Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by caz 41 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Fisherman 2 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Harry D 4 hours ago.
Visual Media: London 1930 - by Robert 5 hours ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - by Fisherman 6 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: So if you live in Bethnal Green, you won´t kill in Whitechapel? - (43 posts)
Witnesses: Kennedy and Lewis - (15 posts)
General Discussion: A broken down masher - (5 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Why Didn't the Police Have Schwartz and/or Lawende Take a Look at Hutchinson? - (4 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: distances between kills.odd - (3 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Kansas Physician Confirms Howard Report - (2 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Letters and Communications > From Hell (Lusk) Letter

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-01-2011, 12:21 AM
kerrypn kerrypn is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 30
Default Quick Q/Observation on Lusk Letter

Just been perusing the Lusk Letter. Seems to me "Sor" could quite easily actually be "for"-it is a rather over exagerated formation of "F"-but then it would read "From Hell Mr Lusk FOR I send....." which at least makes some kind of sense, but is an awkward grammatical formation. What does anyone think?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-01-2011, 12:56 AM
Scorpio Scorpio is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Cheltenham
Posts: 386
Default

The ' Sor ', as it is usually expressed for some reason, looks like ' Sur ', which is a simple phonetic mispelling of ' Sir '.
Sorry Kerrypn, but i cannot see your ' for ' in any logical context. ' For' , in the context you suggest, is a subordinating conjunction, and a comma placed after it serves no purpose.
__________________
SCORPIO

Last edited by Scorpio : 05-01-2011 at 01:10 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-01-2011, 07:45 AM
Adam Went Adam Went is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 779
Default

"Mr. Lusk, Sir" certainly makes a lot more sense than "Mr. Lusk, For". The actual structuring of sentences in From Hell is pretty good, it's simply the grammatical errors that show up the most....

Cheers,
Adam.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-01-2011, 12:23 PM
kerrypn kerrypn is offline
Cadet
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 30
Default

That certainly makes a lot more sense Thanks to both! I was actually debating whether it was a genuine error, but the phoenetic "sir" although possibly sarcastic given the letters content would make more sense.

Have any the letters been fingerprinted? I realise this wouldnt find the culprit but might tell us if the same hand sent more than one letter(but not necessarily if they were the Ripper)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-01-2011, 01:56 PM
Chris Chris is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,840
Default

Personally I think it just reads "Sir" - and as far as I know no one read it as anything but "Sir" until Martin Fido transcribed it as "Sor" in 1987. I've tried to explain here how I think the misreading arose:
http://forum.casebook.org/showpost.p...9&postcount=53
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-01-2011, 08:02 PM
mariab mariab is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Berlin
Posts: 2,977
Default

I agree with Chris Phillips that it reads “Sir“, and the old casebook thread he quoted is worth re-visiting.
__________________
Best regards,
Maria
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-02-2011, 07:09 AM
Adam Went Adam Went is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 779
Default

Hi Kerry,

It's an interesting thought just the same and would be worth more consideration if there wasn't so many other spelling errors within the "From Hell" note. Unlike the Goulston Street Graffiti which was spelt perfectly except for "Juwes", hence why it's caused so much debate over the years....

Cheers,
Adam.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.