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

[Nemo]

Hi Ayailla

It looks as if the website retains the radio shows for listening at a later date, listed on the site

I'm not sure it's a good platform for Dale based on some of the other shows available, but we will see

[Limehouse]

Subject: I’m being interviewed about Van Gogh being Jack the Ripper.

Radio show: True Crime Uncensored with Burl Barer.

When: This Saturday, April 27, 5 p.m. EST.

Listen live online from link below. Full hour discussing the evidence and particulars. Tune in, then come back to Casebook.org and post comments.

http://outlawcrime.com/



Thanks,
Dale Larner

Discussing the evidence eh? Does that mean you've actually found some?

[Vincent alias Jack]

Is anybody going to tune in to this? I live in the UK, not sure I want to be tuning in at 11 o'clock at night for it.

It will be on live beginning at 10:00 p.m. UK time this Saturday night. Maybe that will be early enough for you to catch it, hope so. It’s an hour long. I think it will be worth it.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[Vincent alias Jack]

Hi Ayailla

It looks as if the website retains the radio shows for listening at a later date, listed on the site

I'm not sure it's a good platform for Dale based on some of the other shows available, but we will see

Yes, if you miss the show, then it will be archived, but later. The archive list is to the right on their page.

This show is the perfect platform. It’s all about True Crime books, and if you scroll down the archive list you will see a Jack the Ripper listing when John Morris, author of The Hand of a Woman, was interviewed. Of course, I disagree with his premise, since I know the true identity of Jack--Ha!, but interesting all the same.

http://adoraburl.typepad.com/truecrime/2013/04/vincent-van-gogh-serial-killer-dale-larner-breaks-the-story-sat-2pm-pt.html

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[DRoy]

Dale,

You haven't found one person to accept your theory on the most popular and read Ripper site in the world. Who do you honestly think you'll entice to believe you after your radio show?

I hope you all the best but I must be completely honest that I have little faith it is going to turn out the way you're hoping.

Cheers
DRoy

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
I have been fascinated with the Ripper case since the age of seventeen [ back in 1964], I have walked the area many times, starting with a trek of the murder sites in 1965, I have read countless press reports, and have a large collection of books, corresponded with well known true crime experts, not to mention have written to several newspapers with theories.
On top of that I have been a member of Casebook since before the century[ this one...] and Have witnessed countless theories, and speculative posts[ many of them from yours truly]
But the suggestion that the eminent artist Van Gogh was the perpetrator, surely is the most outrageous candidate for many a year, even Sickert has far better credentials then him, at least Cornwall's efforts revealed some merit.
Why is it that some authors have to put forward a suspect that has all the ''Hot potato'' ingredients ie, a figure that is known worldwide?, whilst I am aware that this subject is lucrative , and generates publicity it remains a fact that putting forth Van Gogh will not wash with the serious students of the case..
But even so, I will at least watch this space..I have been wrong before[ haven't I ?]
Regards Richard.

[Limehouse]

Hi,
I have been fascinated with the Ripper case since the age of seventeen [ back in 1964], I have walked the area many times, starting with a trek of the murder sites in 1965, I have read countless press reports, and have a large collection of books, corresponded with well known true crime experts, not to mention have written to several newspapers with theories.
On top of that I have been a member of Casebook since before the century[ this one...] and Have witnessed countless theories, and speculative posts[ many of them from yours truly]
But the suggestion that the eminent artist Van Gogh was the perpetrator, surely is the most outrageous candidate for many a year, even Sickert has far better credentials then him, at least Cornwall's efforts revealed some merit.
Why is it that some authors have to put forward a suspect that has all the ''Hot potato'' ingredients ie, a figure that is known worldwide?, whilst I am aware that this subject is lucrative , and generates publicity it remains a fact that putting forth Van Gogh will not wash with the serious students of the case..
But even so, I will at least watch this space..I have been wrong before[ haven't I ?]
Regards Richard.

Agree totally. And, apart from the fact that Van Gogh was almost certainly not in London at the critical times and that there is not a even a speck of evidence against him - it's the dead dogs and door knockers that really let this theory down!

[Vincent alias Jack]

Radio Interview

PRE-SHOW EVIDENCE REVEALED

Jack the Ripper victim hidden in Van Gogh painting!

Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper!

RADIO INTERVIEW: This Saturday 5 p.m. Et., 10 p.m. UK. LISTEN LIVE ONLINE
SHOW: True Crime Uncensored with legendary Burl Barer.
SUBJECT: Full hour discussing details and evidence presented in my book VINCENT ALIAS JACK.
COMMENT: Return to Casebook.org after the show and say what you think.

SEE THE HIDDEN IMAGES NOW

[Vincent alias Jack]

Radio Interview Available

My April 27 interview with Burl Barer at True Crime Uncensored is now available. Mattt Alan, Howard Lapides, and Mark Boyer were also in attendance in this madhouse of fun and fascination. Great time! Full hour.

Lots of excellent questions, and excellent answers too—Ha! Have a listen and then return to Casebook.org and say what you think.

http://adoraburl.typepad.com/vincent.mp3

[ceejay75]

Vincent Van Gogh is Jack the ripper? Surely the most laughable theory I have ever heard and in the realms of sheer fantasy for author Dale Larner.

The only thing Vincent Van Gogh cut with his knife/razor , was his ear!

[TomTomKent]

COMMENT: Return to Casebook.org after the show and say what you think.

Well, I have carefully reconsidered the case you made and have come back to tell you what you think.

I think that your blatant attempt to try and make money from the tragic deaths of innocent women based on absolutely no real evidence and only your opinion, not to mention trying to foist blame on an innocent man and capitalise on his obvious mental health issues as uncovincing as it morally dubious and I sincereley hope you sell your book,-or what evr it is you are promoting- as fiction.

[The Good Michael]

I think that your blatant attempt to try and make money from the tragic deaths of innocent women based on absolutely no real evidence and only your opinion, not to mention trying to foist blame on an innocent man and capitalise on his obvious mental health issues as uncovincing as it morally dubious and I sincereley hope you sell your book,-or what evr it is you are promoting- as fiction.

To be fair, how is this any different than believing in God and the exploitation of as many people as possible by every church that ever existed? This includes birth, marriage, death and all the BS in between. This theory is small potatoes and he may actually believe it's true. After all, there was a Van Gogh. That part is at least reality.

Mike

[TomTomKent]

To be fair, how is this any different than believing in God and the exploitation of as many people as possible by every church that ever existed? This includes birth, marriage, death and all the BS in between. This theory is small potatoes and he may actually believe it's true. After all, there was a Van Gogh. That part is at least reality.

Mike

I am sure a lot of theories are put out there in good faith. Unfortunately this has all the hallmarks of a "wouldn't it be cool if" case. There is nothing to suggest this chap was either researching his biography of Van Gogh and stumbled upon tactile evidence placing him in Whitechappel, nor that he was studying the Whitechappel case and fell upon Van Gogh. There is all the appearance, especially from his posts in this thread, that the author set out with the single intention of finding any coincidence or any hint in his art that would tie his chosen celebrity to the crimes, with speculation and purely subjective opinion.

If this had been written as fiction I would be first in the queue, as either of the possibly valid avenues of investigation? It just seems to be the same old empty accusations that could be made against so many artists or writers of the time.

The "Ha!" tone of the posts seems to be making light of the accusation of murder. If I have misread the tone of the posts I apologise, but to my reading this is all rather to light and playful for somebody trying to accuse another of murders. Especially given the kinds of murders being discussed.

[Limehouse]

Hi Tom Tom,

I do not think you have misread the posts at all. There certainly is a playful tone running through Vincent's posts and the fact that he describes his experience of being interviewed about his theory as 'a madhouse of fun and fascination' only goes to show how far removed this guy is from the reality of the case and its victims.

Regards

Julie

[Limehouse]

To be fair, how is this any different than believing in God and the exploitation of as many people as possible by every church that ever existed? This includes birth, marriage, death and all the BS in between. This theory is small potatoes and he may actually believe it's true. After all, there was a Van Gogh. That part is at least reality.

Mike

It is completely different. For almost everyone who believes in God, it is a matter of personal belief and faith rather than exploitation.

However, that is a debate for another thread.

Regards

Julie