Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rippercast- The Jack the Ripper Podcast

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hi JM! I don't really see why we should remove names from the list altogether, all are part of the folklore , no matter how ridiculous! I would however like to see some further categorisation to distinguish ,particularly for the newbie, the potentially serious contender from the downright ridiculous, though I appreciate all are serious to somebody.!? It would be an interesting job for the panel to create something like a premier league, and then some lower divisions!

    As regards additions, I'm sure you are aware of the increased interest, since the first release of Broadmoor files, in Thomas Cutbush..he has been much discussed on the boards, but still lacks a profile! I am not the only one on these boards to have queried this.As to why he should be added, well there are others better versed to tell you but briefly:

    1.The Sun Reports..in which an apparently reputable newspaper claims to have found Jack The Ripper..and further relates a history which at present cannot be disproved.
    2.The Macnaghten Memoranda..written specifically to rule out Cutbush as a suspect, by a police officer whose motives and integrity are possibly open to question.
    3.The character of Cutbush as described in the Broadmoor files as a highly dangerous and insane person whose behaviours included expressing a desire to obtain a knife with the express purpose of 'ripping' people up.
    4.The bizarre possible connection to Charles Cutbush, an officer initially involved in the case, and whom Macnaghten apparently believed to be Thomas' uncle, who later shot himself in front of his own daughter, for reasons unknown.

    Also, I had been considering why you don't ask AP (Cap'n Jack) onto the show (or have you already?) as he is the most vociferous campaigner for and researcher of Cutbush on the casebook, as I am sure you are aware!?

    I think the Cutbush story has much going for it myself..more than Druitt or Feigenbaum , both of whom have been the focus of shows with respective researchers, Spallek and Marriot..,and both of whom were fascinating subjects nonetheless!

    Anyway...love the podcasts...and keep up the good work!

    Respectfully,

    WK.
    Last edited by White-Knight; 01-05-2009, 03:35 AM.

    Comment


    • OK, John, I'll start it off. I don't really believe that any of these guys is the one we're looking for, but, from the list, these, to me, are the names that are at least worth discussing:

      Joseph Barnett
      W.H. Bury
      David Cohen
      Montague John Druitt
      George Hutchinson (Br.)
      James Kelly
      Severin Klosowski (George Chapman)
      Aaron Kosminski
      James Maybrick
      R. DŽOnston Stephenson
      Francis Tumblety

      All of these have had articulate proponents at one time or another. A solid case can't be made out against any of them but, if we want to play hunt the Ripper, this ain't a bad bunch to start with.

      Comment


      • like that list T.G.M. exactly matches my premier league..except aren't you missing one person? If not,why not?

        knickers sorted and back on.

        WK.

        Comment


        • You'll find WK that there is a very clear prejudice on this site in allowing Thomas Cutbush a foot in any door. That the young chap can be featured in the modern media all over the world as a likely candidate for Jack the Ripper, but still not make it onto the official suspect list on Casebook should speak volumes to you.
          My good self, and others, have long been the objects of derision snd negative comment for our efforts in researching and promoting Thomas as a reasonable and likely suspect.
          Given JM's recent comments about my good and 'umble self - I think he described me as the 'lowest of the low', simply for questioning the authenticity of an out of focus photo - I don't believe he'll be inviting me to do anything.
          But that suits me just fine and dandy.
          I'll wait for hell to freeze over.
          I'm good at that.

          Comment


          • I am rather surprised that Thomas Cutbush is not on that list. Especially when some real humdingers are (eg Prince Albert Victor).

            And especially when the release of his Broadmoor files open him up to more reasoned scrutiny.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cap'n Jack View Post
              Given JM's recent comments about my good and 'umble self - I think he described me as the 'lowest of the low', simply for questioning the authenticity of an out of focus photo - I don't believe he'll be inviting me to do anything.
              AP Wolf has been asked to be on the podcast multiple times, we've added each other to our Skype contact lists in anticipation of such an appearance, and the invitation still stands. When the podcast scheduled Philip Hutchinson, Robert Clack, and John Bennett on to discuss the Dutfield Yard Photo, AP referred to my booking that show as having "Papa Doc, Papa Doc Junior and a few loud shirts and sunglasses to discuss the benefits of democracy in Haiti.", even though that show contains the most public information to date on the topic of the photograph.

              Nevertheless, the discussions and debates that occur on the message boards I view separately and do not color my decisions as it pertains to guests on the show. I repeat, AP is more than welcome to appear to as a special guest to discuss Cutbush, or anything else he wants.

              As to why Cutbush is not on Casebook's list, I would venture to guess that the reason is that it has not been updated. I was surprised to not find Neil Stubbing Shelden's book The Victims of JtR listed in the media section, but I don't believe its absence is a conscious decision to hide the existence of this book from the public.

              JM

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cap'n Jack View Post
                Given JM's recent comments about my good and 'umble self - I think he described me as the 'lowest of the low', simply for questioning the authenticity of an out of focus photo - I don't believe he'll be inviting me to do anything.

                If you wonder why people get sh*tty with you AP, think about your manner.

                It ain't what you do, it's the way that you do it.

                Comment


                • John, thanks, I am supremely aware of that situation.
                  If I were to wake up in the morning and everyone liked me I'd probably shoot myself.

                  Comment


                  • Well since it appears that Norma and White Knight like you, isn't that worth at least seriously wounding yourself?
                    Last edited by Ally; 01-06-2009, 01:44 AM.

                    Let all Oz be agreed;
                    I need a better class of flying monkeys.

                    Comment


                    • As I can only speak for myself on the issue of Eliminationist Ripperology, I would hope others "see" what could turn out to be a positive development in our beloved field by contributing to this thread and hence the upcoming Rippercast program on the subject.

                      Over the years, the civilian world has created film after film about Jack The Ripper, casting some of the least plausible individuals imaginable as the Whitechapel Murderer. The most popular suspects and theories,in terms of book sales and public awareness, are the ones written about Mrs. Cornwell's Sickert, Knight's triumvirate, and Mrs. Harrison's cotton merchant.

                      One need only ask a civilian "who" Jack The Ripper was and invariably the answer will be one of the above. That one may have been the Ripper is not the issue here on this particular thread, but this is:

                      When we as a community fail to engage in the necessary task of culling the herd, we will continue to have suspects "introduced" to the pack based on a dollar-driven agenda, despite there being no tangible evidence other than wishful thinking to even consider the "suspect" in the first place. It is as simple as that. People prey on Ripperologists knowing full well we are literate, overtly passionate,and are not averse to spending a buck on our hobby/way of life.

                      What this does is reduce the credibility of those of us who are serious researchers who know that speculation is the best and currently only thing one can do in terms of suspect-Ripperology. For me, speculation is served best in the arenas of what is evidence and what is not... and the individual aspects & scenarios within the Case. More damage has been done to the 'reputation' of Ripperology by the authorship of books which turn innocent men into criminals for money than anything else in terms of how our contemporaries and future Ripperologists percieve the field.

                      Thats why I think that if all of us, here and elsewhere, put their collective foot down, and tried to weed each and every non-starter from the bloated cadre of innocent men....it would go a long way for future "newbies" or civilians as to how they perceive the serious work of say, Chris Scott or Tim Riordan or Bobby McLaughlin and inevitably create a message board atmosphere here and elsewhere of mutual disdain for accepting tired old premises,half baked "what ifs?" in terms of the suspects.

                      A.P...God knows I love you,buddy. The last guy in our field who would remain standing in an integrity test is JMenges. If he says he wants you on...bank on it.

                      Comment


                      • Thanks JM & How
                        always willing to take part, just as long as it is not a Bay of Pigs.

                        Comment


                        • It looks and sounds great JM, sorry about the technical difficulties my end, but my internet explorer keeps playing up. It has something to do with my modem, but hopefully the newer updated model will be installed tomorrow.
                          Regards Mike

                          Comment


                          • I'd go on if asked, but only if A.P. Wolf was with me.

                            Comment


                            • J.M. A.P. ALLY, (Chris..if you are listening)

                              Hilarious..o.k. beg all to forgive a little faux naivety..it seems being new has SOME advantages in terms of getting you lot back to the dinner table.

                              the ends justified the means if it will bury the hatchet for at least the duration of a podcast... I did tell you all I've trawled here quite widely and for quite a while before starting to post...the 'Papa Doc' and the 'lowest of the low' comments are not unknown to me.

                              ALLY,
                              very funny ..Yes I do like AP! but due to my lowly status I think you are looking at something more like a shaving cut!

                              Its not just the Cutbush or child suspect angles though, which ARE compelling and which Chris again condemned this very day. (Norma incidentally read my mind citing Mary Bell and James Bulger cases in response)

                              Its also that the man IS damned entertaining..That Papa Doc stuff was priceless..just plain funny as an assasination of the personalities AP saw being stacked against him.. surely bound to entertain on podcast ( and yes obviously I know that isn't the main function of podcast before you all start moaning..)i'm all for a healthy respect for others ..I applauded everybody's treatment of Trevor M but if only some could loosen their ties a little..

                              Now I know a lot of people have worked hard, and find this sort of thing rude..and I know AP is more than capable of defending himself, but I want to say that I don't think being a serious researcher should give any poster here the right to condemn the man SO VERY heftily for his style and tone, or even his content, which many seem to find so objectionable, misled and/or misleading..though personally I don't. It often comes across as sour grapes by the humourless for not being as amusing in counter argument.Staying up all night researching MJK geneology or any other taxing research option, worthy as it may be , doesn't give you the right to dismiss people presenting ideas you HADN'T or CHOSE NOT to consider. Sorry, Chris..you seem to keep walking in there...? How CAN you take Mel' Mac' at such face value? (Well repeat-argued on Saunderson's birth cert tho!.AP..you are still wriggling around your earlier assertion there). For a really good example of how to argue with AP, though, look no further than recent posts by Mark on Saunderson!! Great match, lads!

                              So,..full credit to you- JM ,for keeping the dinner invitation open and concentrating on the meat on the table.

                              I can forgive all for asking why a site devoted to JTR should be a repository of wit, but I would suggest that if casebook wants to continue to thrive and prosper there is no reason why it SHOULDN'T have these elements present AS WELL AS worthwhile content, and yes I do think AP provides both, though he is far from the only one who does so.

                              And of course Cutbush not being on the list by now, for whatever reason, is a bit of a travesty, especially given those who are, and regardless of what people make of AP,his views or the way he presents them.

                              Good luck to all anyway...no more excuses, now AP!? Let 'em come! Doc and all! ha ha ..easy for me to say..I ain't going under the lamp...lol! to say I'm looking forward to that one is quite an understatement..now get on and get that Tom Tom mic'd up. Its time for the gig!

                              W.K.
                              Last edited by White-Knight; 01-07-2009, 06:00 AM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by White-Knight View Post
                                Its not just the Cutbush or child suspect angles though, which ARE compelling and which Chris again condemned this very day. (Norma incidentally read my mind citing Mary Bell and James Bulger cases in response)
                                Just for the record, what I actually said was that Saunderson could be a serious candidate only for those who believed the Ripper might have been a boy of 14 - which I don't believe but, as I said, nothing some people believe would surprise me - and that the suggestion deserved a thread of its own. I can't imagine many people would take the suggestion seriously, but if you feel there are arguments to be put in its favour, why not put them? (For example, does anyone know of another serial killer of prostitutes as young as 14?)

                                As for Cutbush, I don't think I've mentioned him for a while. I certainly wouldn't condemn anyone for being keen on a particular suspect. What I object to is people posting factually incorrect information. That kind of thing makes a mockery of any attempt at serious discussion of anything.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X