Ripper Confidential by Tom Wescott (2017)

[Tom_Wescott]

At the end of the day, Tom, your name is on the front of RC (and on every other page). Please stop blaming others for your mistakes, and threatening those who mention them with ostracism from your circle.

Again with the Whoa. Wow.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Damaso Marte]

Of all the weird subcultures I belong to, Ripperologists are the ones who are nastiest to each other online.

[MrBarnett]

Again with the Whoa. Wow.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Tom,

I think most people looking at this debate have some idea of what I'm talking about, but 'Whoa. Wow?' What is that?

Sadly, I think we've gone beyond the stage where you might have 'manned-up' to your massive MM mistake and explained to us how it came about that the limited facts you provided in your book supported your theory.

As for your insistence that you know more about the geography of the Victorian East End than Her Majesty's Ordnance Survey... sorry, just spilt some of my 9th glass of wine after dinner.

Don't respond, Tom, you still have a tiny bit of credibility in your enormous circle (your hat band).

Gary.

[Tom_Wescott]

As for your insistence that you know more about the geography of the Victorian East End than Her Majesty's Ordnance Survey... sorry, just spilt some of my 9th glass of wine after dinner.

I know fek all about geography. I get lost on my own street.

Don't respond, Tom, you still have a tiny bit of credibility in your enormous circle (your hat band).

Gary.

Okay, props for the hat-band burn. That was pretty sweet.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[MrBarnett]

The hat-band gag was original, honest. It occurred to me today as I was on the train to sunny Dorset.

[Dane_F]

What does that mean? Between what two events?

To be clear: Between what two events are you saying that we do not know how much time elapsed?

Clearly when I say we do not know how much time has elapsed I am speaking about when Millous went into the hospital and when the record was made. We know the record was made at a later time but how much later, we cannot say.

[Abby Normal]

Of all the weird subcultures I belong to, Ripperologists are the ones who are nastiest to each other online.

Lol! I guess you've never been on a MMA web site.


I also belong to a particular web site forum that's based on the works of one of my favorite authors. It's in the realm of fantasy so many of the members are double nerds and very literate.
The moderators don't tolerate any overt nastiness so these members can delicately and subtly rip you a new one. It truly is an art form.


Sorry off topic. Back to the nastiness! LOL!

[Abby Normal]

The hat-band gag was original, honest. It occurred to me today as I was on the train to sunny Dorset.

That was pretty sweet. Lol

[harry]

Now I have not,in all the years posting here,talked to or personally met and conversed with any other poster.So do not include me as being for or against anyone on a personel level.
The hospital records certainly have the 1st as the date of admission,but was that the date on which the injury occurred?That is what I believe Tom was trying to determine.He seemingly believes the injury could have occurred on the day previous to admission.That is what should have been argued.
Could it? I believe it possible.I could be wrong,but insisting his mistake over the 1st,on it's own,disproves his belief,doesn't prove he's wrong.

[Damaso Marte]

I'm about 3/4 through the book myself and thought the Milhous section was the weakest part anyway. Even if the hospital records had said 31st instead of 1st, he's still hanging his hat on speculation from newspaper stories of suspicious credibility. Plus the description of what happened to the alleged woman in the newspaper does not fit with the "fake mugging" model of the Ripper that Wescott puts forth later so it's not even consistent with his own views.

Overall the Nichols stuff is great. The further you get in the book, the less it becomes about the Ripper and the more it becomes about other stuff happening in Whitechapel at the time, which I know some people here like very much but I find less interesting. The Nichols stuff itself was worth the $6 I paid for the eBook on Amazon.

[Tom_Wescott]

I'm about 3/4 through the book myself and thought the Milhous section was the weakest part anyway. Even if the hospital records had said 31st instead of 1st, he's still hanging his hat on speculation from newspaper stories of suspicious credibility. Plus the description of what happened to the alleged woman in the newspaper does not fit with the "fake mugging" model of the Ripper that Wescott puts forth later so it's not even consistent with his own views.

Overall the Nichols stuff is great. The further you get in the book, the less it becomes about the Ripper and the more it becomes about other stuff happening in Whitechapel at the time, which I know some people here like very much but I find less interesting. The Nichols stuff itself was worth the $6 I paid for the eBook on Amazon.

Hi Damaso, thanks for that. I'm curious what you thought of the Fanny Mortimer and Israel Schwartz essays. To me those are among the most 'hardcore Ripperology' parts of the book, along with the Nichols stuff and the Goulston Street essay in section 3. My guess is the part where I lost you was in 'Murder in the Neighborhood'. The Stride stuff in that was good but the topography stuff, which works great in a magazine, rather slowed down the pace I had established earlier on. Such is the pitfall of an essay-oriented book. Plus I'm now told it was all wrong, so...

Yours truly ,

Tom Wescott

[drstrange169]

I enjoyed the Fanny Mortimer section, one of the best in the book, imo.
A couple of mistakes in it, but nothing earth shattering and I actually learnt something!

The Swhartz piece wasn't so good for me, no mistakes that I noticed, but I found some of the reasoning very dubious, to say the least.

[Patrick S]

Of all the weird subcultures I belong to, Ripperologists are the ones who are nastiest to each other online.

I was just thinking the same thing. Before this thread, I'd have said it was a close call between Ripperolgoists and Olympic Weightlifters. But, the lifters I as around mainly just ignored one another, and pretended they'd never met. Of course, having played an extremely social sport like baseball for years before I got into lifting, I didn't get the memo. So, for the first few years I'd show up at a meet and say things like, "Hey! Didn't we meet at the Vegas Open last month? Hello? Hey, bud? I'm over here....." or "Whoops! Looks like I'm a full kilo over weight! Guess I better have some chili cheese fries to get things moving! Hello? Anyone? These are the jokes, fellas...."

Ripper people, on the other hand, impugn one another's character, intimate that some among us may have serious mental defects, or the odd, borderline-illegal sexual perversion. I think I've seen it suggested here that Tom Westcott killed the Linburgh baby and that Trevor Marriot is Joseph Mengele.

[Tom_Wescott]

I enjoyed the Fanny Mortimer section, one of the best in the book, imo.
A couple of mistakes in it, but nothing earth shattering and I actually learnt something!

The Swhartz piece wasn't so good for me, no mistakes that I noticed, but I found some of the reasoning very dubious, to say the least.

Mistakes in the Mortimer section? Dubious reasoning? Oh, Dusty, you must tell me more!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

I was just thinking the same thing. Before this thread, I'd have said it was a close call between Ripperolgoists and Olympic Weightlifters. But, the lifters I as around mainly just ignored one another, and pretended they'd never met. Of course, having played an extremely social sport like baseball for years before I got into lifting, I didn't get the memo. So, for the first few years I'd show up at a meet and say things like, "Hey! Didn't we meet at the Vegas Open last month? Hello? Hey, bud? I'm over here....." or "Whoops! Looks like I'm a full kilo over weight! Guess I better have some chili cheese fries to get things moving! Hello? Anyone? These are the jokes, fellas...."

Ripper people, on the other hand, impugn one another's character, intimate that some among us may have serious mental defects, or the odd, borderline-illegal sexual perversion. I think I've seen it suggested here that Tom Westcott killed the Linburgh baby and that Trevor Marriot is Joseph Mengele.

Why does Marriott always get to be The Mangler and I'm the baby killer?

So, you're an Olympic weight lifter and Abby is into the MMA. And yet you're two of the nice ones.

For the record, there's actually not a lot of trouble makers in Ripperology. It just seems that way when they choose to band together and gang up on someone. And they only gang up on people who put out books that receive positive attention for being 'original'. Somehow this is a trigger mechanism for them. I reserve certain sides of my personality only for these individuals and only when they behave a certain way. Otherwise I'm all good times and noodle salad. This comment does not of course refer to all those who have criticisms of my book (most criticisms are healthy and appreciated), but I think it's obvious I'm referring to a very, very small and particular group of individuals.

If you think they had the knives out for me, wait until the Swanson book comes out.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott