News Flash!! . . . VINCENT VAN GOGH WAS JACK THE RIPPER!!

[Vincent alias Jack]

Hello Dale. I am curious about clues surfacing in the paintings. This has baffled me with regards to our chaps who espouse Sickert and Lautrec.

I have asked before about this phenomenon but have received no reply as yet. Permit me to ask you.

Why would a murderer plant clues that could, if properly interpreted, result in getting him sent to the gallows?

Cheers.
LC

For the thrill.

But also, because painters are magicians, and Van Gogh was a master magician. He believed in his skill to deceive the eye. He believed he could hide images related to his night with Mary Kelly among the irises and all anyone would see was the irises, and he was right, at least for more than a century.

But now, the magician’s code has been cracked. He’s been found out. The illusion falls away, and the truth comes to light.

Thanks, Lynn.

Sincerely,
Dale Larner
www.facebook.com/vincentaliasjack

[lynn cates]

thrill

Hello Dale. Thanks. The thrill? I suppose we have quite different ideas about thrilling?

Cheers.
LC

[Vincent alias Jack]

Hi Henry,

I don't understand how someone can go to the trouble of writing (allegedly) a whole book, which postulates Van Gogh as JtR, without a process of due diligence which checks to see whether or not he has an alibi for any of the murders.

Regards, Bridewell

I agree, Bridewell. I couldn’t imagine anybody doing it, either. It would be irresponsible and ridiculous.

Sincerely,
Dale Larner
www.facebook.com/vincentaliasjack

[Henry Flower]

What a shock! A cluster of answers featuring precisely no evidence, some vague generalisations, sub-Freudian pop psychology, and a promise that if only we read the book all will become clear.

Mr Larner, it would have surprised most of us, I think, had you actually included some evidence. I wouldn't be remotely interested in your book on the basis of your website or your repeated and unsupported assertions. Sorry.

[miss marple]

Enough is enough. Can we just ignore these fantasy posts that accuse great artists of being serial killers, they might just go away, replying just feeds the flames, after Sickert the whole thing has got completely out of hand, its turning the case book into a joke.

Focus energies on more productive lines of enquiry.

Its a pity these people can't be sued for slander.How dare they trask reputations out of self regarding vanity.

Miss Marple

[Bridewell]

Good Talk

What a shock! A cluster of answers featuring precisely no evidence, some vague generalisations, sub-Freudian pop psychology, and a promise that if only we read the book all will become clear.

Mr Larner, it would have surprised most of us, I think, had you actually included some evidence. I wouldn't be remotely interested in your book on the basis of your website or your repeated and unsupported assertions. Sorry.

i have to wonder why someone who has genuine evidence would focus on perceived images in artwork, and not on the evidence itself. There are some police officers of whom it is said that they "talk a good job". I suspect such people exist in others fields also.

I won't be posting on this thread again unless, and until, some 'bona fide' evidence is adduced. I've wasted enough time on it already.

Regards, Bridewell.

[Vincent alias Jack]

Hello Dale. Thanks. The thrill? I suppose we have quite different ideas about thrilling?

Cheers.
LC

I would hope so. I don’t mean between you and I, but between you and Van Gogh. The description is how the psychopathic serial killer sees things. To him, such things as hiding images related to his murders in his painting is a powerful and wonderful enjoyment—a thrill.

This is similar to the thrill Jack the Ripper was getting from killing and from writing letters that stirred up fears and excitement in London. Van Gogh, hiding behind his created persona, was enjoying his ripping, and he enjoyed hiding images related to his murders in his paintings—all of this being a great and evil thrill.

Thanks, Lynn.

Sincerely,
Dale Larner
www.facebook.com/vincentaliasjack

[Sally]

Enough is enough. Can we just ignore these fantasy posts that accuse great artists of being serial killers, they might just go away, replying just feeds the flames, after Sickert the whole thing has got completely out of hand, its turning the case book into a joke.

Focus energies on more productive lines of enquiry.

Its a pity these people can't be sued for slander.How dare they trask reputations out of self regarding vanity.

Miss Marple

Miss Marple, I'm entirely in agreement with you and would have posted similar if you hadn't already done so. As I've already observed, Mr Larner is plugging his book; that appears to be is only reason for being on Casebook. Perhaps he should be paying the administrators of this site an advertising fee.

And indeed, the longer this thread continues, the more publicity he will attract.

[Vincent alias Jack]

Enough is enough. Can we just ignore these fantasy posts that accuse great artists of being serial killers, they might just go away, replying just feeds the flames, after Sickert the whole thing has got completely out of hand, its turning the case book into a joke.

Focus energies on more productive lines of enquiry.

Its a pity these people can't be sued for slander.How dare they trask reputations out of self regarding vanity.

Miss Marple

Grouping people and suspects can lead to false conclusions.

I have no problem with trashing or slandering the reputation of a serial killer. Regardless of any other artist theories or suspects, Vincent van Gogh was a psychopathic, sexual serial killer. Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper.

Sincerely,
Dale Larner
www.facebook.com/vincentaliasjack

[lynn cates]

letters

Hello Dale. Thanks. I take it that you consider at least some of the JTR "correspondence" to be genuine. Which of them fall into that category?

Cheers.
LC

[Vincent alias Jack]

i have to wonder why someone who has genuine evidence would focus on perceived images in artwork, and not on the evidence itself. There are some police officers of whom it is said that they "talk a good job". I suspect such people exist in others fields also.

I won't be posting on this thread again unless, and until, some 'bona fide' evidence is adduced. I've wasted enough time on it already.

Regards, Bridewell.

Bridwell, the reality is that I could show you and Henry Flower a photo of Van Gogh standing over Mary Kelly’s mutilated body with a knife in his hand and you would still cry out, “Show me the evidence, Mr. Larner.” So there really isn’t anything further I can show you.

Sincerely,
Dale Larner
www.facebook.com/vincentaliasjack

[Vincent alias Jack]

Hello Dale. Thanks. I take it that you consider at least some of the JTR "correspondence" to be genuine. Which of them fall into that category?

Cheers.
LC

Yes, I do, and not just some, but most. Here’s just a few that I believe Van Gogh wrote, pulled from my list at random from throughout the time period.

The First Letter, 9/24/88
Dear Boss, 09/27/88
Angel of Death, 10/8/88
You Dogs, 10/12/88
Knocking About, 11/08/88
I’m 35, 11/15/88
Jibberish, 12/04/88
Limerick, 12/23/88
Jim the Cutter, 01/08/89
Boss Eye, 03/31/89
Stylish S, 07/19/89
Left Ship, 09/02/89
The Poem, 11/08/89
If I’m Hung, 04/17/90

Thanks for the question, Lynn.

Sincerely,
Dale Larner
www.facebook.com/vincentaliasjack

[lynn cates]

points to ponder

Hello Dale. Thanks for the comprehensive reply.

That first letter--that predates the "Dear Boss"--is thought by some a modern invention. But, as you wish.

I wonder if you have thoughts on the following?

1. The "Saucy Jack" post card? [Hand looks like the "Dear Boss" that preceded it.]

2. The fact that a large bulk of the correspondence seems to emulate, to a greater or lesser degree, the "Dear Boss" and "From Hell" missives in both tone and language. [Suggests to my mind a copycat done for a farce.]

3. The dates/origins of these missives along with know movements of VVG. [I daresay you have, as a single error could cast doubts on a suspect's location at time T.]

4. VVG's command of the English language along with a "stylometric" analysis of his individual idiom of English.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Lynn. I believe the 'First letter' that Dale is referring to is the letter about Annie Chapman, where he draws the coffin and says his name is under it. It is not signed Jack the Ripper, but apparently is a real letter and not a latter day hoax. The letter you're thinking of, which unquestionably is a modern hoax, is the September 17th letter, where the author combines attributes from the From Hell and Dear Boss letters and makes the grave error of mentioning Lusk, who as of Sept 17th, wasn't even part of a vigilance committee.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Tom. Thanks for that. You are indeed correct.

Cheers.
LC