The Grisly

[Monty]

"Hi Archaic,

As Ripperologists are all too fond of saying, the writer was there in 1888 and you weren't.

What I think has got nothing to with anything. Please concentrate on the story.

I'll give the source at the end. It's in the public domain.

Regards,

Simon"

"Here's the finale from the Timaru Herald [NZ], 22nd October 1888."


Yeaaah, anyways,

As Phil states, these are quite often Freelance stories peddled through agencies. I'd be interested to see if other newspapers obtained the story or if they wouldn't touch it with the proverbiable barge pole....which would be telling.

However we must focus on the words, not the source, look at the shiney things and not the ropes and pulleys which makes the glitz sparkle.


Monty

[Simon Wood]

Hi Phil,

Perfidious Albion, the Colonies, the Antipodes and the rest of the known world received wholly different variations on the story at wholly different times.

We have been bequeathed a mystery which not only beggars belief but also insults the intelligence of otherwise smart people.

Regards,

Simon

[Phil Carter]

Hello Simon,

Thank you for providing this for our perusal- am I correct in saying that these 'commonwealth" newspapers were normally based upon articles of homeland origin or news agency stories and only 'leader' articles were of local written opinion? Or perhaps the odd representative from these countries based in London sending news home? Or am I way off the mark?

If the award be started for outside the box daring writing, no 'quality' Ripperologists will EVER approve I'd wager! Such thinking is unwelcomed by some don't-you-know-old-bean! Haha!

Best wishes

Phil

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

Here's the finale from the Timaru Herald [NZ], 22nd October 1888.



I hereby award the Grisly to the author for daring to be different and thinking outside the box.

Qualities to which we should all aspire.

Regards,

Simon

[lynn cates]

Tomkins

Hello Simon. Tomkins et al then?

Cheers.
LC

[Cogidubnus]

So my great great grandfather at 34 Queen Ann Street is innocent then...I'm not sure whether to be sad or glad about that then!

Dave

[Simon Wood]

Hi Ken,

Your wish is always my command.

Part 3 -



Regards,

Simon

[The Grave Maurice]

Could we have the next part please, Simon? I'm rather enjoying this, even if the author can't spell "Nichols" correctly.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Archaic,

As Ripperologists are all too fond of saying, the writer was there in 1888 and you weren't.

What I think has got nothing to with anything. Please concentrate on the story.

I'll give the source at the end. It's in the public domain.

Regards,

Simon

[Archaic]

Source?

Hi Simon.

I don't happen to agree with the writer of the article, but he's entitled to his opinion. Do you happen to believe that other C5 victims were "moved" from their place of murder?

Just out of curiosity, is there a reason you haven't stated the source of this article?

The name of the source is always helpful when sussing out news reports and other articles, and of course it's a courtesy to other researchers and to the Casebook archive.

Thank you,
Archaic

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

"Nichols was in fact killed where she was found. "

So sez you.

Part Two—



Regards,

Simon

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Simon,

Isn't it bad form to not provide the source for the article? In any event, here we have a writer who has decided that the evidence proves Nichols had been murdered elsewhere and deposited on Buck's Row. He clearly thinks he was the first to think of it, but he wasn't. The police investigated that possibility and proved it not to have been the case. Nichols was in fact killed where she was found. The author of this piece, in his blinding ignorance, then calls the police lazy, ignorant, and derelict in their duties. All because he, the writer, was too lazy, ignorant, and derelict to bother to learn the facts.

That being the case, why on earth would you want to reward a writer for poor research and failing to reach the correct conclusion?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

If I had to present some sort of award for "Ripperology"—you know, something akin to the Oscar, Nobel, Pulitzer or Tony but perhaps called something like the Grisly—I would award it to the unknown author of this article which appeared on 22nd October 1888.

Sure he got the date wrong, but he still richly deserves this award because in 1888 he dared to step up and refuse to believe a single word of the accepted nonsense surrounding the murder of Polly Nichols.

Here's the first part.



Regards,

Simon