thomas Stowell published an article in the Criminologist in 1970 suggesting the involvement of Eddy in the Whitechapel murders it caused quite a sensation.
Two days later he was dead.
Look at the holes in the theory of Eddy and Stephen and tell me if those holes could have been conveniently created up by someone with an enormous amount of power, more than the police for example. Dr Gull, the medical council of both Eddy and James Stephen would appear to perhaps have held the key in his documents which were at one time ere held at the New York Academy of Medicine. The Academy politely explained that Dr Gulls notes did not contain any reference to Eddy or James Stephen, they did however point out that some of the dicumentation could have been misplaced . Strange but true!

[Little Nell]

In order to prove guilt you have to produce evidence. Knowing how to cut up people or animals, having connections in the East End are facts that apply to thousands of people around in 1888.

The trouble with conspiracy theories is that any objection is met with "cover up".

Since Prince Eddy was a royal embarrassment I can't believe he'd ever be allowed anywhere without a minder or two.

But we are free to believe what we want.

[Bob Hinton]

Oh really...

Indeed when Doctor Thomas Stowell published an article in the Criminologist in 1970 suggesting the involvement of Eddy in the Whitechapel murders it caused quite a sensation.
Two days later he was dead.
!

Please at least have a go at getting your facts right. The first book to suggest PAV as a suspect was published in 1962 if memory serves.
Apparently no one thought to release the masked assassins on this occasion
.
Stowell published his article in the November Issue of the Criminologist (vol.5 pp.40–51) which was actually available at the end of October I believe. He wrote to the Times on the 5th November to state “"I have at no time associated His Royal Highness, the late Duke of Clarence, with the Whitechapel murderer.”. The letter was published on the 9th of November, a day after Stowell died. Wow shock horror 80 year old man dies at beginning of winter!

So where do you get this idea that he died two days after the article was published? Who the hell appeared on the BBC current affairs programme 24 Hours on 2 November? And who wrote to the Times on the 5th November?

Apart from all of that don’t you think the masked assassins might have done their work better by eliminating him before the article was published? Kinda draws attention to the fact doing it afterwards don’t you think? And of course highly sloppy to let Colin Wilson who spoke to Stowell about this theory to continue living.

Please don’t tell me you actually believe Diana was murdered will you?

[Bob Hinton]

Tthe Actual Letter

Here is the letter

[Natalie Severn]

Diana"s death in that tunnel should really be seen as a lesson to all those prepared to get into a car with a drunken driver.

[Zodiac]

One from the vaults!!!

Look at the holes in the theory of Eddy and Stephen and tell me if those holes could have been conveniently created up by someone with an enormous amount of power, more than the police for example. Dr Gull, the medical council of both Eddy and James Stephen would appear to perhaps have held the key in his documents which were at one time ere held at the New York Academy of Medicine. The Academy politely explained that Dr Gulls notes did not contain any reference to Eddy or James Stephen, they did however point out that some of the dicumentation could have been misplaced . Strange but true!

This would be the same Royal Family that are "in fact" a reptilian race of space aliens, would it kennyo??? I suppose that they also had President Kennedy shot, faked the moon landings, and are, at this very moment, plotting the total, final and irreversible destruction of Humankind by 2012???!!!

Kennyo, it can be taken as a pretty strong indication that you have erred, when you find Bob and myself, happily playing on the same team for once, and opening the batting against you! Now that is "Strange but true" as you put it!!!

As for Diana, Nats post sums up my feelings on the matter too.

[bolo]

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

[Robert]

I would have thought that leaving women lying around in public or semi-public places with their bowels exposed, doesn't exactly smack of discretion.

[Robert]

Or as Peter Cook might have said, the sight of an Establishment conspirator running around Whitechapel disembowelling people, might draw unwanted attention.

[kennyo]

Diana

This would be the same Royal Family that are "in fact" a reptilian race of space aliens, would it kennyo??? I suppose that they also had President Kennedy shot, faked the moon landings, and are, at this very moment, plotting the total, final and irreversible destruction of Humankind by 2012???!!!

Kennyo, it can be taken as a pretty strong indication that you have erred, when you find Bob and myself, happily playing on the same team for once, and opening the batting against you! Now that is "Strange but true" as you put it!!!

As for Diana, Nats post sums up my feelings on the matter too.

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. The point I'm making in the royal conspiracy theory is that it smells of another cover up. Take Eddy's alibi's... everyone provided by the palace and their entourage. If we take a step back for a second and just believe for one moment that Eddy's alibi's were fabricated, what other holes are there in the case? Taking it a step further, if he had a duel partner in crime in Stephen why can't we point the finger at these two men who have been proven to have been 'not of sound mind and deed' . I agree it's very unlikely for two homicidal maniacs to take up together and commit murder on such a grand scale. But it happens, look at Fred and Rose West, and The Sunset Strip Killers, Clarke and Bundy. And while we're on the guessing game who are your prime suspects. It appears from your message boards that anyone who profers a theory is usually shot down in flames by the experts who offer nothing in return, further more the posts tend to make a concious effort to ridicule and insult rather than offer anything constructive. And Zodiac, not sure where your coming from on 'This would be the same Royal Family that are "in fact" a reptilian race of space aliens' I've checked and double checked my post and can't find any mention of suggesting the Royal family are a reptilian race of space aliens.

[Steven Russell]

Kennyo,
These are your boards too and you are entitled to share your thoughts and opinions. A bit of gentle ribbing is all part of the game so please don't get discouraged. You asked about other suspects. Here are a few who many consider much more likely candidates than Eddy and Stephen:

Kosminski,
Chapman/Klosowski,
Tumblety,
Druitt,
Stephenson,
Barnett,
Jacob Levy.

I hope this early skirmish hasn't put you off too much.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[kennyo]

Kennyo,
These are your boards too and you are entitled to share your thoughts and opinions. A bit of gentle ribbing is all part of the game so please don't get discouraged. You asked about other suspects. Here are a few who many consider much more likely candidates than Eddy and Stephen:

Kosminski,
Chapman/Klosowski,
Tumblety,
Druitt,
Stephenson,
Barnett,
Jacob Levy.

I hope this early skirmish hasn't put you off too much.

Best wishes,
Steve.

Many thanks, Steve, I'll be back.

Later

Kennyo

[Bob Hinton]

Oh really...

But Kennyo you are destroying your own argument. If as you say “the establishment is all powerful” how come they made such an appalling mess of killing these people that there are possibly millions discussing it and investigating every aspect of the case over a century later. Don’t you stop to consider that an all powerful establishment could get rid of half a dozen prostitutes without drawing any attention to the fact?

I have knowledge of six assassinations carried out by government departments, one of ours and five of theirs and I can assure you all of them were written off as natural causes or suicide. Ours was rather good as we arranged to have one of theirs bumped off by them. Oops clear another bunk in the Gulag for that one. (If you want to know what that was about check the Paris Air Show for 1973)

Eddy’s alibi as you put it was provided by the Court Circular and myriad witnesses. For that to have been false you would have had to have a conspiracy involving hundreds if not thousands of ordinary people. What on earth would their motive me for doing that?

You go on” The point I'm making in the royal conspiracy theory is that it smells of another cover up.” Will you listen to yourself? You are saying that one load of nonsense smells just like another load of nonsense, well who would have thunk it?

As for shooting down theories that’s actually called ‘peer review’, look it up. If you can’t manage that I’ll explain it for you. It means if anyone puts forward a hypothesis others will examine it and see if it is a likely theory or just another load of rubbish. The Royal Conspiracy has been dismissed as rubbish years ago for very good reasons, so please don’t blame us for pointing that out!

You go on “by the experts who offer nothing in return”; we do offer plenty in return if you weren’t so blind as to not see it. We offer a combined total of hundreds of years experience in the case and vast quantities of accumulated knowledge, however if you decide to turn your back on that then don’t be surprised if people don’t take you seriously. Furthermore we don’t make a conscious effort to ridicule and insult but you must be aware that your silly ideas are considered by many to be ridiculous and insulting to their intelligence.


If you have a theory, fine let’s hear it and I am quite sure everyone will give you a fair hearing. But you have to present in such a way as we can see what you are getting at. Blabbering on about mysterious Royal Conspiracies, without offering a shred of evidence that they ever exist is just as daft as talking about Diana’s murder, again not offering any evidence that she was. You read a book by someone who says she was and you jump all over that. How about the countless books that have been written ( one by a person who was there at the time) and various investigations that says she wasn’t – apparently you dismiss all those on the basis of Royal Conspiracy because it was a Royal Conspiracy that covered up the Ripper killings etc. And round and round we go.


The point is you jump in with both feet, your ears shut and your mouth wide open. In your original post you made errors of fact, errors which I pointed out and yet you have failed to admit your errors, failed to thank me for taking the time to correct you and failed to admit you were wrong. I managed to point out you were wrong after only a few minutes on the internet, if you cannot be bothered to do the same why on earth should we take you seriously?


You bleat about ‘experts’ offering nothing in return for your ludicrous ideas and yet when we do offer you the benefit of our knowledge you just ignore us. I’m under contract to the Welsh Assembly to go round schools and Colleges lecturing. They pay me £60 per hour. How much should I charge you?

[kennyo]

But Kennyo you are destroying your own argument. If as you say “the establishment is all powerful” how come they made such an appalling mess of killing these people that there are possibly millions discussing it and investigating every aspect of the case over a century later. Don’t you stop to consider that an all powerful establishment could get rid of half a dozen prostitutes without drawing any attention to the fact?

I have knowledge of six assassinations carried out by government departments, one of ours and five of theirs and I can assure you all of them were written off as natural causes or suicide. Ours was rather good as we arranged to have one of theirs bumped off by them. Oops clear another bunk in the Gulag for that one. (If you want to know what that was about check the Paris Air Show for 1973)

Eddy’s alibi as you put it was provided by the Court Circular and myriad witnesses. For that to have been false you would have had to have a conspiracy involving hundreds if not thousands of ordinary people. What on earth would their motive me for doing that?

You go on” The point I'm making in the royal conspiracy theory is that it smells of another cover up.” Will you listen to yourself? You are saying that one load of nonsense smells just like another load of nonsense, well who would have thunk it?

As for shooting down theories that’s actually called ‘peer review’, look it up. If you can’t manage that I’ll explain it for you. It means if anyone puts forward a hypothesis others will examine it and see if it is a likely theory or just another load of rubbish. The Royal Conspiracy has been dismissed as rubbish years ago for very good reasons, so please don’t blame us for pointing that out!

You go on “by the experts who offer nothing in return”; we do offer plenty in return if you weren’t so blind as to not see it. We offer a combined total of hundreds of years experience in the case and vast quantities of accumulated knowledge, however if you decide to turn your back on that then don’t be surprised if people don’t take you seriously. Furthermore we don’t make a conscious effort to ridicule and insult but you must be aware that your silly ideas are considered by many to be ridiculous and insulting to their intelligence.


If you have a theory, fine let’s hear it and I am quite sure everyone will give you a fair hearing. But you have to present in such a way as we can see what you are getting at. Blabbering on about mysterious Royal Conspiracies, without offering a shred of evidence that they ever exist is just as daft as talking about Diana’s murder, again not offering any evidence that she was. You read a book by someone who says she was and you jump all over that. How about the countless books that have been written ( one by a person who was there at the time) and various investigations that says she wasn’t – apparently you dismiss all those on the basis of Royal Conspiracy because it was a Royal Conspiracy that covered up the Ripper killings etc. And round and round we go.


The point is you jump in with both feet, your ears shut and your mouth wide open. In your original post you made errors of fact, errors which I pointed out and yet you have failed to admit your errors, failed to thank me for taking the time to correct you and failed to admit you were wrong. I managed to point out you were wrong after only a few minutes on the internet, if you cannot be bothered to do the same why on earth should we take you seriously?


You bleat about ‘experts’ offering nothing in return for your ludicrous ideas and yet when we do offer you the benefit of our knowledge you just ignore us. I’m under contract to the Welsh Assembly to go round schools and Colleges lecturing. They pay me £60 per hour. How much should I charge you?

The words of a true lecturer.

[MrTwibbs]

The theory I am leaning towards is Prince Albert Victor and his partner in crime, (I think) James Kenneth Stephen. Everything is there if you pit the two of them together, there are too many flaws in the argument if you point the finger at only one of them. Two... and it all fits, motive, conspiracy, a little madness, violent tendancies against women and of course the necessary means to elude capture with a little help from certain 'friends' within the establishment. Eddy is known to have connections with the East End and there is no doubt he learned the butchering of an animal on the many hunts he enjoyed in Hyde Park and St James's Park which were in fact huge wooded areas back then. Although many Ripperologists will pick holes in the theory, the holes they pick can be easily explained by two words - cover up.
No fingers were pointed at Eddy during the time of the killings. It's not surprising because the establishment had absolute power to cover up scandals using whatever means were necessary, including murder. Some of the unconnected murders not attributed to 'The Ripper' were alledged to have been carried out by agents of the Palace to silence certain individuals who were making their mouths go, even demanding a little hush money to seal their lips. One only has to look at the murder of Princess Diana, (shock horror) to see the power that the Establishment has. Whilst wholly unconnected to the Whitechapel Murders I suggest you take a look at a book quite honestly called. "The Murder of Princess Diana" by Noel Botham to see how the Establishment works. It goes on today and there is no doubt it went on during the Autumn of Horror in 1888.
Indeed when Doctor Thomas Stowell published an article in the Criminologist in 1970 suggesting the involvement of Eddy in the Whitechapel murders it caused quite a sensation.
Two days later he was dead.
Look at the holes in the theory of Eddy and Stephen and tell me if those holes could have been conveniently created up by someone with an enormous amount of power, more than the police for example. Dr Gull, the medical council of both Eddy and James Stephen would appear to perhaps have held the key in his documents which were at one time ere held at the New York Academy of Medicine. The Academy politely explained that Dr Gulls notes did not contain any reference to Eddy or James Stephen, they did however point out that some of the dicumentation could have been misplaced . Strange but true!

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.