A New Ripper Book

[Archaic]

If NONE are 'JTR' Victims why is only ONE of the Non-Victims on the cover?

Hi, Jonathan; thanks for trying to shed some light on this matter. I was quite impressed with Mr. Cook's work on the Murder of Rasputin, the Romanovs being one of my all-time favorite historical subjects, and I look forward to reading his new book on the Whitechapel Murders.

However, in all honesty, Mr Cook's explanation to you which I quote here:

He does not believe any of the murder victims are victims of a "Jack the Ripper" and so the use of any one of the victims photographs would have fallen into the same category of not-victims of the Ripper

JM

only leaves me more baffled then before. > If NONE of the Victims were murdered by a figure known as 'Jack the Ripper', surely the most logical subsequent thought in that sequence would be to conclude that NONE of the bloody death scenes of that 'category' of Murder Victims belongs on the cover, let alone the bloodiest and most appalling one!

- Isn't it a reasonable conclusion, based upon the premises we have been given, that therefore NONE of the famous 5 belong on the cover of this book? I ask in all sincerity; I do not wish to be argumentative, but only to understand this issue and all its myriad implications more fully. In fact, that's also my goal in choosing to research the Ripper case. [/B] I want everybody to know that I'm always to hearing new viewpoints, and I welcome them.

I just want to add that really enjoy the Podcasts, and I offer my Best Regards to you and to Mr Cook. -Archaic

[Natalie Severn]

Something along the lines of "It couldn't have been me, I was someone else at the time."

It couldnt be a doppelganger thing could it?

[Supe]

Jeff,

Unless someone comes up with a "Jack the Ripper" was a football croud theory?

Now that you mention it, Jennifer (Pegg) Shelden and I had an article, "Sports Extra." in Ripperologist 95 (September 2008) about the birth of what became the English Premier League in which we pointed out that the first games ever were played a few hours after Annie Chapman was murdered. Make of that what you will.

Don.

[Jeff Leahy]

Are you saying that its not only possible that all the JtR suspects were equally guilty? But another one thousand two hundred and twenty five, rattle carrying, scarf wielding, homocidal maniacs need to be taken into consideration?

I'm liking this new theory. More the better

Besides it makes Maybrick and Sickert more credible

Pirate

In fact Don a book entitled "Everyone was Jack the Ripper" could make an interesting counter balance to Andrew Cooks book.

I'm Sparticus!

[caz]

Cover Girl Obsession

I'm Sparticus!

And I'm speechless.

Well almost.

Because Mary wasn't apparently butchered by the 1888 equivalent of Robert Napper after all, but by - quite literally - Mr. Nobody, and it's apparently in everyone's interests to read the good news, she's going to have to spread herself all over again, repeatedly, in all good bookshops.

So instead of a serial offender picking off three or more victims, one at a time, we now get one victim being repeatedly offended against and Nobody gets - or takes - the blame.

And we are all supposed to cheer because no man will have his reputation harmed this time round by being fingered for the crimes. Tidy.

The film title's already been taken: There's Something About Mary.

Love,

Caz
X

[Jeff Leahy]

True Caz

But if we have a book called "Jack the Ripper was Sparticus, case closed"

With a picture of a mashed turnip on the front cover. We would be creating the perfect balance to this latest theory. Which was all I was getting at.

Of course no one as far as I can see has ever toyed with the idea that MJK committed suicide?

Unless of course DON knows any different.

Pirate

Just to make sure it doesnt fly to far off topic I've been trawling todays press releases which are much the same in content:

http://current.com/items/90012710_jack-the-ripper-was-several-different-killers.htm

However it does seem evident from this press release that Andrew Cook is claiming Nichols, chapman and Eddowes were killed by different people.......Caseclosed.

"According to The Times, Dr Cook alleges that the five women considered to have been the Ripper's victims – Mary Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes and Mary Kelly – cannot have been killed by the same person."

Px

[Jeff Leahy]

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article6201628.ece

Sorry I lapsed out of time getting the Times

[anna]

A doctor?.......with those strange ideas,let's hope he's not a gp.


He put's "case closed" on the cover of his book...and watches Casebook.
Obviously not when the Pat thread was going,because you'd have to be not very bright or need to go to Specsavers,to repeat the process,yourself.

Now,instead of pointing to the victims we struggle a bit with...he goes for the obvious ones.....oh,boy!!


Unless one of the newspapers of the time did a pull-out supplement on "How to murder and mutilate a woman in your local area"......his theory doesn't stretch too far. Would it not occur to a publisher,that he's tuppence short of the price of a knee-trembler??????

Or are we on here discussing the finer details,because we have all come to the wrong conclusion....hmm...ONE IS A LONELY NUMBER.

[Chris]

Following on from m_w_r's observations, I don't think we have any evidence that Andrew Cook is suggesting that all the victims were killed by different hands. In fact what's said in the Times article seems consistent with up to three of the canonical five having been victims of the same killer (assuming "several" could mean as few as three).

Wouldn't it be better to wait until we know what he's suggesting, and what evidence he's working from, before passing judgment?

[truebluedub]

As I pointed out on the Jack invented by journalists thread http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=2656 from the press descriptions Cook seems to be suggesting that the Jack the Ripper panic was the result of a social process called a moral panic. The same process led to the satanic ritual abuse scares in the 80s.

Chris Lowe

[Jeff Leahy]

Yes to be fair I was quoting from the 'current' feature which was quoting the Times...by the time I'd read the Times I was timed out...

What it would appear Andrew Cook has discovered is proof that Best wrote the 'Dear Boss'...

On which the 'Old' A to Z has this to say: Journalist. Alleged author of 'Jack the Ripper' letters. Dr Robert Anderson, Donald Swanson and Melville MacNaughten all independently mention Scotland Yard's beleif that the 'Jack the Ripper letter was hoax by an identifiable journalist. a writer in crime and detection for Aug 1966 describes using the 'very spy and clear minded' seventy year old ex-journalist Best as a contact in 1931.

Account..

We may note that Best was probably unaware of the full total of Ripper letters sent to the police and held on file. But his confidence suggests that he claimed responcibility for most widely reported missives, including Dear Boss letter and post card sent to the Central News Agency, and possibly the From Hell letter sent to George Lusk with half a kidney.

End.

So it seems logical that Andrew Cook has managed to identify Best as the writer of the letters. Which if true would be an interesting side line but hardly a particularly new revelation.

We all know how we love and trust hand writing experts...

The question is does he bring anything new to the table about the victims murders and my guess is NOT. Andrew Cook is obviously keen to stir up a sensational story to make his point that " The story was sensationalized" by the press. I guess there's some irony in that...

Pirate

[jmenges]

If anyone has any specific questions they'd like me to ask Andrew Cook, please PM me today. Try to keep them short, polite, and to the point.

JM

[Christine]

As I pointed out on the Jack invented by journalists thread http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=2656 from the press descriptions Cook seems to be suggesting that the Jack the Ripper panic was the result of a social process called a moral panic. The same process led to the satanic ritual abuse scares in the 80s.

Chris Lowe

Well, in the Satanic ritual abuse scares there were many unsubstantiated claims of horrific crimes. The figure of 20,000 murders a year was thrown around, and was eventually shown to have no substance whatsoever. There were a few murders that had weird elements created by self-styled Satanists.

But in the Ripper panic, all the murders seemed to more or less real. "Fairy Fay" is a complete mystery. Rose Mylett actually died under mysterious circumstances. Carrie Brown, Martha Tabram, and Emma Smith were truly murdered. The Nicaragua and Jamaica ripper scares also seem to have involved actual murders.

As I said, I'd like to read the book, but it seems to be completely unavailable.

[Chris]

As I said, I'd like to read the book, but it seems to be completely unavailable.

It hasn't been published yet.

[Cap'n Jack]

Yes, JM, I've got a question for Andrew Cook.
What would his defence be if he was arrested for an offence under the revised 'Obscene Publications Act'?