|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 986
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 4:44 pm: |       |
Hi,
It is widely accepted that we as a imformative bunch, are clutching at straws when it comes to naming 'Jack'.
It is well known that Leanne and myself finger Barnett as the most likely to have been at the very least a killer.
If i was the prosecution at his trial, i would say that out of all the universal named suspects , he is the most likely.
The dates of the murders starting with the 39 stab wounds inflicted upon Tabram, followed by the 31st of the 8th month, and the 30th of the ninth month, and the names of the victims all correspond with the number 39, which also involves Barnett with the 9th april 87 [ the day he moved in with kelly] and the 30th oct88 [ the day he left her to her own devices] also the day he left her and the day she was killed=39. not to mention the fact that she was killed at
number 26 dorset street , room 13 =39.
The above rough account of my imfamous 39 theory is a solid reason to suspect this individual of murder, not to mention the circumstancial evidence of a possible grave spitting by Barnett, which lets not forget was taken seriously enough by Associated redifusion Tv in 1959 to consider a programme on the said event, and mentioned in Farsons book some 15 years later.
It is a fact that most murders that occur in the privacy of a household, are committed by a spouse or lover of the deseased, and Barnett without question [ whether he committed the act or not, had a motive]
I am a firm believer of Mrs Maxwells statement , that she indeed did see Mary Kelly on the morning of the 9th, and if this recorded statement [ which was sworn to] is correct, then Barnetts alibi is insignificant, also the person who saw a blood splatered male rushing through Mitre square at 1010am on the morning of the 9th carrying a parcel, may well have been the killer of kelly, exspecialy as the route was the same as he could have taken exiting Berner street6 weeks before.
I am convinced that Barnett although suspect originally was release because of Mrs Coxs statement , which although going against the grain that has been handed down was not the carrotty man carrying a quart of ale , but a real toff, similar to that of Hutchinsons man given to the police on the monday evening.
As Barnett had a alibi for the night hours, and as the police believed she was was killed in the hours of darkness, proberly by a man of more respectable appearence , he was released,
number one suspect without a doubt, unless someone can put forward a more suitable candidate, that fits all the data i have mentioned.
Regards Richard. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2771
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 6:42 pm: | |
"Sarge! Sarge! There's been another one!"
"What? Another Ripper murder?"
"No. Another Barnett thread."
Robert |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1986
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 02, 2004 - 7:00 pm: | |
Robert,
I'd say that's bound to be a classic, that one. 
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 987
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 3:47 am: | |
Hi Chaps,
It is not intended to be another Barnett thread, it is an attempt to try and put a solid foundation on why i personally consider him the most likely named killer.
It is all very well being critical, but at least i am trying to bring a prosecution against a suspect, what i would like to see is members of this site put foreward a suspect , that they generally believe plausible, and try to perswaude to the rest of us their guilt.
Regards Richard. |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1987
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 4:40 am: | |
Hi Richard,
"what i would like to see is members of this site put forward a suspect , that they generally believe plausible, and try to persuade to the rest of us their guilt."
I don't think that many is prepared to do that, Rich. That is the big difference between you and many others here. There is just simply not enough evidence to argue in favour of and name one particular suspect -- for all we know, Jack the Ripper may not be among the known suspects anyway.
Unless we want to compete in who is the best guesser, but that's really not my thing.
I think most here know your arguments for stressing Barnett (not to mention the 39 theory), so I really don't see any real revelations in your introductory post above. I think that's what Robert implied in his little sketch.
I am just reading Bruce Payley's book (finally), and as far as I am concerned, there are fair reasons for suspecting Barnett as perhaps Mary Kelly's murderer, but hardly as Jack the Ripper.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Sarah Long
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 1219
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 4:58 am: | |
Richard,
I'm sorry but I don't see your 39 theory as plausible. One of the things you pointed out was Mary's address when she was killed. The only way this could work or be a part of a theory is if Joe knew he was going to kill her prior to them moving in there. Unless you are saying that, because their address added up to 39 that he chose to somehow incorporate that into his killings.
I still say that Joe is a plausible suspect but the 39 theory just doesn't wash with me.
Sarah
Smile and the world will wonder what you've been up to 
Smile too much and the world will guess  |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 647
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 8:19 am: | |
Hi Richard,
while I do not agree with the crux of your theory that Joe Barnet was JTR. I do agree with you that he could have killed Mary Kelly.
All the best
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Sarah Long
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 1223
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 9:04 am: | |
Jennifer,
I don't understand how anyone can go about saying that he may have killed Mary but not be Jack the Ripper. Remember the mess Mary was in when her murderer was done with her? If Joe was capable of committing such a terrible crime as that then why is it not plausible for him to have committed the other (not as messy) crimes? It doesn't make sense to me when people say he may have done the last one but not the others.
Sarah
Smile and the world will wonder what you've been up to
Smile too much and the world will guess |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1989
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 9:12 am: | |
Sarah,
It is very simple. Because there is absolutely no proven connection between him and the other women and no real reason for him to be Jack the Ripper -- regardless of what strange motives and circumstances Richard or Bruce Payley pulls off their sleeves.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 650
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 9:27 am: | |
Sarah,
If his motivation was to scare away Kelly from prostitution that seems odd to me.
Anyway, I have never been satisfied that the more than one killer theory has been put to bed, so to speak, either.
Its just a thought.
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1991
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 9:37 am: | |
Jennifer,
Nice to know someone else is thinking along those lines as well as an alternative possibility.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 651
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 9:49 am: | |
Glenn,
Indeed!
Cheers
Jennifer
ps I'm not saying Joe killed her. But he did have means and motive, as for the number 39, its kind of interesting I suppose Richard!
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Sarah Long
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 1224
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 10:12 am: | |
Jennifer & Glenn,
We can't really think that a motive is strange because just because we wouldn't kill for the same reason, doens't mean others wouldn't. I personally think it's strange when husbands end up killing their wives to stop them from cheating on them. I mean, yeah they can't cheat if they're dead but then the husband won't have them anymore anyway. Now that is strange but it happens.
If he did kill Mary then it shows that he was very capable of killing people in that fashion.
Sarah
Smile and the world will wonder what you've been up to
Smile too much and the world will guess |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 652
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 10:18 am: | |
Sarah,
totally, I agree.
Deranged killers tend not to act normally,
cheers
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1992
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 10:34 am: | |
Sarah.
"If he did kill Mary then it shows that he was very capable of killing people in that fashion."
Not necessarily. There is at least really nothing that suggests that he did, even though he would be capable of it.
I have said it once and I'll say it again.
I can give you a large number of cases throughout crime history (and I've done so earlier on this site) where husbands and boyfriends without a prior criminal record have murdered and mutilated their women to an extreme extent (some even worse than Mary Kelly -- I've seen photos of some of them); in most cases the mutilations were done after the murder (and mostly totally unplanned) to make it harder to identify the victim but mainly for the reason to blame it on other killers and confuse the police that there would be a serial killer roaming the neighbourhood.
As you yourself imply: strange things happen. I wouldn't stress this point if it wasn't for the fact that it has.
With the Ripper on the loose, Barnett had this opportunity, once he killed Mary Kelly in affect. He had motive and he had (if we discard the so called alibi) opportunity as well. I can't rule it out.
However, in contrast, there is not much that suggests that he killed those other women or was a serial killer.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Sarah Long
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 1225
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 11:34 am: | |
Glenn,
There is at least really nothing that suggests that he did, even though he would be capable of it.
That's what I'm saying. IF he killed Mary then he was obviously capable of killing those others in a similar fashion as Mary's murder was the worst.
some even worse than Mary Kelly -- I've seen photos of some of them
Wow, I can't imagine that. That's not to say I don't believe you I just mean I can't imagine worse than Mary.
I'm not saying for a fact that Joe was Jack, but I was just saying that IF he killed Mary then he was capable of it.
Sarah
Smile and the world will wonder what you've been up to
Smile too much and the world will guess |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1993
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 12:30 pm: | |
Hi Sarah
"Wow, I can't imagine that. That's not to say I don't believe you I just mean I can't imagine worse than Mary."
You better believe it, Sarah. Those were not pretty sights.
Humans can be strange creatures.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 989
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 4:40 pm: | |
Hi,
I did not mean to start a hornets nest, I really think that Barnett is a candidate for Marys murder, and because of that and other relevant details believe he could have been our 'Jack',
Sarah.
we should remember that it was only when Barnett became unemployed , whilst living at number 13, that she returned to prostitution, and it was shortly after this loss of job that the murders started, I do appreciate that this 39 theory is strange , but it does fit all the murders , and the attack on the first victim and Barnetts involvement, the fact that the last assumed victim of 'Jack' occured at 26, Dorset street room 13 fits the pattern precisely, we should remember that one day out in this pattern would show a descrepency, but there is none.
Glenn.
I am the first to acknowledge that the real 'Jack'proberly has never been named, but i sense that a large section of people that view this site have some nagging doubt over Barnetts innocence, the fact is so do I.
Regards Richard. |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 693
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 4:51 pm: | |
"we should remember that one day out in this pattern would show a descrepency, but there is none. "
How does Sept 8 fit the pattern of 39 or Nov. 9? If he was killing on 39 days, why didn't he kill on Oct 29 and Nov 28?
 |
Jon Smyth
Detective Sergeant
Username: Jon
Post Number: 150
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 4:59 pm: | |
Richard.
Did you ever explain what the significance of '39' was?.
I mean, in numerology the tendency is to reduce the numerals to their lowest significant number.
Therefore, in numerology only the numbers from "0" to "9" actually hold any significance.
Your "39" is actually "3" + "9" = 12, and 12 is "1" + "2" = "3".
I'm going on memory here but if there is any notable significance in any numbers at all, then your "39" is actually "3".
You do not appear to be carrying the 'theory' to its final resolution, but stopping in mid-theory.
I'm sure there are several contributors who can correct me on this if I am mistaken.
Any opinions?
Regards, Jon |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 991
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:07 pm: | |
Ally,
Mary nichols was killed august 31st, of the 8th month, Chapman on the 8th sept 31+8 =39 eddowes and stride the 30th of the 9th month, kelly on the 9th 30+9 =39.
It is proberly conceivable that the killer did not realize that sept had 30days, and was calculating 8+31=39 , which would then correspond exactly with kelly being killed 39 days later.
The fact that no murders happened in october would fit in nicely with Barnett , who was then focused on Mary stopping her immoral ways.
Richard. |
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1212
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:18 pm: | |
Richard, you can clutch at straws but I'm sticking to clutching at full glasses of brandy.
They ain't so fast as those pesky straws.
Didn't you realise that 'Thomas Hayne Cutbush' makes the number 39?
You just subtract his uncle's birthdate from the addition of his own name, and then add two dead Catholics and divide it by the street number of the Police Seaside Home, then multiply by the number of all Jews with the surname of Lipski living in Whitechapel in 1888, and blow me down you get the number 7.
Just add 32 and have a drink. |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 694
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:18 pm: | |
How does Sept 8 = 39? You use the month number and the day to get nichols, eddowes and stride but then suddenly drop it for Kelly and don't explain how Sept (9) + day (8) equals 39. And then you assume that the killer didn't know how many days were in the month?!!! If he was all concerned with number symbolism, I'm pretty sure he would have been able to count days.
|
Brad McGinnis
Inspector
Username: Brad
Post Number: 177
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:25 pm: | |
Hi All, I feel that it must be pointed out that Joe went on to live an uneventful life until his death in 1926. After the Autunm frenzy, is it likely that the killer just up and quit? Living the next 38 years without incident? I think not. Brad |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1995
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:29 pm: | |
Oooooh no. People... Not the 39 theory again...
Richard please...
My head hurts already.
-----------------------------
"Didn't you realise that 'Thomas Hayne Cutbush' makes the number 39?
You just subtract his uncle's birthdate from the addition of his own name, and then add two dead Catholics and divide it by the street number of the Police Seaside Home, then multiply by the number of all Jews with the surname of Lipski living in Whitechapel in 1888, and blow me down you get the number 7.
Just add 32 and have a drink."
Hahaha, AP!
You're wonderful. Number symbolism in a nut shell.
I'll buy you a brandy anytime -- Spanish, I promise.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1996
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:34 pm: | |
Hi Brad,
"I feel that it must be pointed out that Joe went on to live an uneventful life until his death in 1926. After the Autunm frenzy, is it likely that the killer just up and quit? Living the next 38 years without incident?."
If he was Jack the Ripper...?
-- Doubtful.
If he was not Jack the Ripper but Mary Kelly's murderer only...?
-- Not impossible.
If he was completely innocent...?
-- Apparently.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2773
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:55 pm: | |
Brad, of course he lived the next 38 years without incident! Now if Joe had lived till 1927.......
Robert |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 695
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:56 pm: | |
Well Brad clearly it couldn't have been Joe then because Joe would have made certain to die one year later than he did to make it an even 39. There's that number again!
|
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 696
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 5:57 pm: | |
Dammit Robert...beat me by 30 seconds.
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2774
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 6:02 pm: | |
Sure that wasn't 39 seconds, Ally? |
Thomas C. Wescott
Detective Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 145
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 03, 2004 - 10:12 pm: | |
Hello all,
There's no more evidence now to suggest that Barnett was the killer than there was when Abberline cleared him in 1888. Since Barnett had been involved with Kelly, this theory would be interesting if there was anything at all to it. Aside from this silly '39' obsession, that is. I can't figure out why thread after thread get devoted to Barnett. I suppose it's a fad, like when the 'Diary' was so prevelant on these boards. Thankfully, Sickert never became a full-fledged fad and, hopefully, we're now rid of him for all time since Cornwell went to all the trouble of proving there's not a reason in the world to think him the Ripper. But despite my moaning, I know there's plenty of people who'd think my theory wacky, so it's all good.
Since this thread is about prosecuting Barnett, I'd have to say he wouldn't need Johnny Cochran and and ill-fitting glove to get off. It would be fun to watch on Court TV - "Your honor, I'd like to present to the jury Exhibit A, the number '39'. Ha ha. Or, 'This edition of Court TV is sponsored by the number 39 (ala Sesame Street). The jury would then convene for 39 seconds before suggesting to the prosecuting attorney that he should, in fact, quit his day job.
Joe Barnett didn't kill Mary Kelly, Jack the Ripper did. Joe Barnett wasn't Jack the Ripper. I find the defendant 'Not Guilty'.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
P.S. The number 39 is 63 when turned upside down. |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 195
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 12:02 am: | |
39 is actually 6E upside down, which is pronounced six-e, and since Joe obviously had a speech disorder he meant 60, which is how many seconds there are in a minute, so Joe was saying he was the second killer.
Or not.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 992
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 3:55 am: | |
Hi,
I obviously would never expect members of this casebook to agree with what may sound like a obsessive theory, but as i understand it many serial killers in the past have worked to a pattern, using all manner of ways , which is meaningful to them, and i truely believe our 'Jack' was one of this type.
It is just a [ mayby coincedence] strange fact that Tabram was stabbed a total of 39 times, thirty eight of the wounds with a small weapon such as a penknive, which then proceeded to a pattern which was relevant to the number of wounds inflicted on the poor woman.
I do not want to inflict more suffering on you all by repeating the dates, but they are there, and Barnett is implicated by another coincedence?.. the day he moved in with kelly/the day he moved out/ and the day she was killed.
9-30-9.
We can never understand what goes on inside these killers minds, but like in black magic working to a numbered pattern, can sometimes give them the impression of invisibility, and a safety zone.
Regards Richard. |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1401
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 6:05 am: | |
G'day Rich,
I fear that this thread may mislead people into thinking that our book is full of your 39 theory. It is not! At the moment your 39 theory is not even mentioned. I am still waiting for your contribution on it.
Like it / or hate it, agree with it / or not, it may make interesting reading and lead to some debate. What do people think?
To believe that Barnett killed Mary Kelly only, one would have to believe that Mary wasn't a Ripper victim. I have no doubts she was! If Barnett had a motive strong enough to kill the woman he loved, why wouldn't his motive be strong enough to kill the other women who meant nothing to him?
GLENN: There doesn't have to be a proven connection between Barnett and the other women! That's what makes 'Jack the Ripper' a serial killer! If the Ripper had have killed only women that had a strong connection between them, the case would have been solved!
Look for subtle connections, like the fact that four of them once had connections to Dorset Street.
LEANNE
Q: How do trees get onto the Internet?
A: They log in! 
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 656
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 6:21 am: | |
Leanne,
to believe Joe killed Kelly only you would have to believe that - agreed.
i have heard theories which have argued Mary Kelly or Liz Stride weren't actually ripper victims. I don't particularly agree but remain open to the possibility.
what is being suggested is not that Barnet was not capable (supposing he killed Kelly) of killing the others but rather that his motive for killing Kelly was not connected to motives for serial killers. In other words in the same vein that Kidney is sometimes put forward for killing Stride.
Cheers
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 699
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 6:35 am: | |
Richard,
You still have not explained how Sept 8 adds up to 39. It is neither a summation of the month and day nor 39 days from the last murder with or without the killer being precise in his addition...which one would think he would be if he was so numerically obsessed. If you have already explained this on another thread, you could just point me to it, but you did state that if just one of the days did not match pattern the theory would crumble. And for the the life of me I cannot see how Sept 8 adds up to 39.
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 657
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 6:40 am: | |
Ally,
31 (Nichols)plus 8 (Chapman) equals 39
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Sarah Long
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 1229
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 6:43 am: | |
Richard,
The only problem with the '39' theory is that it is all so planned. It still indicates that he was planning to kill Mary when they moved into Millers Court or that he at least planned to kill her a few weeks in advance. I just don't think like that and think it was more of a spur of the moment thing.
Please can you explain about their address. Do you mean that he involved the number 39 because their address adds to that number or are you implying that they choose that place because he was planning to kill her there. I doubt the latter, but since you say the 39 in their address is significant I would still like to know.
Sarah
Smile and the world will wonder what you've been up to
Smile too much and the world will guess |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 700
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 6:45 am: | |
Nah I am sure that can't be it. If Nichols was killed on 8 -31 to make 39 then her date would be used. It's too stupid to think that a numerology freak would recycle numbers.
Not to mention that it would be too ludicrous to think that someone would come up with 39 in SO MANY different ways. If he was killing according to a number plan, it would be precise as numbers are...not some random oh I can add her death to her death and it's been 39 days (give or take a few) blah blah.
Sorry it just doesn't add up (heh).
(Message edited by Ally on August 04, 2004)
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1997
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 8:08 am: | |
Leanne,
"I fear that this thread may mislead people into thinking that our book is full of your 39 theory. It is not! At the moment your 39 theory is not even mentioned."
I know it's not in your book. Your book has nothing to do with it; this is a discussion board.
Still, it's Richard who keeps dragging it up.
"Look for subtle connections, like the fact that four of them once had connections to Dorset Street."
Yeah sure.
Like there weren't hundreds of women living together in doss houses on Dorset street. Of course some of could have run into each other. What does that prove?
I know that there doesen't have to be a connection between the women in order to make Barnett a serial killer, but isn't it you and Rich that claim that there were? And that they knew each other? Because I agree on, that is completely redundant.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Chief Inspector
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 663
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 10:20 am: | |
Ally,
i think that is the point, although 8 and 30 is 38 whilst 30 and 30 is 60, though 30 plus 9 is 39.
I don't really understand! (sorry Richard).
Jennifer
"Think things, not words." - O.W. Holmes jr |
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 151
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 12:30 pm: | |
Ally.
Remember what I was saying about Richards theory is really a theory based on "3", not 39?.
Well, in numerology A = 1, B = 2, C = 3, etc.
(A-I = 1-9, J-R = 1-9, S-Z = 1-8) Zero has no value.
Look at it this way..
September 8th is defined thus..
S=1
e=5
p=7
t=2
e=5
m=4
b=2
e=5
r=9
then add day 8.
Therefore, 1+5+7+2+5+4+2+5+9, + 8 = 48, correct?
48 = 4+8 = 12, 1+2 = 3...****3****, that blessed THREE again
See if Richard can do better, my god, where's the Southern Comfort!!
Regards, Jon |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 430
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 4:42 pm: | |
Richard,
If Joe was focusing on 39, and reflecting this number in the murders as you keep suggesting, what is the personal significance of 39 to Joe (other than the 39's from the murders themselves, which can't be said to be related to Joe without first proving Joe was the killer; if you want to use the 39's of the murders to connect Joe to the murders, you first have to show that both the murders and Joe independently have all these 39's, and then make the connection).
I would think that something pretty significant must be associated with 39 in Joe's mind. And, since he stops after Mary, that 39 must somehow involve Mary, either directly or indirectly.
What I'm getting at, is that the 39's all seem to come from the murders, which might not be connected to Joe. Where are the 39's that come from Joe to connect him to the murders in the first place?
- Jeff |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 996
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 4:43 pm: | |
Hi Jon,
I am not refering to complicated numerology, it is a basic thought that the killer conjured up a number that was significant to him for eg The 39th psalm, which if one interprets as ' I tried to hold my tonque, even tho evil was before me, i swore that i would try to be strong , but the fire built inside me , then i spoke my tonque, for i am weak' if that was the thought of a certain Joseph Barnett who had always disliked the immorral ways of prostitutes, although he originally felt sorry for the sad story that kelly told him ie. dead husband , ill in confirmary, and had to solicit herself to survive, then he could have tried hard to contain his dislike for the streetwalkers.
However when the money dried up after Barnetts loss of earnings, and she having no breadwinner on a regular basis, resulted in her returning to that kind of life, he became determined to alter her lifestyle, he tried talking to her, but that failed miserably, and in desperation, and seeing himself as the poor soul in the psalm killed Tabram[ quite possible in error of Pearly Poll who lived at 35 Dorset street, and quite possibly Kelly knew] hopeing that would stop her streetwalking.
But that failed so he killed Mary Nichols the furthest point from his obode on the 31st aug 88, and followed that with the killing of Chapman on the 8th sept 88. The thirty nine stab wounds on Tabram , corresponded with the killing of nichols and Chapman 31+8 =39.
He tried again to alter kellys atitude, but she was adamant that she would be fine, so he planned to do the next murder on the 3ist of sept 88 , but he had not realized that 30days hath sept, so the 30th of the 9th month would surfice, like the 31st of the 8th month, because his victim stride was not mutalated in the fashion he required he searched franticaly for a second victim, which he found in Eddowes.
He then spent the majority of October trying to perswaude Kelly that he felt that she was in danger of such a killer, but although he scared the daylights out of her, so much so she had a nightmare that someone was killing her, he could not alter her ways. it then became apparent to him that the next kiling would be hers, for he saw her responsible for all the unnnessesary murders, so he remembering that the day he moved in with her was 9th april 1887, he would leave her then on the 30th of the month[october]. and her death would be on the 9th november88, which would keep up the pattern, and he would kill her in the room that they used to share , the very room that she had had that nightmare, in the very bed that she had the dream.
which so happens to be room 13 house number 26.
far fetched perhaps but surely my good friends on this site can see my reasoning.
Regards Richard. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2778
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 4:44 pm: | |
Jon, you'll need two bottles, because your own name totals 10 + 15 + 14 = 39.
Robert |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 997
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 4:58 pm: | |
Hi Robert and co,
Mock all you want, i am only tying to express my opinion which is based on actual certified facts.
I am not doing a Radka, as i have always stated i am open to suggestion, I am not saying it is a fact that Barnett committed any offence, i am simply giving a well informed possibility.
Regards Richard. |
Ally
Chief Inspector
Username: Ally
Post Number: 702
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 5:16 pm: | |
No Robert, they are not based on actual certified facts because the facts of your theory appears to keep changing. You have yet to answer how Sept 8 adds up to 39 and now it appears that you are saying that either 9 or 3 will do in it's place so basically, any number under the world could be substituted if a convenient 39 can't be found. If Joe was so concerned with "convincing" Kelly, then I am sure that he could have found 20 minutes or so on Oct 29 to kill a prostitute in order to fit the pattern. You say he left her on Oct 30..why not the 29 if he was so concerned with the number 39 and all it's significance? I would think that the 30th day of the 9th month would add up to 39..what's the deal with him wanting to do it on the 31...that would be 40? Or were you making a mistake and he thought there was 31 days because of the Kelly murder? Are you sure you are adding any of this right?
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2781
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 5:22 pm: | |
Hi Ally
I'll let Richard answer that as it's his theory.
Robert |
David Andersen
Sergeant
Username: Davida
Post Number: 46
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 7:51 pm: | |
Mary Kelly was born in '63' an upside-down 39
Regards
David |
timsta
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 04, 2004 - 9:08 pm: | |
What are the 39 Steps?
timsta |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
