Jack the Ripper: Written In Blood

[Doctored Whatsit]

Thank you all for the advice. There is already more than enough waste material about JtR lying about, we really don't need anyone else shovelling more on top.

I'll give it a miss!

[jmenges]

As Best sprints to another murder scene, the narrator says: “Every journalist grows up with the phrase ‘If it bleeds, it leads.’”

- Just not these journalists, as the phrase wasn’t coined until late 1890’s.

JM

[jmenges]

Does anyone else catch the irony in that this recent run of “documentaries” (Lucy Worsley, and now Written in Blood) portrays Victorian media outlets as being so piss poor, while their very own product is absolute garbage?

JM

[Herlock Sholmes]

As Best sprints to another murder scene, the narrator says: “Every journalist grows up with the phrase ‘If it bleeds, it leads.’”

- Just not these journalists, as the phrase wasn’t coined until late 1890’s.

JM

I get the feeling that if you took the time to point out every error Jon you’d need the whole of the next issue of Ripperologist just for your review.

[The Rookie Detective]

It's a shame to hear that it is full of so many factual errors.

I can understand and appreciate the odd bit of artistic licence, or personal bias creeping in to the production, but there's really no need to make so many factual gaffs.

Of course, these kind of productions aren't geared towards those of us who actually care about the case, and the absolute need to get the basics right.


I have yet to see a single production, documentary, series, or film that contains 100% factual data; which I know can never really be achieved when so much of the case remains subjective and based on personal opinions more often than not. There are so many brilliant minds who know a lot about the finer details of this case, but I have yet to see a single definitive piece that "gets it right," so to speak.


What's really frustrating is that the focus on the press pushing the agenda to promote sales, is something that genuinely needs more of an in depth look at.
But when they can't even get the fundamental basics right, then it automatically obliterates the integrity of the piece and makes watching it seem utterly pointless.


A waste of time it seems

[jmenges]

What’s more frustrating is the state of the modern press and what they consider legitimate news about the Ripper murders. 1000 click-bait articles just in recent months claiming Russell Edwards has solved the case being a prime example. Glass houses and all that.

JM

[Herlock Sholmes]

What’s more frustrating is the state of the modern press and what they consider legitimate news about the Ripper murders. 1000 click-bait articles just in recent months claiming Russell Edwards has solved the case being a prime example. Glass houses and all that.

JM

I met someone the other day in a pub that I hadn’t seen for 2 or 3 years (he’s been living in Italy) and he remembered my interest in the case. Almost the first words out of his mouth were “it looks like you’ll have to find another interest now that the ripper case has been solved.”

[Herlock Sholmes]

I finished watching the series this afternoon and I now regret my appraisal in post #15. I was being far too complimentary. When I said that JM might need an entire issue of Ripperologist for his review if he was going to list the errors I was wrong. He might need two issues. Perhaps a book?

[PaulB]

I finished watching the series this afternoon and I now regret my appraisal in post #15. I was being far too complimentary. When I said that JM might need an entire issue of Ripperologist for his review if he was going to list the errors I was wrong. He might need two issues. Perhaps a book?

Not that you are sounding like one, but one should try to avoid sounding like one of those people who watch a drama based on Jane Austen novel and then complain that the teaspoons used when folk were having afternoon tea were early Victorian. Not errors, but what worries me about this drama/doc is whether it is based on any evidence at all. What evidence is there that Frederick Best actually covered the Whitechapel murders? Or that he wrote the Dear Boss letter and Saucy Jacky postcard? And can someone remind me of the evidence on which is based the claim that The Star "invented" the single murderer story? Or that anything at all happened in the offices of The Star that resembles what was portrayed in the program?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Not that you are sounding like one, but one should try to avoid sounding like one of those people who watch a drama based on Jane Austen novel and then complain that the teaspoons used when folk were having afternoon tea were early Victorian. Not errors, but what worries me about this drama/doc is whether it is based on any evidence at all. What evidence is there that Frederick Best actually covered the Whitechapel murders? Or that he wrote the Dear Boss letter and Saucy Jacky postcard? And can someone remind me of the evidence on which is based the claim that The Star "invented" the single murderer story? Or that anything at all happened in the offices of The Star that resembles what was portrayed in the program?

Or that he confessed to the faking. I know what you mean in your first sentence though Paul. It’s easy to fall into ‘spot the error” mode.

[Trevor Marriott]

Or that he confessed to the faking. I know what you mean in your first sentence though Paul. It’s easy to fall into ‘spot the error” mode.

In 1931 at the age of 70, Frederick Best purportedly confessed that he and a colleague at the Star newspaper had written all the letters signed "Jack the Ripper" to "keep the business alive" The possibility that 'Best' and company were responsible for all the Ripper letters is unbelievable, considering how many were sent and the various locations they were posted from. Best's confession first appeared in a 1966 edition of "Crime and Detection" and is set out below as described by Best to author Nigel Morland

"Returning homewards with me, Best discussed murders, the Whitechapel Murders in particular. With much-amplifying detail, he talked of his days as a penny-a-liner on 'The Star' newspaper. As a freelancer, he had covered the Whitechapel murders from the discovery of Tabram. He claimed that he, and a provincial colleague, was responsible for all the Ripper letters, to 'keep the business alive'.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Herlock Sholmes]

In 1931 at the age of 70, Frederick Best purportedly confessed that he and a colleague at the Star newspaper had written all the letters signed "Jack the Ripper" to "keep the business alive" The possibility that 'Best' and company were responsible for all the Ripper letters is unbelievable, considering how many were sent and the various locations they were posted from. Best's confession first appeared in a 1966 edition of "Crime and Detection" and is set out below as described by Best to author Nigel Morland

"Returning homewards with me, Best discussed murders, the Whitechapel Murders in particular. With much-amplifying detail, he talked of his days as a penny-a-liner on 'The Star' newspaper. As a freelancer, he had covered the Whitechapel murders from the discovery of Tabram. He claimed that he, and a provincial colleague, was responsible for all the Ripper letters, to 'keep the business alive'.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Thanks Trevor. I couldn’t recall any of that but it’s ringing a bell now that I see it.

[John Wheat]

In 1931 at the age of 70, Frederick Best purportedly confessed that he and a colleague at the Star newspaper had written all the letters signed "Jack the Ripper" to "keep the business alive" The possibility that 'Best' and company were responsible for all the Ripper letters is unbelievable, considering how many were sent and the various locations they were posted from. Best's confession first appeared in a 1966 edition of "Crime and Detection" and is set out below as described by Best to author Nigel Morland

"Returning homewards with me, Best discussed murders, the Whitechapel Murders in particular. With much-amplifying detail, he talked of his days as a penny-a-liner on 'The Star' newspaper. As a freelancer, he had covered the Whitechapel murders from the discovery of Tabram. He claimed that he, and a provincial colleague, was responsible for all the Ripper letters, to 'keep the business alive'.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

I would suggest that most of the letters purportedly by Jack were most likely written by journalists possibly including Best. Best may have written a number of the letters.

[PaulB]

In 1931 at the age of 70, Frederick Best purportedly confessed that he and a colleague at the Star newspaper had written all the letters signed "Jack the Ripper" to "keep the business alive" The possibility that 'Best' and company were responsible for all the Ripper letters is unbelievable, considering how many were sent and the various locations they were posted from. Best's confession first appeared in a 1966 edition of "Crime and Detection" and is set out below as described by Best to author Nigel Morland

"Returning homewards with me, Best discussed murders, the Whitechapel Murders in particular. With much-amplifying detail, he talked of his days as a penny-a-liner on 'The Star' newspaper. As a freelancer, he had covered the Whitechapel murders from the discovery of Tabram. He claimed that he, and a provincial colleague, was responsible for all the Ripper letters, to 'keep the business alive'.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Being nit-picky, someone called Best confessed in 1931. It was probably, but far from certainly known that this was Frederick Best.
Nigel Morland is far from the most trustworthy author. He claimed to have met Aberline, you will recall, and a number of other people of note.
Best claimed to have used a battered Waverley pen, which doesn't suggest the penmanship of the Dear Boss letter or the Saucy Jacky postcard. If anything, it may mean he wrote or was involved in the writing of the Lusk letter.
Frederick Best might have covered the murders as a freelancer, like he claimed, but would he have been an "insider" with The Star hierarchy like O'Connor and Parke?

[Trevor Marriott]

Being nit-picky, someone called Best confessed in 1931. It was probably, but far from certainly known that this was Frederick Best.
Nigel Morland is far from the most trustworthy author. He claimed to have met Aberline, you will recall, and a number of other people of note.
Best claimed to have used a battered Waverley pen, which doesn't suggest the penmanship of the Dear Boss letter or the Saucy Jacky postcard. If anything, it may mean he wrote or was involved in the writing of the Lusk letter.
Frederick Best might have covered the murders as a freelancer, like he claimed, but would he have been an "insider" with The Star hierarchy like O'Connor and Parke?

I am satisfied that the article relates to Frederick Best, the Star Reporter.

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk