Who was killed by Jack the Ripper?

[FISHY1118]

A letter from Sickert's mother dated September 6th documents that Walter was in St. Valery-en-Caux at that time. "A letter sent by a French painter, Jacques-Emile Blanche, to his father described a visit with Sickert on September 16th." Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Patricia Cornwell and Walter Sickert: A Primer

See also Paul Begg's Jack the Ripper the Facts, pp. 410-411.

I ve had this discussion about said letter/s , its not conclusive in regards to Sickert s movement on the dates on the murders

The 16th you mentioned isn't a murder date and the 6th Sept has no year 1888 on it , if you can post it I'd like to see it . Cheers

[Lewis C]

I ve had this discussion about said letter/s , its not conclusive in regards to Sickert s movement on the dates on the murders

The 16th you mentioned isn't a murder date and the 6th Sept has no year 1888 on it , if you can post it I'd like to see it . Cheers

When I said, "It has been proven that Sickert was in France shortly before and shortly after the Chapman murder, and there's no evidence that he was ever anywhere but in France in the days in between," I didn't mean "the same day" when I said, "shortly before and shortly after". If I had meant that, I wouldn't have referred to the days in between, and I wouldn't have said in the next sentence that he may not have an ironclad alibi.

I don't have a copy of the Sept 6th letter, but from the context of the reference in Ryder's article and Begg's book, it's clear that the year is 1888.

[FISHY1118]

When I said, "It has been proven that Sickert was in France shortly before and shortly after the Chapman murder, and there's no evidence that he was ever anywhere but in France in the days in between," I didn't mean "the same day" when I said, "shortly before and shortly after". If I had meant that, I wouldn't have referred to the days in between, and I wouldn't have said in the next sentence that he may not have an ironclad alibi.

I don't have a copy of the Sept 6th letter, but from the context of the reference in Ryder's article and Begg's book, it's clear that the year is 1888.

Context is not Evidence. Its no where near clear.

Its clear however that Sickert could well have been in London at the time of the murders.