Jack the Ripper Writers

[Stewart P Evans]

Age

Stewart,

bitching, -you? never! thats my job

Jenni

No, I bitch a lot but I've got an excuse - it's something that comes with age. And you?

[Mike Covell]

I bitch a lot, but thats part and parcel of being married

[Jenni Shelden]

I never bitch. i am a perfect example of a Ripperologist eager to learn and calm and relaxed when people make errors.

You know that.

if i were to say something bitchy - i could have a good reason - or i could not

Jenni

[Jeff Leahy]

sounds like the first chapter on the history of Jack the Ripper Researchers is almost complete

[auspirograph]

Don't quite think so somehow Jeff, that's just the prologue...

Seriously, I think Robin Odell did a marvelous job in writing an historical overview of Ripper researchers in his undernourished book, the 2006 release of Kent State University Press Ripperology.

[BillyE]

I've always said "People aren't happy, unless they're bitching about something." ;-)

[auspirograph]

Ripper Writers - Update

The 120th Anniversary of the Whitechapel murders as historic events has been met with some enthusiastic projects including the release of the new website for crime writers and historians, Jack the Ripper Writers.

Thank you to all for your support, well wishes and understanding whilst establishing the site and will continue to offer authors of fiction and non-fiction a free online writer's den as a supplement for those interested.

Registered membership is required to participate on the message board intended for research and writing development on detailed aspects of the Whitechapel murders and a cordial attitude is a must.

For those who missed it, be sure to read: The East End Tradesmen, The Three Nuns Hotel and the Retirement of Chief Inspector Abberline by Scott Nelson.

http://ripperwriters.aforumfree.com/Retirement-of-Chief-Inspector-Abberline-h1.htm

Jack the Ripper Writers is proudly a Maybrick free zone and does not eliminate legitimate contemporary police suspects on a whim.

Have a good weekend.
Admin

[Howard Brown]

Jack the Ripper Writers is proudly a Maybrick free zone and does not eliminate legitimate contemporary police suspects on a whim.-Spiro

Better to just avoid a topic that some people do have interest in to be one of the boys and pretend that "legitimate contemporary suspects" ( just say Stephenson) still have a leg to stand on,eh Spiro? Pardon me if I skipped the foreplay....

You still up to claiming Stephenson "could have" killed Nichols? Is that the way one "fits in" with the boys?

[Natalie Severn]

Jack the Ripper Writers is proudly a Maybrick free zone and does not eliminate legitimate contemporary police suspects on a whim.-Spiro

Better to just avoid a topic that some people do have interest in to be one of the boys and pretend that "legitimate contemporary suspects" ( just say Stephenson) still have a leg to stand on,eh Spiro? Pardon me if I skipped the foreplay....

You still up to claiming Stephenson "could have" killed Nichols? Is that the way one "fits in" with the boys?

Now ,now How-----you may get yourself banned saying things like this!

[Howard Brown]

Dear Nats:

Better banned ( I am,by the way,over there...and yet Spiro isn't on the our site..go figger) for tellin' the truth, than living in some fantasy world where everyone who has ever been named as a contemporary suspect is still a suspect despite evidence pointing in the other direction completely.

Later Nats...

[auspirograph]

Thanks Natalie, Howard and all for your interest in the Jack the Ripper Writers website, I hasten to add that I am grateful to Casebook for allowing inclusion of notices for those interested and continue to also value my participation here.

Better to just avoid a topic that some people do have interest in to be one of the boys and pretend that "legitimate contemporary suspects" ( just say Stephenson) still have a leg to stand on,eh Spiro? Pardon me if I skipped the foreplay....

On the contrary, Howard. The Maybrick 'diary' has seen widespread rejection as a reliable source on the Whitechapel murders and as the purported memoirs of the Victorian serial killer. Jack the Ripper Writers supports that view and is not obligated to accept it because of an interest held by "some people". I believe there are other more appropriate online avenues for those few who want to continue discussing the Maybrick 'diary'.

Stephenson, better known as Roslyn D'Onston, is generally regarded as a legitimate contemporary police suspect because his police documentation forms a part of the official files on the Whitechapel murders. Whether or not he was actually the Ripper is one of personal taste and admittedly a weak suspect at that. But to eliminate D'Onston as a legitimate suspect who was considered and rejected by Scotland Yard, is in my opinion, to also reject valuable and scarce source material on the murder investigation of 1888.

For a complete overview of D'Onston's Police File, see:

http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.php?p=1074&postcount=1

You still up to claiming Stephenson "could have" killed Nichols? Is that the way one "fits in" with the boys?

The claim that D'Onston could have killed Nichols that I referred to some time ago, was made in 2002 by Ivor Edwards, perhaps you could take up any further grievances with him. His conjecture was made on the basis of the close proximity of the suspect residing in The London Hospital on the night to the crime scene and, on the loose standards of hospital supervision known to have been evolving during the Victorian period.

Regarding the fascination with "boys" and their "toys", I am not quite sure why some people assume the site to be gender selective, it is not and never was. Jack the Ripper Writers considers members on merit and a cordial attitude towards the subject and other members. There are currently a few female members, all capable crime writers and historians, and the issue is a non-issue but for those few who have assumed otherwise.

[Howard Brown]

Spiro:

Regardless of what you mentioned about Edwards, who not only includes Nichols,but the other 4 post-Nichols victims as well, you did mention that some time ago about Nichols as being a "possible" victim of Stephenson. I do not seek nor require any advice on Stephenson from amateurish Stephenson researchers such as Ivor Edwards.

Regardless of whether Stephenson is a "contemporary police suspect" and by definition he was for two days, there is no proof that there was any sort of follow-up to the Marsh Statement by Scotland Yard and in light of how Roots worded the December 26th memo to Swanson, it appears that there was no urgency,nor manhunt for Stephenson. It remains incumbent on anyone to prove that the police followed up on the statement Marsh provided Roots. No one can.

Regardless of what your rationale is for avoiding Maybrick discussion, it will continue. I generally avoid the threads myself, but people enjoy engaging in speculation regarding Maybrick. Just as with Stephenson. In the latter case,we know he was incapable of committing the crimes. In the former...well,thats up to those who wish to discuss that aspect or area of the Case.

Regardless of the origin of this comment: "loose standards of hospital supervision known to have been evolving during the Victorian period."...one has to show ( and don't give me the line that Harris and Edwards didn't know he was in the Currie Ward,because they most certainly did without any doubt)... that there was a reason for Stephenson to attempt leaving the ward considering that virtually everything those two wrote about him is based on the false premise that he wanted to enter the LH to commit murder, based on distortions of his character and person. Stephenson had NO idea that he would be sinecured into that ward and above all,Harris and Edwards did not even mention the Currie Ward...and some of us know why.

Therefore, the gauntlet is dropped for some other person....some bold and energetic researcher or theorist here or even on your site,which I cannot access... to be the first to claim that Stephenson, despite being placed in a ward with a protocol such as the Currie Ward had to risk even attempting to leave the facility....when it was a ward in the Hospital that prevented night time perambulation on the streets of London. There was no reason for him then and there is no basis to continue this mental masturbation now that he "could have" or "he might have" left the Currie Ward when the facts at hand in 1888 state otherwise. Its as if we completely dismiss the fact that PAV had an alibi for the nights in question. Its as if we pretend that Neill Cream "could have" had a double.

Talking about Stephenson in the context of him being a legitimate contemporary police suspect is like talking about Michael Ostrog in the same context. Its unnecessary.

"Fitting In With The Boys" simply means following the pack who just don't want anyone to discuss Maybrick in the context of the Case, whether as a suspect or as a "part" of the Case in any way....which by now we know he has become and that in fact its an interesting avenue for some people. I love liver and onions. You may hate it.

[auspirograph]

"Fitting In With The Boys" simply means following the pack who just don't want anyone to discuss Maybrick in the context of the Case, whether as a suspect or as a "part" of the Case in any way....which by now we know he has become and that in fact its an interesting avenue for some people. I love liver and onions. You may hate it.

Nonsense. The rest of the post is so Norderesque and off-topic, all froth and no body, to bother commenting on. Chopped liver indeed...

[Magpie]

Hi auspirograph

Thanks for the updates!

One quick question: by "Maybrick free zone" do you mean no duscussion of Maybrick at all, or just no Diary shenanigans?

Thanks again.

[Magpie]

Oops, sorry, I see Howard beat me to it.

Anyway, still wondering whether Maybrick is off-limits altogether. Thanks again.