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:
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - by Karl 53 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - by harry 4 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by harry 5 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Abby Normal 5 hours ago.
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - by Abby Normal 5 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - by harry 5 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Elizabeth Stride: For what reason do we include Stride? - (23 posts)
Non-Fiction: the victims werent prostitutes - (19 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Any updates, or opinions on this witness. - (11 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: Was Mary Kelly a Ripper victim? - (8 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (6 posts)
Witnesses: Mizen's inquest statement reconstructed - (5 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 > Scene of the Crimes

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 12-19-2010, 10:29 AM
Stephen Thomas Stephen Thomas is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,728
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Firth View Post
I, and others who have posted on this thread, do not appreciate being told what we are here to discuss. It's as simple as that.

By all means air your views, that's what forums are for. But to say that the discussion is "off topic" which is essentially what you're doing, is absurd.
Come now, Andrew. Where on earth did I tell anyone what to discuss or be 'off topic'?
__________________
allisvanityandvexationofspirit
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-19-2010, 11:11 AM
Andrew Firth Andrew Firth is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Shipley, West Yorkshire
Posts: 418
Default

By telling us all that we were here to discuss who, or what, Jack the Ripper was. By default, that means that in your book, we are not here to discuss the board school.

I understand that you feel the petition will be ineffective, but there's no harm in trying.

Anyhow, no point in arguing. I've signed it, and I hope they leave the building as it is. My interest in the case is probably 10% identity of the killer, and 90% the local history angle, (buildings, streets, photography, maps, the social effect of the crimes etc). So this sort of thing interests me greatly.

All the best
Andrew
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-19-2010, 12:11 PM
kensei kensei is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 983
Default

In September of '08 I went on a full solo tour of all the Ripper sites that took up one entire day. I would say that the Mary Kelly sites- former Miller's Court, "Mary's Corner" in front of the Ten Bells, and especially her grave at Leytonstone- were the most emotional for me. But a close second was the old Board School, being able to stand on the exact square yards where Polly Nichols' body was found, just as strewn with garbage now as it was back then and just so very sad. As I was shooting video of the place I narrated, "I think you'd have to agree this is a damn sad place to die." That's just what came to my mind to say in that moment. I know that time marches on, things change, a different house now stands where the one in which Sharon Tate and the others died in Helter Skelter, etc. etc. But it just seems wrong. I was one of a very many that took part in searching for the body of a murdered college girl in my local area in 2003 who was missing for five months, and as it turned out a friend of mine and I passed by 70 yards from where she was eventually found in a remote and undeveloped rural area. Well-wishers have left flowers and stuffed animals and such at the site ever since. If that land were ever to be developed into something, it would seem like a sacriledge. (Her name was Dru Sjodin for any who would care to research it.) So changes to any of the Ripper victim sites feels like building a hotel on the grounds of the Tower of London. I know time has to march on, but it seems to come down to whether or not the powers that be are going to consider noteworthy murders as important parts of history. I think all too often, they do not.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-19-2010, 06:15 PM
Sally Sally is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Badgers Drift
Posts: 2,094
Default Objections

I am broadly in agreement with Good Michael on this one. Having said that, there is an argument for preserving the appearance of this particular building - its location in a word. Detriment to the local character and history of the area, perhaps. Its a Ripper-related argument - but one of heritage, nonetheless.

Another way to go might be to see if it can be listed by English Heritage. The best argument there would be for it's status as a former Board School. Whether this would be successful or not would depend on how many examples remain intact, and how altered the exterior/interior are now from the original scheme.

The proposals for change don't actually look that drastic, and unfortunately, they'll probably go ahead.

I'll sign the petition though, all the same.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-19-2010, 06:47 PM
KatBradshaw KatBradshaw is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: York
Posts: 566
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Thomas View Post
We're here to discuss who or what JTR was.
If that is true then why do we have different categories on here? Why not just a 'Suspects' section??

Andrew is the last person who would ever get 'shirty' with someone.
__________________
In order to know virtue, we must first aquaint ourselves with vice!

Last edited by KatBradshaw : 12-19-2010 at 06:52 PM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-19-2010, 07:13 PM
Robert Robert is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,847
Default

I'm wondering how they'd market this - "Luxury apartment within a stone's throw of a Jack the Ripper murder site."

Kensei, what the powers that be know about history is equivalent to what they know about anything else, which is, zero.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 12-20-2010, 12:30 AM
Celesta Celesta is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: American Dog-Lover
Posts: 1,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert View Post
I'm wondering how they'd market this - "Luxury apartment within a stone's throw of a Jack the Ripper murder site."
You could probably count on it being snapped up before the print dried on the advertisement, Robert.
__________________
"What our ancestors would really be thinking, if they were alive today, is: "Why is it so dark in here?"" From Pyramids by Sir Terry Pratchett, a British National Treasure.

__________________________________
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-20-2010, 12:44 AM
Roy Corduroy Roy Corduroy is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,582
Default

Name:  ConsArea.jpg
Views: 393
Size:  19.9 KB

Trinity Hall, 6 Durward St is in the Whitechapel Market Conservation Area, the shaded area, which may have some bearing on how the application proceeds.

Built in 1876, I'm surprised it is not a listed building. The nearest ones within this conservation area are two Locally Listed's and two Grade II's from 255 to 281 Whitechapel Road.

I think the petition and making your position known is a good thing. Thank you Adrian and the folks at WS 88 and all other interested parties.

Roy
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-03-2011, 07:22 PM
Andrew Firth Andrew Firth is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Shipley, West Yorkshire
Posts: 418
Default

In addition to the proposed changes to the Board School building, there's a great deal of change in the area surrounding it. Crossrail work at Whitechapel station continues, and some pictures of this, including a few taken from the top of the school can be found here:

http://londonreconnections.blogspot....itechapel.html

All the best
Andrew
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-11-2011, 10:15 PM
adrian adrian is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 97
Default Urgent: Old Board School - Durward Street

URGENT: OLD BOARD SCHOOL IN DURWARD STREET (BUCKS ROW) UNDER SERIOUS THREAT

Dear all,
Last year we informed you that the playground at the top of one of the only remaining landmarks from that famous Autumn/Fall of Terror in 1888, The Old Board School, (Trinity Hall) was under threat from the prospect of development. This development was to extend upwards on the top of the building with an entirely inappropriate modern extention. We encouraged you all to submit objections. You did, it worked. Thank you.
Unfortunately, the same proposals have been resubmitted for this extension to the board school playground to Tower Hamlets council planning department. We now ask you again to submit an objection. Submitting an objection is quick and easy, we will show you how below.

PLANNING APPLICATION: PA/11/02230
This application (PA/11/02230) was submitted on 23-8-2011 and is described thus: "Erection of a single storey extension at roof level of existing building to provide three new residential units comprising 1x1 bed and 2x2 bed and associated works."

SUBMITTING AN OBJECTION
*THIS MUST BE DONE BY THURSDAY (This Thursday!) 13th OCTOBER 2011*
- Visit the Tower Hamlets website at: www.towerhamlets.gov.uk
- In the search bar at the top right-hand of the home page put in the application number: PA/11/02230
- Then press 'enter'
- This will now give you three options. Pick the SECOND option: "Comment on Application - online planning register"
- Then fill in the form completing all the fields asked for and click on submit button.
- You have gone some way to save a piece of history for future generations! Well done.

Alternatively, you can email Tower Hamlets Planning department with your concerns, remembering to include the application number; PA/11/02230
Their e-mail address is: planningandbuilding@towerhamlets.gov.uk
Or, you can write to them (be very quick!!!) at: Tower Hamlets Planning & Building Dept. Planning Office, Mulberry Place (AH), P.O. Box 55739, 5 Clove Crescent, London, E14 2BE

WE CAN WIN THIS ONE AS WE DID BEFORE!

ADRIAN
(Editor: Whitechapel Society Journal)

www.whitechapelsociety.com
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 11:55 PM.


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