I think I have found him.

[Shaggyrand]

Teasing about Grampton isn't fair. You know some of us have been dying for the full details.

[Chris2307uk]

Would anyone care to elaborate on this theory?

[Elamarna]

Sorry DJA,
I should have qualified my comment, you have as I mentioned in a previous post should be done, submitted your theory for what amounts to peer review, you must see how for many of us this is so frustrating.
Especially that some now well respected contributors have started mentioning this Grampton thing. which seems to be known by some but not all, therefore its not a real secret, why can't the rest of us be given the slightest information on this.

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby,

And who is David´s "viable" suspect?

Is it Francis Tumblety?

Has Francis Tumblety left any evidence of being the killer?

And how does David (or anyone else) explain Elizabeth Jackson, Alice McKenzie and the Pinchin Street torso?

There are two reasons that I can´t name the person I think was Jack the Ripper and I have told you about these.

And I prefere to not take part in constructing garbage in > garbage out theories about the Whitechapel killer, which also the theory of Tumblety is, not matter how "respected" their authors are considered by you to be.

I can tell you that the best ideas of who the ripper might have been are some of the ideas written here on the forum by people who are not authors. Some of those are newcomers to the forum and some of them are people who, since many years, have had an interest in who the ripper was and have not decided on a certain susupect or theory.

The are the most reliable persons to debate with since they are not stuck with a suspect that they have to defend.

So if you think that writing and selling books about "Jack the Ripper" is a good way forward to find the Whitechapel murderer, you should go on buying these books.

But if you think that going over the sources from 1888-1889 again and again is a better idea, you should do this.

And I can tell you that I will be the first to admit if I am wrong. I would do it gladly.

Regards Pierre

Hi Pierre
Tumblety? who said anything about him? You know dang well the person that David put forth on this thread, and you responded to, is William Ripper.

But whos this Grampton fellow?

[DJA]

Sorry DJA,
I should have qualified my comment, you have as I mentioned in a previous post should be done, submitted your theory for what amounts to peer review, you must see how for many of us this is so frustrating.

No sweat.

You want frustrating.....had my first meeting with a screenwriter 8 years 3 months ago.

One guy who has my facts is highly respected on both this and the other main site.

Actually, he did me a favour and I consequently asked if he'd like a look at my research.

Simple fact is that no one in their right mind is going to let anything like this out,unless the book or film is well under way.

You cannot copyright history.

Thanks for your interest.

[Abby Normal]

Wait, the Grampton thing, that I've only heard on the peripheral, is real?? Bloody hell.

Yours,
Mister Whitechapel

The intrigue just never stops here does it?

and with so many new suspects/theories Im starting to feel I need to find one myself! LOL.

Im going to get to work on it right away!

[Abby Normal]

I don't post much, but I heard that Pink was bring up the 'grampton' theory, and so was naturally moved to do so. Pink, I really believe it's a mistake to discuss that right now. But I will say this - it's too strong to be called a mere 'theory'. I think of it as the 'grampton solution'.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Westcott is in the house!

and apparently with a new theory to boot! is this Grampton a new suspect of yours Tom?

[Panderoona]

Im gutted the Grampton things been brought up here, I thought it was only Tom Pink and I knew about it

[Tom_Wescott]

Pink brought up grampton. Big mistake if you ask me. It's too big. It's just too big.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Elamarna]

DJA
I fully understand YOUR POSITION,
you however did not come here claiming you had found him.

I await your final release with interest.

however this Grampton thing seems ti be hinting at around same date as Pierre, is it real, i mean does it exist, not is it the answer.

do you know about it at all? is it just a wind up at pierre?
regards

[Abby Normal]

Hi Pierre
Could you(or anyone else if they want) list all the hints (for lack of a better word) you have given so far in one post for us?

Thanks in advance!

[pinkmoon]

Pinkmoon,

I didn't think the 'Grampton theory' was going to be revealed until 2016, I'd heard a rumour of a 'Ripper Conference' exclusive.
Do you know something more? Will there be a publication soon?

And Pierre, if you don't know about it, why are you still posting when these new revelations will make anything you find look trivial?

Amanda

It looks like it will be released onto the general public sometime next year I think I've got myself into a bit of trouble with my associates by posting about grampton on here but if you've heard about it at the conference then someone has not kept their vow of silence I'm sure Pierre must have been tipped of I hope it dosnt spoil the party.

[pinkmoon]

Pink brought up grampton. Big mistake if you ask me. It's too big. It's just too big.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

It's going to be big Tom it's also going to prove a lot of people wrong I'm just a bit upset that Pierre has obviously been tipped of. I wasn't going to post about it but I don't want Pierre to steal my thunder.

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
Its to early for April 1st.?
So we have a hidden theory on the Horizon, only known by a selected few, something that will outshine, all the suspects previously, it will be so big, it will finally name the killer, it will be DNA proven..and Case closed...
Worth waiting for ..Yippee.
Regards Richard.

[Brenda]

.

I'm so frustrated right now. It's like a circus.