New book - 'The Five' by Hallie Robenhold.

[MrBarnett]

While we're at it, we'll hound Robert Anderson off the boards, too.

I used to work with an old boy named Jack Rippe. TF he’s not a Ripperologist.

[ChrisGeorge]

Could be. One of her acolytes, following her lead in rubbishing Casebook, made a big deal out of some of the user names on the site. One sicko apparently uses the name ‘MrBarnett’.

Hang on! That’s me - perhaps I should stop using the name on my birth cert and start calling myself ‘Mr Detective’ or something similar.

While we're at it, we'll hound Robert Anderson off the boards, too.

[ChrisGeorge]

I don't recall anyone here using this as an excuse to question her abilities. I assumed the error in the montage was down to a BBC researcher's error, and wrote to them in like vein.

I don't glorify the Ripper. In fact, I couldn't care less about the hunt for the Ripper. I don't think at this point we'll ever know who it was.

No what fascinates me is the whole era and exploring the side alleys of the case which to me are more fascinating than who did the crimes.

Take that Ms Rubenhold, if you care.

[Robert]

I've checked the membership list for Hallie Tosis, but not a sausage.

[MrBarnett]

She maybe here as Mistress H. Abberline and Hailie Poirot too.

Could be. One of her acolytes, following her lead in rubbishing Casebook, made a big deal out of some of the user names on the site. One sicko apparently uses the name ‘MrBarnett’.

Hang on! That’s me - perhaps I should stop using the name on my birth cert and start calling myself ‘Mr Detective’ or something similar.

[MrBarnett]

Hi Herlock

I understand that despite Ms Rubenhold's criticism of Ripperologists on her Twitter account, the book does reference a number of the sources one would expect, such as Begg, Rumbelow, etc.

Cheers

Chris

And Debra Arif, Tom Wescott, Neal Shelden, Mike Covell, various Casebook dissertations, Casebook Examiner, Ripperologist and Ripperana mags... and much more from the wider field of Ripperology.

While writing her book she was up to her elbows in what she now calls the ‘dung heap’.

She cites three of Paul Begg’s books, but has blocked him from asking awkward questions on her Twitter account.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Herlock

I understand that despite Ms Rubenhold's criticism of Ripperologists on her Twitter account, the book does reference a number of the sources one would expect, such as Begg, Rumbelow, etc.

Cheers

Chris

[Herlock Sholmes]

I haven’t read the book as I’m waiting a few weeks for it to appear in The Works for £3! Who does she mention in her acknowledgments (apart from Joseph Goebbels of course?)

[ChrisGeorge]

She maybe here as Mistress H. Abberline and Hailie Poirot too.

[MrBarnett]

"I have a feeling that the intent is to insulate Ms. Rubenhold from the Hounds of Ripperology in case we drag her onto the "dung heap" of our forums."

She's already dragged herself on, Chris. She joined JTR Forums as Hallie McGrath (her married name) on Dec 13th 2016 and is still, to date, a member of the 'dung heap.'

I believe she may also be on here as ‘Madame Detective’?

And anyone who has glanced at the bibliography in her book will be able to see how much she is indebted to the ‘dung-shovelers’.

[ChrisGeorge]

"I have a feeling that the intent is to insulate Ms. Rubenhold from the Hounds of Ripperology in case we drag her onto the "dung heap" of our forums."

She's already dragged herself on, Chris. She joined JTR Forums as Hallie McGrath (her married name) on Dec 13th 2016 and is still, to date, a member of the 'dung heap.'

Then we don't have to wonder what she's "dung" at JtR Forums. She's one of us!

Cheers

Chris

[Robert]

"I have a feeling that the intent is to insulate Ms. Rubenhold from the Hounds of Ripperology in case we drag her onto the "dung heap" of our forums."

She's already dragged herself on, Chris. She joined JTR Forums as Hallie McGrath (her married name) on Dec 13th 2016 and is still, to date, a member of the 'dung heap.'

[Herlock Sholmes]

Latest twist in the Ripperology hate-narrative

This kind of language points to a woman who was hoping to create her own little ‘Ripperological Safe Space’ where she could assume her self-appointed role as the valiant hero defending the honour of the victims of Jack the Ripper against a hated army of Ripperologists walking around in “I love Jack the Ripper” t-shirts. Now she herself is a ‘victim’ of being found out. Did she arrogantly assume that no one would check her research? Or did she think that she was somehow exempt? From the beginning she appeared as a person with an agenda and so it has been proved. An agenda which overrode any thought of integrity. Everything she says or write needs to be rebutted...with facts.

[Cogidubnus]

Not that it makes any difference, but that comment about a 'thicker skin' was written by a woman.

Also, as Howard Brown has pointed out (thanks, Howard), the post read, 'In all the years I have chosen to hang around the ripper related message boards, and despite the various individuals I have managed to rub up the wrong way, I have never felt any personal hatred or hostility towards me, either as a co-author of a book on the hated Maybrick diary, or as a female, and the vast majority of my fellow posters have been welcoming and tolerant of views I have expressed, no matter how far removed they may be from their own.'

I wonder if the "friend" will mention that?

"This is the thing about deciding to hate people you don't know - you don't know them, so whatever assumptions you're drawing are based on guess work & your own prejudices. It takes a lot of hubris to attack someone personally when you haven't the faintest clue who they are."

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi all

I see reviews calling Ms. Rubenhold a historian. Is she? She deals with history, but it appears to me that her intent is to romanticize the subjects of her books. Look at the covers of her other books.

I believe that might be the downfall of her approach to the subject.

As my friend Paul Begg wrote in his review of The Five in Ripperologist 164, she is very selective in the way that she handles evidence and purposely doesn't include information that doesn't support her thesis.

In essence, then, she is portraying the five victims as she wants to see them rather than as they actually were.

Best regards

Chris