Mary Jane Kelly found?

[Abby Normal]

You have written a book that tells us who mary kelly was and who jack the ripper was but offer us no proof or evidence you can't claim case closed and sell books on the strength of this it just isn't cricket.

evidence and proof aren't the same thing and he has plenty of evidence that mary Kelly might have been his ancestor.

and he can do whatever he wants. his claims are more legit than 80% of the ripper related garbage that's published.

you don't seem to be able to grasp the difference.

[pinkmoon]

Research ,evidence,proof then publish a book not the other way round

[pinkmoon]

[QUOTE=Abby Normal;350310]evidence and proof aren't the same thing and he has plenty of evidence that mary Kelly might have been his ancestor.

and he can do whatever he wants. his claims are more legit than 80% of the ripper related garbage that's published.

you don't seem to be able to grasp the difference.[/QU
The man is selling books on the strength of this in the not to distance future it will come out that this is a load of old Victorian shoe makers in other words a load of OLD COBBLERS

[Ozzy]

No wonder people like Prosector stay away from the forums.

I think most/all of us understand your position pinkmoon. I think many of us would also have preferred something like a Ripperologist article.
What's done is done and dwelling on things that annoy you, or you don't like etc just eats you up. I'm sure there's some great quotes*** that have said something similar and I wish I could recall one right now.

Obviously by now making another similar post is pointless. We understand how you feel. If I had a solution I'd post it because I'd love to help you out pinkmoon.

I really don't want to see Prosector become so annoyed that it gets to the stage where he thinks screw it regarding a forthcoming Ripperologist article on possible medical knowledge seen in the C5 that Paul Begg asked him about in the podcast.

*** tried a google search and the top result gave me 50 Quotes on Letting Go of the Past. Bookmarked!

http://daringtolivefully.com/letting-go-of-the-past-quotes

[c.d.]

"Why does everything always have to be some convoluted conspiracy, (as in the name Kelly being significant) instead of several very unfortunate (not using that word in the Victorian sense) and I'll-fated women meeting a serial killer and being murdered by him?"

Now THAT is a damn good question, Rosella.

c.d.

[c.d.]

I should have added that it is probably because conspiracy theories are so much more interesting than using Occam's razor.

c.d.

[c.d.]

"I think most/all of us understand your position pinkmoon. I think many of us would also have preferred something like a Ripperologist article.
What's done is done and dwelling on things that annoy you, or you don't like etc just eats you up. I'm sure there's some great quotes*** that have said something similar and I wish I could recall one right now."

How about that great Irish saying never try to teach a pig to sing. You won't succeed and you'll only end up making the pig angry.

c.d.

[GUT]

"Why does everything always have to be some convoluted conspiracy, (as in the name Kelly being significant) instead of several very unfortunate (not using that word in the Victorian sense) and I'll-fated women meeting a serial killer and being murdered by him?"

Now THAT is a damn good question, Rosella.

c.d.

Because we jut have a common lowlife wandering around killing prostitutes.

Also there is the good old tall poppy syndrome at work.

And lastly (for now) if it wasn't all complicated we'd have worked it out years ago

[Rosella]

^ I'm not saying the Jack the Rippercase is uncomplicated and clear cut. Not at all. Much still lies undiscovered and we will never know the answer to many questions about this series of murders, including the identity of the perpetrator! I have noticed though, that with famous murders there can be a tendency to wrap a mystery within a mystery, or look at some coincidences and see plots and conspiracies connected with them.

[DJA]

Occam's razor.

c.d.

Crikey!

Is that what he used!

Seriously though,most people who spout Occam's razor have no eye deer what they are on about.

If you really wish to understand Jack the Ripper,read Maimonides and Spinoza.

[GUT]

I should have added that it is probably because conspiracy theories are so much more interesting than using Occam's razor.

c.d.

Crikey!

Is that what he used!

Seriously though,most people who spout Occam's razor have no eye deer what they are on about.

If you really wish to understand Jack the Ripper,read Maimonides and Spinoza.

Shouldn't we be having a closer look at this Occam bloke, running around with a razor and all.

[pinkmoon]

I'm not going to get myself into a blazing row about this on here and get myself banned all I wil say that in the not to distance future you will all be agreeing with me.By the way have any of you read "the fifth victim"

[packers stem]

Morning Rosella
It's because as I seem to remember Simon Wood once put it on these boards it's because it has all the conspiratorial ingredients...

[Sally]

I'm not going to get myself into a blazing row about this on here and get myself banned all I wil say that in the not to distance future you will all be agreeing with me.By the way have any of you read "the fifth victim"

Jason,

Have you actually read Prosector's book, seen any of the on-going research into the theory presented therein; or listened to the informative podcast which you can access via this site?

You seem adamant that the theory carries no weight, but you haven't explained why this is your view - not that you're under any obligation to do so, of course.

I think most would agree that Dr Weston Davies does have evidence to support his theory that his great aunt, Elizabeth Weston Davies, may have been MJK. Moreover, he will attempt to prove scientifically, one way or the other, whether this is in fact the case; should it prove possible to conduct DNA analysis, which is, as almost everybody recognises, the main issue here.

Prosector has, on a public forum, offered to show you his letter from the Ministry of Justice giving permission to exhume in post #41 - as you have in several posts stated categorically that he wouldn't get permission from the MoJ, I'd have thought Prosector's offer would've been of interest to you - it seems pretty open and honest to me.

[pinkmoon]

Jason,

Have you actually read Prosector's book, seen any of the on-going research into the theory presented therein; or listened to the informative podcast which you can access via this site?

You seem adamant that the theory carries no weight, but you haven't explained why this is your view - not that you're under any obligation to do so, of course.

I think most would agree that Dr Weston Davies does have evidence to support his theory that his great aunt, Elizabeth Weston Davies, may have been MJK. Moreover, he will attempt to prove scientifically, one way or the other, whether this is in fact the case; should it prove possible to conduct DNA analysis, which is, as almost everybody recognises, the main issue here.

Prosector has, on a public forum, offered to show you his letter from the Ministry of Justice giving permission to exhume in post #41 - as you have in several posts stated categorically that he wouldn't get permission from the MoJ, I'd have thought Prosector's offer would've been of interest to you - it seems pretty open and honest to me.

Sally Mr dear I have invested a fiver and read his book and I still stand by what I've said .when this story comes to its conclusion I sure that all of you will agree with what I've been saying the matter is now laid to rest because the last thing I would want to do is fall out with you or anybody else on here.my kindest regards love and kisses to you jasonxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.