What does this picture remind you of?

[Phil Carter]

Don't worry David. I tried that many moons ago with him when he started this joke. I didn't get a reply.

It's Florence Nightingale. Or one of her nurses.
In a teddy bear outfit.

Phil

[MysterySinger]

Is there more symbolism in the picture originally referred to by Pierre that links it to his potential suspect? By that I mean perhaps links to Scottish nationalism and an anti monarchy stance. Connections too to the events of Bloody Sunday in 1887 for which the first anniversary was looming in November 1888.

[Rosella]

Don't worry David. I tried that many moons ago with him when he started this joke. I didn't get a reply.

It's Florence Nightingale. Or one of her nurses.
In a teddy bear outfit.

Phil

Talking about teddy bears. One has been put forward as JTR. (Sooty and Sweep were famous glove puppets on TV when I was a child.)

http://rhymesandroutes.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/jack-ripper-sooty-and-doctor-who.html

[Pcdunn]

Talking about teddy bears. One has been put forward as JTR. (Sooty and Sweep were famous glove puppets on TV when I was a child.)

http://rhymesandroutes.blogspot.com....octor-who.html

Being a fan of both teddy bears, and "Doctor Who", I enjoyed that link immensely-- thanks, Rosella! (Sooty, however, probably was not Jack the Ripper, for the simple reason that he was created in the 20th century, and hence was too young!)

[Shaggyrand]

I'm more convinced than ever that its Time Traveling Freddie Mercury. He ended his rampage by taking the place of Mary Queen of Scots at some point in the timeline. For the reason her portraits do not look like him see Quantum Leap.

[Pierre]

I'm more convinced than ever that its Time Traveling Freddie Mercury. He ended his rampage by taking the place of Mary Queen of Scots at some point in the timeline. For the reason her portraits do not look like him see Quantum Leap.

No. The killer did it to show the police that he was the one who had done it.

Regards Pierre

[Henry Flower]

Why do people keep playing Pierre's tedious games? Please, folks, go back and read through his collected works here, and remind yourself how absolutely futile they have all been, how little he actually states, how he dangles questions and teases people in before telling them they're doing it all wrong, and reminding them how pure and data-driven his research and his reasoning are, without ever having the guts to put forward anything testable or falsifiable himself. Same MO every time, and every time people play his dumb games.

[Bridewell]

Hi Karl,

thanks for the links.

But in the late 19th century, there was a discussion going on in England about Queen Mary. The roman catholic church wanted to make a saint of her. And this painting was hanging in London. So people knew a little about this queen and some had seen this painting.

The killer had no interest in this queen whatsoever. But he used what people generally knew of her to leave a message to the police and the message was: "I told you I would do this and as you can see, I did it".

This last sentence is my interpretation of a new data source and the photo of Kelly.

Regards Pierre

Okay, I'll buy the possibility of a serial killer who also appreciates the finer things in life and who visits art galleries in his spare time, but how were the police supposed to make the connection between a painting of Mary Queen of Scots and the Kelly murder, even if we take the leap of faith which is required to draw the tenuous conclusion that there was one?

[Bridewell]

No. The killer did it to show the police that he was the one who had done it.

Regards Pierre

The post above makes no sense whatsoever, even at the most basic level.

To be honest I've had enough of this nonsense. The rest of us disagree about all sorts of things but at least we divulge information. We infuriate each other but we share. We discuss. We don't just soak up other people's thoughts like a sponge yet disclose nothing in return. In future I'm skimming past your posts, Pierre to those of people with whom, even though I may disagree with them, I can at least engage in a proper discussion and the exchange of information, the latter being a concept which seems to be completely beyond your comprehension.

[Rosella]

THE big question in Britiain in the late 1880's was Irish nationalism and the activities of the Fenian Brotherhood. There were also worries about a trade recession and bad harvests, leading to more unemployment at home and a fall in exports. None of which has the slightest link to Mary Queen of Scots, and the last place the police would be looking would be in that direction to try and gain a clue!

[DJA]

The post above makes no sense whatsoever, even at the most basic level.

To be honest I've had enough of this nonsense. The rest of us disagree about all sorts of things but at least we divulge information. We infuriate each other but we share. We discuss. We don't just soak up other people's thoughts like a sponge yet disclose nothing in return. In future I'm skimming past your posts, Pierre to those of people with whom, even though I may disagree with them, I can at least engage in a proper discussion and the exchange of information, the latter being a concept which seems to be completely beyond your comprehension.

He has no information,just looks stuff up on Wikipedia,etc and posts gibberish.
Then he and any friends fall about laughing at the replies.

[Henry Flower]

He has no information,just looks stuff up on Wikipedia,etc and posts gibberish.
Then he and any friends fall about laughing at the replies.

Which is why I think it's a mistake to reply to any of his absurd fishing expedition posts. I mean, this is a guy who managed to spawn an 86 page thread based on asking everyone what happens if we use a dictionary to gain an understanding of the word Juwes! He offered no hint or clue as to his own thoughts, just tantalising hints that he was onto something that he never shared, and doing his usual "you're all thinking wrong" routine. 86 pages and he never offered a single debatable proposition.

Isn't it obvious by now that he's a fraud and is taking people for a ride? My recommendation would be to reply only when Pierre actually offers some concrete fact or idea for disscussion, rather than his usual "what does this picture suggest to you?" bollocks.

[Geddy2112]

Isn't it obvious by now that he's a fraud and is taking people for a ride? My recommendation would be to reply only when Pierre actually offers some concrete fact or idea for disscussion, rather than his usual "what does this picture suggest to you?" bollocks.

Indeed. We are not allowed an alternative opinion.

In most other forums I read on various topics this poster would have been kicked into touch months ago and his IP banned for life...

What does this picture remind you of?

http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/warriorshtm/tirelessrebutter.htm

[MsWeatherwax]

I'm more convinced than ever that its Time Traveling Freddie Mercury. He ended his rampage by taking the place of Mary Queen of Scots at some point in the timeline. For the reason her portraits do not look like him see Quantum Leap.

Finally, a legitimate contender! All the pieces fall so neatly into place...his murderous rampage was clearly sparked by jealousy of Brian May's magnificent man perm and widdly guitaring.

Pack up lads, lets go home...last one out turn the lights off.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Henry Flower;384632]

Why do people keep playing Pierre's tedious games?

Hi Henry,

You can define my discussions the way you like, of course. But if you want to do that, you might be interested in giving the right definition instead of the wrong one. "Games" is the wrong definition, Henry.

Please, folks, go back and read through his collected works here, and remind yourself how absolutely futile they have all been,

Yes, one can always go through old posts, it might be interesting. And the word futile is a definition for the fact that some dead people are not being accused of being serial killers. Others are, and then the content is not at all futile. There are already a lot of such people presented within ripperology, so the futility mentioned here should be of no interest.

how little he actually states,

Ethics. If you were not a serial killer, would you like people to say that you were a serial killer, 119 years after your death?

how he dangles questions and teases people in

I like to pose questions. I have many questions and questions are more important to me than answers.

before telling them they're doing it all wrong,

An example of that is the discussions about Lechmere. Many posters here think that Lechmere was not Jack the Ripper, and they tell Fisherman he is wrong. Another example is all the posters claiming that I am wrong. And yet another is myself, claiming that I may be wrong. There is nothing strange about that.

and reminding them how pure

On the contrary. I am always reminding myself and anyone who is interested in the scientific fact that we all have a bias and that this bias should be analysed and taken into consideration in our research.

and data-driven his research and his reasoning are,

Well, without data, you can not do any research. I think everyone knows that. It is nothing new or radical.

without ever having the guts

It is not a matter of "guts", it is a matter of ethics. But the problem of ethics could be solved after a short time period, given that there is negative or positive information.

to put forward anything testable or falsifiable himself.

As above.

Same MO every time,

Stability is important I think. I must act with responsibility as an historian.

and every time people play his dumb games.

There you make the wrong definition again.

Regards, Pierre