|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
Thread |
Last Poster |
Posts |
Pages |
Last Post |
  | Archive through August 10, 2005 | Thomas C. Wescott | 50 | 1 | 8-10-05 2:04 am |
| |
 Closed: New threads not accepted on this page |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 820
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 6:04 am: | 
|
Hey Tom,
But having your name last is a good thing. Wolf's is quite often last and I'm sure not trying to hide his name. It stands out more that way. Yeah, that's it. But really, considering my own oversized ego you'd think that I wouldn't list my own name consistently in the middle if the order on the cover mattered, right?
On a serious note, one thing I've tried very hard to do with these issues is to present a variety of viewpoints. Someone reading an article wants to know what the author thinks, not what I think. Heck, if any of them even care what I think they can usually get that on these boards for free. So when you say that I should have reigned in Andy and prevented him from mentioning the drowned Ripper story Bachert was allegedly told, I'm not sure that that kind of editorial control would be a good plan... especially when so many facts are in dispute.
(As an aside, I don't understand how you can be arguing on one hand that anything McCormack said should be ignored completely and then turn around and claim that Colonel Dunham's proven career of lies are "not solid proof that the story was false" when it comes to the Tumblety uterus jars tale. Either everything they say should be considered to be false or some things they said might not have been wrong. Pick one argument and stick with it.)
Wolf's Carrie Brown piece wasn't actually split into consecutive issues, by the way. I think it was spread out over April/July 2003, January 2004 and then finally July 2004. But the pertinent point there is that an article by one author split into parts over three issues is substantially different from five different articles by three authors that cover a lot of the same ground over three issues. That second case isn't just a matter of being in consecutive issues, it's intra- circular- consecutive. (Hey, it's a perfectly cromulent word).
I've always preferred jumping into a topic and focusing on it in one issue and then not going back and covering the same ground each time. That's one of the main reasons why there are now themes for issues. It's also why each issue is a lot longer than it used to be, so there's more room to have that focus and not have to choose between lots of (necessarily smaller) articles or only one in depth one.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 786
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 7:17 am: |
|
"Wolf’s evidence show Dunham to have been a hack reporter not ashamed to twist the truth or invent stories (not to mention identities for himself) in order to get his name into print.."
----------------Senor Wescott.
I'm wondering if Mr. V didn't mean Donston. Sounds like it could be his twin.
The article on Tumbelty is not merely good [ actually very good and very well researched,as I had just finished reading Mr. Chetcuti's article in Ripperologist and wanted to absorb 'em in unison..]....but think of the consequences of this article.
If Mr.Vanderlinden's source,this Michael W. Kauffman, is absolutely correct about the location that Tumbelty did live in [ The Willard Hotel and not The House On "H" Street ], then it certainly does bring into question the accepted belief that Tumblety collected uteri,if the uteri that were believed to have been stored at "H" Street are the same uteri. Hard to imagine they would be different....
Not only that,but the basis of Tumblety's misogynist perception of women has to be re-evaluated,since Conover a.k.a. Birch a.k.a. Foster a.k.a. Dunham is the originator of the alleged marriage of Tumblety to a woman with a roving eye.
This opens up Tumblety research up,I'd say,to further scrutiny. Well worth reading.....
....which is why Tom and I say it over and over and over...and over again...you don't know what you're missing by not subscribing to this magazine,as well as any other available Ripper related journals.
Nice articles by Ms. Perry and Mr. Souden and Mr.McKenna. A solid issue like my subdued sidekick from The O.K. state said.......
One question from Mr. McKenna's article regarding this handwriting "match" that Mr. Slemen says resembles Condor's and the GSG...You can't match cursive writing and "block" writing with each other. If Mr. Slemen is saying that two different forms of writing methodology "match"...I say pass that hookah over here. Thats absurd.
...and...an original photo of MJK found? And the man doesn't reveal it to the world ? What better way of guaranteeing a book's success,not only to Ripperologists, but to the Mortal Coil in general,than by holding a press conference and scooping every Ripperologist since Harkins,Matters,and W-E with this news? Some people don't know how to make a buck....
..and speaking of a buck. Thats a nice chunk of change that Mr. Slemen raked in at the Liverpool meeting in 2003. Maybe you and I should get into the ghostbusting business,Tommy !
One final thing....The statement that is made that McCarthy, MJK's landlord and Louie Diemschutz were in cahoots [ no kidding...they were going to overthrow the British Govt in tandem..] confirms what my grandmom said about these people.....She said, "Dollink...never trust an Irish landlord or a Jew who has his hands full dodging horseapples on the street at 1 in the morning !! "
Thats advice we should all take. Thanks Verushka.
|
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 668
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 12:47 pm: |
|
Tom,
He put my name on the freaking bottom again.
If you want top billing you have to adopt a pen name along the lines of some companies in the phone book. You know, call yourself Tom AAAAAA1 and you'll be top of the heap.
And thanks for the kind words.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3883
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 12:53 pm: |
|
I must say I am rather much in doubt about that alleged photo of Mary Jane Kelly.
I have been told that such a picture once was presented, but that it in the end proved to be the wrong woman and another Mary Kelly.
The only chance I can see of finding a photo of Mary Kelly -- unless it could be found in some police records regarding prostitutes or vagrant women - is if one could get it from those who have been in direct relation to her.
But how is that possible, since her whole background and family tree is covered in confusion and pretty much a blank canvas?
I am not saying that Slemen tries to commit a deliberate fraud here in order to boast his book, but it could very well be a result of mistaken identity. This has happened to me several times during my research on prostitute women, since they often appeared under aliases and 'borrowed' names from each other.
According to the article, the photo is supposed to show a 'slim' woman, but the sources say that MJK was rather stout.
Forgive me for doubting this; if Mr Slemens really had found a photo of Mary Kelly, it would be Earth-shattering news, but since we know nothing about Mary Kelly, how can we be sure of that this is the right one? Therefore I - at this stage, before the book is out - beg to remain cautious and unimpressed.
Tom,
Again -- thanks a million. And a hilarious review as always.
As for the matter on the Goulston Street topic in Ripperologist, I completely have to agree with Dan (no offense to Howie or Monty, because it was certainly nothing wrong with their handywork as such; this is an editing matter).
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Jane Coram
Chief Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 514
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 3:01 pm: |
|
Hi Tom,
Thanks for the kind words.......that will save me a few grand for a hit man.......
Hilarious review as usual........best laugh I have had all month, but very fair.
Next months cover is going to be Katie Holmes in the guise of Mary Kelly a la 1950's comic book style pursued by a Ripper who looks suspiciously like Michael Jackson.
Not really, but made you look. hee hee
Hugs Jane
xxxxx |
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2814
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 3:55 pm: |
|
Tom, Tom , Tom,
dear old Tom, i could never be pissy with you!
(will email you).
Why would anyone spend any money at all on Uncle Jack? here, here. But i digress.
Later
Jenni
ps it was mephs who you stole it off.
|
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1796
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 5:29 pm: |
|
G'day Jennifer,
I've tried several times to subscribe to 'Ripper Notes' over the Internet, using my valid Visa card, but keep getting the message 'Some information is incorrect or missing.'. The Visa card expires in 2008 and all information is correct. I can't complete the subscription. As an Australian I don't use the subscription form for U.S. subscribers or the one for U.K. and Canadian subscribers.
I've noticed your name is there for U.K. subscribers to contact. Should I subscribe through you? I don't want to miss out on the issues that my stories appear in.
LEANNE |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 421
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 9:07 pm: |
|
Dan,
I'm all for you presenting a wide range of opinions. One of my most 'out there' speculative pieces (Vesica Pisces article) was published by you. However, if something is flatly presented as fact, when it's not known fact, such as Spallek mentioning that Bachert DID go to the police, etc...and moving on, I would think an editor might add the word 'allegedly'. That's all it takes. Now someone else, quoting from Spallek's article, will see this for the first time and assume it's true. And comparing this to what I wrote about Dunham/Tumblety is apples and oranges. We have Bachert's writings to prove this. He submitted many pieces and interviews on a wide range of alleged subjects. Why, if he knew the Ripper is dead? And if Bachert had had such knowledge, he would have been screaming it from the rooftops. This contradicts what McCormack is telling us. There's not a similar direct contradiction in the case of Dunham/Tumblety.
Howard,
Before you re-evalute Tumblety's alleged mysoginy simply because of Conover/Dunham's lack of credibility, please remember the LITTLECHILD LETTER and the sources Littlechild was drawing from. THAT LETTER is proof of high suspicion against Tumblety, and there's not reason 1 to believe that Dunham's article had anything to do with that. That's all I was saying in my review - that although Wolf produced some very compelling evidence that must cause us to doubt Dunham's veracity, this in no way effects Tumblety's suspect status, as that is firmly in place through information given to us by an official source (the source being Littlechild, not the letter, which was personal).
Don,
Your suggestion for my pen name is hilarious. Ha ha. Maybe I should call myself 'Aardvark' and forget having a first name. That reminds me of a joke: What do an aardvark and Yoko Ono have in common?..........they both live off dead beetles. Ha ha.
Jennifer,
You're the shiznit, Jenn! 
Glenn,
I would stake Dan Norder's reputation on saying that Tom Slemen has no photo of Mary Kelly and KNOWS that he has no such photo.
Leanne,
So how about it...I'd like to read more indepth, focused history articles from you. You have a knack of finding and interpreting historical sources in a way that's enjoyable to read. Maybe you could dig up some stuff on the mysterious court that is Millers? As for your Paypal problem, maybe that's just Dan's way of saying your money's no good and your subscription is on the house!
To all,
I guess I'm in the minority in thinking that there was nothing wrong with Rip running consecutive graffiti articles from different writers. In fact, I liked the idea. And it's not like they do this all the time. But then, I was in the minority with my opinion on Rob Hill's article and with my enjoying Dan reproducing the Norman Hasting's piece, so my opnion really means absolutely nothing. Incidentally, while Rip was running these graffiti articles, Ripperana produced one by Charlie Clark that was hands down the worst Goulston Street piece I've ever read. If the rest of you had been subjected to the same material, I believe you would have appreciated Rip's graffiti efforts a lot more.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. I truly like the fact that we all don't agree. That's where discussion and learning kick in. And I like that people all over the world can read the same material at the same time and talk about it on here. |
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Chief Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 785
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 10:06 pm: |
|
I just want to thank both Tom and Howard for the kind comments. I hope that I continue to earn them.
Best wishes,
Jeff |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 938
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 10:49 pm: |
|
Dear Thomas,
Thank you for your review of my article. I'm sorry it did not please you but I see no reason for you to be condescending. I have read Letters from Hell but that doesn't mean I have to agree with that particular author on every point. Also, I never claimed to be unearthing new ground. The closest I came to that was perhaps noting that there was an alternative Tube station closer to Chiswick (Ravenscourt Park) which suggests that Druitt's intended destination may have been Hammersmith after all. It was never intended to reveal any new startling new angle. And, by the way, I've been reading on the case for about 15 years now, so I'm not a beginner.
Thanks for your effort, Thomas. I'm sorry you didn't like my article
Andy S.
(Message edited by Aspallek on August 10, 2005)
(Message edited by Aspallek on August 10, 2005) |
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 939
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 11:08 pm: |
|
In all honesty, I must acknowledge that Thomas is correct in stating that I should have included a disclaimer regarding Bachert's statement. I had intended to do so but in the end failed to do it. It was an oversight on my part and not an effort to deceive.
I regard Bachert's statement as "probably factual" in essence (as do various other researchers). But since it did come from a questionable source, a disclaimer should have been included. Sorry. On the other hand, it is not as if this was the key point to the whole argument for Druitt.
I would hope that some would find a small contribution on my part in summarizing and synthesizing existing information and, in particular, dispelling the erroneous notion that Druitt's known movements exclude him from suspicion. This was the aim of my effort as I had hoped to convey by using the word "Still" in my title.
Andy S. |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 822
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 1:04 am: |
|
Hi Leanne,
Jennifer should be able to give info on sending money to her, but you might try something else first if you want to pay by credit card. You can go to www.paypal.com.au and try signing up for a free account there, and if that works you can send money direct to my PayPal account (dannorder@aol.com is the email mine is attached to). Going to the Australian site directly might help you by having the info fields already set up for Australian addresses.
Hi Tom,
I'm still confused with what you are trying to argue here. I think it's obviously far more likely that Dunham's 1888 story influenced Littlechild's naming Tumblety as a suspect in 1913 then McCormick's 1959 story influenced Macnaghten's naming of Druitt as a suspect in 1894.
But then I think the evidence showing that Scotland Yard did not contact San Francisco police looking for handwriting samples from Tumblety in October of 1888, contrary to earlier reports, is more significant overall.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 823
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 1:42 am: |
|
By the way, Tom, when you say people disagree on your opinion on Rob Hill's piece, do you mean Rob House's piece instead? I don't recall anyone disagreeing on Hills (of course I can't recall if you offered an opinion on his articles) but a number disagreed on House.
There are quite a few Robs writing articles for the various Ripper journals. Besides those two there's McLaughlin, Linford and Clack, just off the top of my head. Hills and House are the easiest to get confused though.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1797
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 3:55 am: |
|
G'day,
Thanks for the comments on my piece! Its great to know peoples opinions, good and bad! I've already written and forwarded my second article, which looks at the 'Double Event'. I'm looking forward to reading people's comments on that one!
LEANNE |
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2817
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 4:01 pm: |
|
Tom darling!
so are you! (though i confess i have no idea what it means!!)
Jenni |
Howard Brown
Chief Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 790
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 6:43 pm: |
|
Tommy..
I would never dismiss Tumblety's candidacy,my man. I wasn't doing that at all when I mentioned what the Wolf introduced to counter just two concepts that people have about Tumbelty, notably his misogyny and collection of uteri,which came from Conover, not the Littlechild Letter. The Littlechild Letter stands on its own legs. To be honest,the claims by Conover,while possibly needing a re-evaluation,don't and can't hurt Tumblety's candidacy, since the Littlechild Letter is the real starting point of Tumbelty's candidacy.
In fact,they [ Conover's claims ] remind me of the claims that have been made regarding a certain other suspect. Like that suspect,additional baggage attached to,in this instance,Tumblety,don't deter and should not deter from his candidacy as being the Ripper.
In addition,there could have been a cache of uteri and Tumbelty may have had mysogynistic tendencies,regardless of what Conover said. I just felt that it needed to be pointed out for those who do NOT get the magazine that Wolf found what he did.
J.B. You are always welcome,sir. Thanks for writing it !
Dammit ! Tom...what I meant to say in the post above and got booted before fixing it properly,is that I know the Littlechild Letter may have been influenced by Conover,but that no mention of uteri were in it, However, the hint of misogyny was. Sorry about that !
(Message edited by howard on August 11, 2005)
(Message edited by howard on August 11, 2005) |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 423
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 11:54 pm: |
|
I find it remarkable that Tumblety could have become a Ripper suspect, hunted over oceans, and still a 'very likely' suspect to Littlechild so many years later just cuz of a newspaper article about an incident that allegedly occurred almost 20 years before the Whitechapel murders. And let me add this...If this article is the reason for such hard suspicion, then the information in that article must have been corroborated to the satisfaction of the investigators. That would mean maybe it's NOT a fantasy ...Hmmmm... personally, I believe the article was quite possibly a fantasy, but I also believe that there were reasons to suspect Tumblety that we simply do not know today and will not find in a newspaper.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. I DID mean Rob House and not Rob Hill. My bad. See, folks, that's why I need an 'editor'! |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 424
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 11, 2005 - 11:56 pm: |
|
Andy Spallek sent me a personal e-mail, which I responded to. I now see he wrote essentially the same thing here, so below is my response to him reproduced in case anyone cares:
Andy,
Thanks for the e-mail. I didn't intend what I wrote to come off as 'condescending', and I don't believe I insinuated this was the first thing you'd ever written. I had no reason to think that. I was referring to this being your first Ripper article published in a Ripper journal which, to my knowledge, it is. And I believe I complimented your style of writing and thought-processes. Your article reminded me of the first one I wrote which was in Ripperologist. I was full of enthusiasm and sure I was right on things I now am not so sure about. That's why I suggested you continue to research and write on non-suspect topics, because I think what you come up with will be interesting. By non-suspect I should elaborate. I mean 'non-theory' articles. Even if your article is on Druitt, but a specific aspect, etc. Unless, of course, you uncover new evidence relating to Druitt's guilt. The Bachert trip to the police station is almost certainly a fairy tale. Writings by and about Bachert AFTER that incident allegedly took place bear this out, and the source for it is horrible. It shouldn't be counted into the evidence against Druitt. There's no question that Druitt remains a viable suspect, and it's frustrating that we don't know WHY he was a suspect, but the inclusion of the Bachert story weakened the overall argument. That's what I was getting at. No offense was intended, and I sincerely look forward to more of your work. And, believe me, I don't feel that way about every writer in those mags!
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
George Hallam
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 3:13 pm: |
|
Mr Slemen apparently has you all worried by the sounds of things. Could this great grotesque puzzle finally be solved? I don't think I could take the vacuum it would leave in my life if Slemen has solved the Ripper case. It's worrying, because Slemen is now officially credited with solving the 1931 Julia Wallace case (see Liverpool: the First 1000 years, Arabella McIntyre Brown). A friend of mine who has studied the Whitechapel Murders for nigh on 50 years also believes Slemen has solved the case, from what he saw privately at a talk the writer gave. If I can find out what the information was etc I will scan it into this forum. |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 830
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 11:57 am: |
|
Hi George,
No need. An article in this issue of Ripper Notes covers a talk Slemen gave about Claude Reignier Conder and compared it to the radio program he presented earlier. There were two completely different theories about why he should be considered the Ripper. Both of them were beyond absurd.
Nobody here is worried that Slemen might solve anything, and, contrary to the rationalizations of the Ripper authors who aren't taken seriously, most of us do want the case to be solved.
By the way, his supposed solution of the Julia Wallace case isn't very well respected either. Isn't the "officially credited" above just a fancy way of saying "someone who self-published her own book mentioned my idea, so I'm going to pretend it means something significant and maybe people will fall for it"?
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
Profile Email Dissertations Website
|
Jeffrey Bloomfied
Chief Inspector
Username: Mayerling
Post Number: 789
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 12, 2005 - 8:19 pm: |
|
Hi all,
I wish I could be just commenting on the new issue of RIPPER NOTES, but several references to Inspector Littlechild have made me aware of some material you may wish to peruse.
I have just finished reading Jan Bonderson's new book THE GREAT PRETENDERS, and in it he discusses the 1907 Druce - Portland Case, wherein several members of the descendants of furniture store magnate Thomas Druce claimed he was actually the 5th Duke of Portland. The Bentinck family's solicitors (the Bentincks were the family of the Dukes of Portland) hired Littlechild, who was a private detective by this time, to investigate the Druces. His work helped to demolish the Druces' case. It might be instructive to read the chapter to see what he was like as a detective, to help evaluate his letter about Doctor Tumblety.
Best wishes,
Jeff |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2289
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:41 pm: |
|
I am about to start Andy"s article on Druitt but took a look at Leanne"s on Billingsgate/Barnett.
Loved it...all of it-loved the woodcuts-a period touch that complemented the article superbly.
Liked the original "interweaving" of actual historical fact and statistics with the Barnett link threaded in subtly but helping the reader towards making links without stating such tenuous links as fact.
Was Joe Barnett brutalised by his work which may have involved the torture and killing of living creatures?
Was he after ten years full employment humiliated enough by his dismissal to lash out at his ex lover for jilting him and destroying all his hopes for reforming her and making an honest woman of her?
Food for thought.
A thought provoking piece indeed Leanne-is there any more?
Natalie |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 425
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 5:10 pm: |
|
George,
Hi, Tom. Long time no see. Don't be a stranger, you're good peeps. Can't wait to read the book!
Natalie,
The idea that Barnett hit fish on the head to satiate his thirst for human blood is absurd, not to mention borrowed from Bruce Paley. Nevertheless, I agree that the information on the Billingsgate Market made for absorbing reading. The article, as it pertains to the historical stuff, could have been twice the length and easily held my interest.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2293
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 6:07 pm: |
|
Hi Tom,
I didnt quite see it in that order-must re-read the bit about the "satiety of his bloodlust".I read it more as the job itself leading to a certain amount of de-sensitization towards living creatures-lobsters and crabs being boiled alive and thus tortured daily.Fish dragged out of tanks and gutted while squirming around for their life-
its worth thinking about whether this might lead to someone who,having had a thoroughly depressing time of it one way or another might have lost his rag for some reason-say trying to get back into bed with his ex and being told to shove off may have strangled her in rage and humiliation-realised what he had done and decided to cover it up with a JtR copycat "mutilation".The sight of human innards might not have disurbed someone who was used to this type of daily activity with the sea creatures found in Billingsgate Market!Its worth consideration thats what I am saying.
But yes Leanne" tale of Billingsgate Market was like a time traveller reporting from the front!
Natalie |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2294
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 6:30 pm: |
|
Have just finished Andrew"s article on Druitt.
I enjoyed this Andrew and thought you drew together all the bits and pieces we know about him very well.
More needed to be made of his competitiveness
and I believe,the accompanying aggression and motivation that leads to a champion Fives player or first class cricketer.The fact that his whole life seemed given over to competition or playing the adversary in debate,in the field of sport,in the courts of Law etc signals a fairly strong, confident, aggressive male to me.
If such a male became mentally ill -say decided he had to conduct a crusade against prostitutes, his strength and fitness,his skill with his arms and hands ,his speed and relative youth and above all his determination and aggression would have stood him in very good stead.
If Druitt was the ripper he was no gentleman
when he was setting about his business!
But some excellent research here Andrew that may lead to further revelation.
Natalie |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1798
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 7:14 am: |
|
G'day Natalie,
Yes there's more! I've written a book, and Dan Norder suggested I write stories for 'Ripper Notes' to get people interested in my writing.
There will be another story in the next issue that I hope will get a reaction from readers.
My book gives credit to Bruce Paley for his research and anyone else that deserves it, and I hope that I've added something to this study, (like a more thorough research of Billingsgate Market, St James Fruit Market near Mitre Square, very possible living-conditions at Buller's Lodging House, etc.)
I am not supporting the belief that Joseph Barnett was a Ripper copycat!!! I am supporting the belief that he was the Ripper! If Mary Kelly's killer wanted to ensure that police blamed the Ripper, he didn't do a very good job! He could have waited until the opportunity presented itself to kill her outdoors, taken her kidney and/or womb and what newspaper report did he copy from? She didn't look very much like any published description any other Ripper victim!
LEANNE
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3926
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 12:23 pm: |
|
"If Mary Kelly's killer wanted to ensure that police blamed the Ripper, he didn't do a very good job! He could have waited until the opportunity presented itself to kill her outdoors, taken her kidney and/or womb and what newspaper report did he copy from?"
Leanne,
I don't want this subject to take over this thread, because it is discussed elsewhere.
However, I just have to comment on this.
Firsty:
-- why do you expect a copy-cat to do a 'good job' and to make an exact copy? As far as I know, I've seldom come across a copy-cat case where the killer have nailed down every detail. In fact, the more strange anomalies you find, the more you can suspect that it was not made by the original killer.
I've said it over and over again, what the general public focus on are the broad and often nasty details, like the fact that the killer did mutilations one way or the other; he ripped up the victims, the last one had cuts in the face (in several papers clearly exaggerated, described in terms like 'beyond recognition') etc. You can't expect an unexperienced man to make en exact copy of a Ripper crime. He did the most important stuff; he cut her up, he took out some organs and made facial mutilations. You can't expect a copy-cat murder based on rough paper reading and the word on the street to follow every detail. That is not how it works.
Secondly
-- Why would he kill her outdoors? This is based on the belief that the murder was planned ahead as a Ripper murder, which I don't believe at all. I see the Miller's Court as a spur of a moment thing, maybe a quarrel that went wrong and then he killed her and realised he had to so something about it etc.
I certainly do not think it was planned ahead and especially not if it was a domestic crime. Although such cases do exist, domestic murders are seldom planned, but a result of temporary emotional disturbance, but I can understand that that wouldn't fit your theory. Domestci killers perform their crimes where they feel at ease with the situation - namely inside the home.
"She didn't look very much like any published description any other Ripper victim! "
Then how can you claim that it was a Ripper job in the first place if you don't think it looks like the Ripper to some extent? Doesn't this create a problem for you?
There is absolutely no evidence or even indication on that Joe Barnett was the Ripper or that the victims knew each other. This idea is based on the old romantic belief that Mary Kelly was a centre figure in the whole Ripper murder story, which is total speculation without any confirmed truth in it. A lot of authors - with their own pet suspects - has put forward this theory without a shred of evidence or even credibility. Even Stephen Knight did this.
I liked your article very much, though. I don't support Barnett as the Ripper at all, but the article gave a fascinating insight in Billingates Market and the life in connection with it. I do want to congratulate you on that.
All the best
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 944
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 2:45 pm: |
|
Thanks, Natalie. I'm glad you enjoyed the article. My purpose, as you say, was to "draw things together" rather than to uncover something new. Perhaps some readers missed seeing that as its purpose. Those reading it with the expectation of finding a new revelation or discovery will be disappointed. A new insight or two, however, might be found by the reader.
Andy S. |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2302
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 3:54 pm: |
|
Look forward to reading the next chapters/extracts Leanne.Thrilling material
on Billingsgate Market.
Andrew,
Do continue with the stuff on Druitt.I"m fascinated.
Natalie |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1440
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 4:16 pm: |
|
Hi Glenn,
The Ripper murders ceased after Millers court, there was not any murder in the crime area past november 9th 88 that in any way was so sadistic and horrific as that gruesome episode.
The fact is the whitechapel murders ended with Kelly. question is why?.
Circumstancial reports indicate Barnett as HER killer.
Not only was the grave spitting account made known 71years later, but also the mind of a killer of this mode is apparent when one is familiar with the mind of such a perpretrator, who has a strong desire to manipulate the victim to his /hers way of thinking which has a strong lead to Barnetts obsession with kellys vices.
I Keep repeating the grave yard report, because I sincerly feel it has major significance, it is almost certain if Farsons informant was accurate that Mr Barnett portrayed cunning and deceit that november afternoon although this does not prove homicide does relay a hatred of the desease possibly brought along from the inquest reports/ news reports of Mjk informing associates tht she could not bear the man even though he was good to her.
The millers court affair has all the hallmarks of a domestic killing with the intention of portraying the event as the latest in the whitechapel murders.
This is , and will always be my sincere view,
Regards Richard.
|
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1799
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 4:48 pm: |
|
G'day Glenn,
OK mate. I'll start another thread when I get home, after lunch (Australian time), on the Joseph Barnett board. This is something that should be discussed.
LEANNE |
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 263
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 4:52 pm: |
|
Leanne,
Would you please e-mail me at jsduker@aol.com, for an alternative explanation that may or may not help you?
SJR |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3929
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 6:09 pm: |
|
G'day Leanne,
You said you've written a book? Does this mean that your Barnett project is finished and due for publication? I am actually curious, although I probably won't agree with the conclusions or theory behind it. But I am certain of it will contain things that are new to us in some respects, like many others - each bok learns us something new, at least in most cases. Or is it still kept low profile?
I look forward to see your next article; I agree with what some has said here, that the last piece was very well written.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 15, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 2305
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 15, 2005 - 6:25 pm: |
|
Hi Tom,
I liked your short feature about Thomas Jones.
Sometimes I think we all hedge about a bit too much in stating what we think was the case.For me it sufficed that several people believed her
story.I thought what you said about Mary Anne Connelly also made absolute sense.Mary Anne was petrified and traumatised no doubt by her shocking
experience-who did she have to shout for her if Jack came looking for her?
Natalie |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1802
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 2:49 am: |
|
G'day Glenn,
I've written about 11 or 12 chapters on Barnett as a suspect, and have forwarded my work to Dan Norder to take a look and tell me if it's worth publishing. I have read far-worse books. He has yet to answer me, but he's a busy man. I've approached a few Publishers here in Australia, but all have said they have desided not to go with my book.
I don't like my chances of finding a Publisher because I'm an Australian Female, who has never been published before, writing about a very contoversial subject that happened over a century ago and on the other side of the world.
Dan has offered to help me if I take the self-publishing route, and suggested that I write articles for 'Ripper Notes' to get people interested in what I have to say. I think that's a good idea!
LEANNE |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3931
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 5:28 am: |
|
G'day Leanne,
I am sorry to hear about your difficulties. I know from my own experiences how hard it is for a new author - especially of you don't have an agent - to attract interest from publishers.
I have also heard that many starts to reject Ripper books because of the already vast number of titles on the subject.
No wonder so many have to turn to self-publishing. The down-side with self-publishing is that it opens the door to all kinds of strange projects (as long as the author has the money to put into such an effort) that maybe shouldn't have been published at all, which is why it has a sort of low status, but this is only half the truth. It also gives those a chance to publish their work, who have great stuff to tell but can't get a publishing deal. Fact remains, that so many today never gets the chance to get published just because they're a new name, not necessarily because of the quality of the book.
I do hope it works out.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 16, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2404
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 3:47 pm: |
|
Running with the discussion between Glenn and Leanne concerning Mary Jane, I have found a very provoking case of murder from October 13th 1887.
This is the case of Martha Bodger who was badly mutilated and murdered ‘indoors’ in circumstances uncannily similar to that of MJK. The press reports of the room in which she was murdered and her bodily condition, head almost hacked off, blood all over the walls, chemise pulled up, various other injuries… all are similar to Mary Jane’s demise.
The crime was not a ‘domestic’, though the killer was a near-by lodger.
I think this crime slices in nicely between both points of view and must give us pause for thought.
We should study this one. |
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3935
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 5:03 pm: |
|
AP,
What was the name of the perpetrator (if he was convicted)?
Both the date and the name of the victim rings very clear to me in the back of my head (or is it the medication I am taking for my cold at the moment that plays tricks on me?). I think I might have come across that one, but am not sure. My search on Google comes up empty.
Indeed, not all of these crimes are domestic (although I've found most of them to be a result of a close relation between victim and perpetrator) and they don't have to be, but they don't have to be the work of a serial killer either, as I believe that particular case - along with a number of others - illustrates.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on August 16, 2005)
G. Andersson, writer/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2405
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 6:28 pm: |
|
The murderer was one Joseph A. Corley, aged 17, and a blacksmith.
His age and trade are interesting considering the gravity of the crime.
I believe he suffered the due process of law, but it is a case I'm still reading.
This is a case that should be flagged up here.
Many lessons and rivers to cross. |
Debra J. Arif
Detective Sergeant
Username: Dj
Post Number: 65
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 7:18 pm: |
|
AP
Is this the case where the victim's 6 month old baby was left unharmed at the side of it's mother?
I have been looking for this for ages in The Times after first reading it a while back.
If it's the one I am thinking of I think I now remember you will find more information if you change the surname of the murderer to Morley and search.
Morley's excuse for the murder was that he had been influenced by an earlier similar event that he had read about.
Thanks for that
Debra |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2406
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 2:27 am: |
|
Yes, Debra, that's the baby.
That part makes for very chilling reading, where the father/husband enters the room and finds his baby laughing on the bed by the side of his slaughtered mother.
Heavens! I must have been well in my cups to have read the name as Corley rather than Morley.
The reports on the case begin on the 13th October 1887... and then go on forever. |
Debra J. Arif
Detective Sergeant
Username: Dj
Post Number: 67
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 4:56 am: |
|
AP The Times did report his name as Corley in the first couple of articles, later changing it to Morley, it had me running around for ages trying to find out what happened to him until I realised about the mis-spelling. The search engine didn't like the name Bodger either!
Thanks I will go back and read that again.
AP if you have been reading about Lipski and Batty Street ( which is how I found the story about Morley in the first place) will you let me know if you come across an article about spring locks and key holders and keys for sale on market stalls, I am sure it's to do with the Lipski case ..... that has disappeared too.
I read so many articles from The Times in one go that I don't always make a note of the date.
Debra
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 2028
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 12:37 pm: |
|
Hi AP,
Maybe it was Jack who was the copy cat? Wanted to see his work go on forever in The Times too?
Love,
Caz
X |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2407
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 4:08 pm: |
|
Will do, Debra... if I find it.
I'm getting very friendly with The Times search engine these days, we shared a bottle of brandy the other night.
I always try to make a note of things found, but sometimes also fail. Found a beauty the other night, with another young chap 'rambling' around Whitechapel covered in mud and blood in 1887, connected to a murder, but beggared if I can find the sod now!
Caz
someone who reads is someone who writes.
Right?
After reading the reports of the murder of Martha Bodger it is difficult not to see some sort of emulation and imitation in the murder of Mary Jane.
|
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 428
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 24, 2005 - 7:51 pm: |
|
So, is there anyone out there who has NOT purchased this new issue or subscribed to Ripper Notes? If so, you should be ashamed. What kind of example is that to set for your kids? Don't be the only person on your block not reading Ripper Notes. Support your favorite serial killer. Go RIGHT NOW to www.rippernotes.com and tell 'em Tom sent you, so maybe my articles won't always be in the damn nosebleed section.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. If you're not broke after subbing to RN, go read my review of the new Ripperologist and then head over to www.ripperologist.info and take the Pepsi challenge. Which is YOUR favorite journal? |
Jennifer Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2882
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 4:32 pm: |
|
Tom,
I don't have any kids!
Jenni
ps support your favourite serial killer?!! Feeling okay there mate?
"You know I'm not gonna diss you on the Internet
Cause my momma taught me better than that."
|
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
