| Author |
Message |
    
Paul Williams
Sergeant
Username: Wehrwulf
Post Number: 36
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 2:41 pm: | 
|
I was researching something unrelated to Jack on the internet and stumbled on this article which was posted in 01. Conder seems an unlikely suspect but it would be interesting to know more about him.
New Evidence Points To Army Col. As Jack the Ripper
[Original headline: County soldier ‘was the Ripper']
Jack the Ripper was an Army colonel from Cheltenham, according to two amateur sleuths.
The pair of researchers are convinced that Colonel Claude Reignier Conder, from Tivoli, was the notorious murderer who killed five prostitutes in 1888 in London.
Mystery has shrouded the true identity of the infamous killer ever since. Many famous Victorians were linked with the case, including writer Lewis Carroll and Queen Victoria's grandson Prince Albert Victor.
But crime writer Tom Slemen and criminologist Keith Andrews today revealed that they have uncovered new evidence which proves Col Conder was the culprit.
They say clues include cryptic messages carved on the victims' bodies and scrawled on a wall at the scene of a murder in ancient languages which Col Conder knew from working as an archaeologist in the Middle East.
Mr Slemen, 33, who lives in Liverpool, said: "Jack the Ripper was a brilliant 39-year-old British intelligence officer, archaeologist, writer, map-maker and trained killer. The man Keith and I know to be the Whitechapel murderer has lain in Cheltenham Cemetery for 91 years. "His name was Claude Reignier Conder. He was born in Cheltenham and had many relatives there. I believe he has descendants living in the area today. "He was not suspected of being the Ripper at the time of the killings and even so-called ‘Ripperologists' will not have heard of him."
Mr Slemen researched the Cheltenham connection from August last year to February this year.
He scoured Public Record Office documents and scanned miles of microfilmed electoral registers.
Mr Slemen and Mr Andrews have visited Col Conder's grave at Cheltenham Cemetery and Crematorium in Bouncers Lane.
The pair also say 19th century Metropolitan Police chief Sir Charles Warren – who was in charge of the hunt for the Ripper – was a close friend of Col Conder.
They claim Warren, who went to school in Cheltenham, knew his friend was the killer but took the secret to his grave when he died in 1927.
Col Conder was born in Cheltenham in 1849 and was regarded as "a local respectable man", says Mr Slemen.
He was a descendant of the French-born Louis Francois Roubiliac, the most celebrated sculptor in 18th century Britain.
He moved to Hackney, London, in the 1860s and served in the Royal Engineers alongside the pre-knighthood Charles Warren, who was then a Captain in the regiment.
Both archaeologists, Conder and Warren gained worldwide fame by excavating hundreds of sites in the Middle East between 1867 and 1882 and wrote an international bestselling book about their finds.
Crucially, they discovered the remains of King Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem, including artefacts and rings, which Mr Slemen says sparked a chain reaction which led to the gruesome murders.
The rings and other personal items were stolen from Col Conder's house by prostitute Annie Chapman, who was later killed by Jack the Ripper.
Mr Slemen says: "All of his victims had known one another and had all benefited from Chapman's robbery."
He alleges all of the Ripper's victims helped steal or sell the stolen goods.
Col Conder was a trained killer who specialised in close surveillance of his enemy and swooping in silence using ancient techniques, says Mr Slemen.
"He would watch the routines of the patrolling soldiers for hours, sometimes weeks, then attack silently and from behind under the cloak of darkness. The victim's throat was slit before he could make a sound. These deadly skills came in very useful in 1888," he said.
The writer says that Col Conder retired to Cheltenham in the early 1890s and lived in the town until his death after a stroke in 1910. His wife Myra died in 1934 and is buried in the same grave.
Mr Slemen said: "The Ripper took almost three weeks to pass away from a cerebral embolism that left him paralysed and in a state of terror.
"Who knows what vengeful spectres haunted the deathbed of a man who took the lives of five women in 1888 in a sinister and most brutally horrific way?"
Mr Clemen said: "The common misconception about Jack the Ripper is that he went around in a top hat and cape carrying a Gladstone bag full of surgical instruments but the reality is quite different."
The Jack the Ripper documentary in which Col Conder is named as the killer will be broadcast on BBC Radio Merseyside tonight (Fri 13th April) at 9.05pm. Mr Slemen and Mr Andrews hope to publish a book based on their findings.
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1288
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 5:17 pm: |
|
Nice find, Paul, I shall see if I can't find more references for you. Somehow I feel I already have something I found concerning the Middle East excavation connection, must have a look. |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 254
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 11:29 pm: |
|
Tom Slemen has been talking about this particular theories for a few years at least. We used to have a couple of threads on the boards about it, including a link to an online copy of the radio show discussing it, but I can't seem to find them. They were probably on the old boards, but I can't pull them up on the Casebook CD either. Google isn't finding the original pages either, so maybe they were taken down.
Tom has said recently (he replied to an email from someone asking and I think he even popped in on the A?R thread here, strangely enough) that he's still working on the book and claims to have even more info that proves beyond a doubt that he's got the right guy.
From what I remember of the theory it was pretty fanciful and disjointed. Eddowes' facial mutilations were supposedly in some ancient language that only Warren would know, all the victims knew each other and stole some brass rings from Conder so he vowed revenge and killed them all in Satanic rituals, he had ninja-like powers and escaped the crime scenes by climbing walls and running across rooftops, things like that.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes
|
Maria Giordano
Detective Sergeant
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 62
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 2:25 pm: |
|
The Eddows facial mutilations were a message?
They're reaching for their sweaters in Hades!!
Mags
|
Jon Smyth
Inspector
Username: Jon
Post Number: 187
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 5:20 pm: |
|
Oh there was certainly a message there Maria, something like, "don't walk near Mitre Square at night!!"
'Sarcy' Jon. |
Howard Brown
Sergeant
Username: Howard
Post Number: 50
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 8:33 pm: |
|
Tom has said recently (he replied to an email from someone]----Dan,from above
That e-mail was from me,Dan....I mentioned contacting him around 3 months or more over at JTRForums.... |
TomSlemen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 6:39 pm: |
|
Mr Norder, I have never once said Claude Reignier Conder ran across rooftops. The book is almost ready. All I can say is just wait and see. |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 284
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 15, 2004 - 6:59 pm: |
|
Hi Tom,
I could have sworn the radio clip that was online mentioned running across rooftops... but then that could just be my memory playing tricks on me. Naturally you would have a better idea of what your book will contain than I do.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes
|
Andrew Spallek
Chief Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 590
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 16, 2004 - 10:38 am: |
|
Mr. Slemen,
Can you provide a link to the radio programme in question (sound file or transcript)? It would be a good "teaser" for your book!
Andy S.
(Message edited by Aspallek on September 16, 2004) |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 186
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 16, 2004 - 11:07 pm: |
|
Mr. Slemen,
Can you explain to me why you took D'Onston's Ada/Louise story, changed a couple of details, and tried to pass it off as 'folklore' in one of your books?
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Mr Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 11:51 am: |
|
What Gets me is the articles I've read that conder was doing other things at the time like this one.
http://www.btinternet.com/~j.b.w/conder.htm
http://www.mara.org.uk/reignier_conder.htm
Also this article too saying they believe he has living decendants in that area living today. What would they think of his theory would they disprove it and show other evidence of what he was doing at that time. Not to mention a book of his published in 1889 so would he be busy the previous year writing that book? This link to the article was from a newpaper in 2001.
http://www.100megsfree4.com/farshores/nripper.htm |
TomSlemen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, September 20, 2004 - 5:25 pm: |
|
First of all Mr Wescott (whoever you are, never heard of you) I didn't. Secondly, I do not have time to enter into further discussion with you, too busy. Can't see how a folklore tale written many years ago is relevant to this valuable forum when so much badly-researched laughable rubbish makes it into books on Jack the Ripper. You seem quite flustered, and it amuses me. No doubt you'll be grinding your teeth when the book comes out. Do you really have a clue as to who the Ripper was? I imagine you've been trying to find out for a very long time. Perhaps in another hundred years you'd be wiser?
|
Howard Brown
Detective Sergeant
Username: Howard
Post Number: 67
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - 10:17 pm: |
|
" Can't see how a folklore tale written many years ago is relevant to this valuable forum..."
DEAD OR ALIVE ,which appeared in the Review of Reviews,by Stead, regardless of whether Mr. Slemen feels it is wholly folklore,does contain factual and verifiable references within the story....
Mr. Andy Aliffe found an 1868 article in the Bridlington Quay-Observer [ 16 July ] that verifies D'onston's claims within the D-O-A story about being shot and cared for at The Black Lion Hotel......
Tom Wescott? Doesn't ring a bell...Any kin to Dr. William Wescott?
|
David Knott
Sergeant
Username: Dknott
Post Number: 44
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 4:45 am: |
|
Just in case anyone was wondering the point of Tom W's question to Tom S ...
www.geocities.com/Area51/Shuttle/9089/haunted.html
This is D'Onston's own true ghost story, the events of which actually occurred in Hull. However, Tom S seems to be suggesting that they occurred in Liverpool, and has apparently changed the names of those involved.
Tom S, bearing in mind you have your own solution which is evidently to be published, I would have thought that Tom W's question was perfectly valid. If you are prepared to deliberately alter facts to your own advantage then how can we be expected to take your theory seriously?
Of course, there may be a perfectly good explanation, but your reply to Tom W does not inspire confidence! |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 208
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 24, 2004 - 10:29 pm: |
|
Hello all,
At the JTRforums I saw people discussing an ‘attack’ on me by Tom Slemen, so I followed the link here to check it out. This is it? Hardly an attack. In fact, Tom has good reason to be a bit sour at me as in my review of Ripperologist #54 I was having a bit of fun and insinuated that Slemen has the intellect of a sixth grader, and I may have likened his upcoming book to a $25 roll of toilet paper. My entire post was tongue in cheek, but still, I can understand Tom’s P.O.V.. Nevertheless, he wrote this post so I feel compelled to respond. Since he’s a busy man, I’ll keep it short. Here it goes:
Slemen writes: First of all Mr Wescott (whoever you are, never heard of you) I didn't.
Wescott writes: Oh, you big silly, yes you did. The link is above. As for who I am, I wouldn’t expect you to know, as my name would only be familiar to those who research Jack the Ripper. I’ve contributed to (detracted from?) this message board, off and on, for years; have written numerous articles published in Ripper Notes and Ripperologist, a few of which are available here on the Casebook (and have been there for years). Now, in my estimation, only those who truly take the Ripper case seriously, and understand the importance of research, would avail themselves of these sources, as very valuable sources of information they are. Granted, my own work is rather meaningless drivel that only manages to get into the mags when submissions are down and filler is needed. But still, I’d imagine someone who takes the subject so seriously as to write a book on it would check out every avenue of research available to them, and my name – if only good for a laugh – would at least strike them as familiar. It didn’t you. Why? You haven’t researched.
Now, that’s a pretty darn bold statement on my part. Kinda sounds like I’m wounded and just slinging arrows, doesn’t it? Not quite the case. Tom (cool first name by the way) Slemen (thank God for that ‘L’!) appears in the new issue of Ripperologist. They couldn’t find any new pictures of divas with their tits hanging out, so instead they ran a pic of Slemen: you can tell this guy has no problem getting poonanny. He looks nothing like what you’d expect from a Trekkie ghosthunter type. The pic is accompanied by a newsbrief where Tom puts to rest an apparent rumor that he was conducting Ripper walks in Liverpool! He then goes on to attack the relevance of the Diary (since the two Toms agree it wasn’t written by JTR, I refrain from calling it the ‘Ripper Diary’), though hinders his own argument by putting forth the following….are you ready folks?...keep in mind this is from the mouth of a man who has just spent years ‘researching’ and writing a book about JTR…here it goes:
“The diarist also states that, after butchering Mary Kelly, he left body parts on the table. The official police files state categorically that one piece was left by Kelly’s right foot, and another was placed under her head. People ignorant of these facts still make “pilgrimages” to the grave of James Maybrick in Ansfield Cemetery…”
Wescott writes: Ignorant people they may be, but facts those are not. So, all the Ripper did was place one ‘body part’ by Kelly’s right foot and one ‘body part’ under her head. Nothing on the tables, no heart missing. I’m going to let that one stand on its own and move on.
Slemen writes: Secondly, I do not have time to enter into further discussion with you, too busy.
Wescott writes: Then what the hell are you doing on a discussion board? What do you think goes on here, tea parties?
Slemen writes: Can't see how a folklore tale written many years ago is relevant to this valuable forum
Wescott writes: Hold on! So, you admit you wrote the folklore tale I referred to? And you wrote it many years ago (this is true)? But you just said you DIDN’T write it? Sounds like you’ve got a case of the John Kerry’s, my friend.
Slemen writes: when so much badly-researched laughable rubbish makes it into books on Jack the Ripper.
Wescott: I’ll have to give you that. In fact, I was just reading the new Ripperologist, and this writer in Liverpool said…
Slemen writes: You seem quite flustered, and it amuses me.
Wescott writes: Maybe flustered is what you Brits call it, but here in the states we call it ‘annoyed’. Since you found D’Onston’s tale delightful enough to plagiarize, you might be interested to know that D’Onston himself may have plagiarized it! Read my upcoming article (pending acceptance) in Ripperologist (www.ripperologist.info) to find out his likely source! (shameless plug mode ‘OFF’)
Slemen writes: No doubt you'll be grinding your teeth when the book comes out.
Wescott writes: Another comment I’ll let stand on its own.
Slemen writes: Do you really have a clue as to who the Ripper was?
Wescott writes: Yes. And that makes one of us.
Slemen writes: I imagine you've been trying to find out for a very long time.
Wescott writes: Since 1998. I’m younger than you, ghostbusta.
Slemen writes: Perhaps in another hundred years you'd be wiser?
Wescott: I appreciate the wish on a long life, and return the same to you. I would like to think I’ll be wiser in 100 years. Either that, or I’ll be exceptionally senile, horribly forgetful, and spouting nonsense such as “the official police files state categorically that one piece was left by Kelly’s right foot, and another was placed under her head”.
Having said all that, Tom Slemen is a talented writer and there’s bound to be good stuff in his book (just glaze over the section on Kelly, folks). Unlike many authors, Tom has spent time looking at the smaller corners of the case where lurk details that may SEEM unimportant, or impossible to figure out, and he’s emerged with explanations which, to him, seem likely. If nothing else, these revelations are bound to make his book an entertaining, and thereby worthy, read.
So, Tom, I wish you the best of luck with the book and hope to purchase a signed copy from you when it comes out. If you distort the facts, I will call you on it, but I’m sure you’ll understand that it’s all in the name of good scholarship. I hope you know this has all been in good fun (except my query about the folklore tale, as a potential reader of yours, I’d still like an explanation on that) and I hope there’s no hard feelings.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
|
Mr Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 26, 2004 - 4:26 am: |
|
Can Anyone give a link to the story that happened in Hull Please? I tried google and nothings come up aceppt his story. |
Mr Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 26, 2004 - 5:25 am: |
|
Also Mr Slemen if your going to make out that only you and no one else could of solved who he was then people are going to crticise your theory. It's kind of insulting peoples intelligence when theres people who have been trying to solve it for months even years and yet you only researched in 6 months. |
Mal X
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, September 26, 2004 - 10:17 am: |
|
yes and it'll be very interesting to read your book too Tom when it comes out, i'm busy studying VISICA PISCIS at the moment; along with a few friends of mine and D'ONSTON is starting to look very shaky indeed ha ha.
i'm also in contact with James Randi so we'll be waiting for you, revenge will indeed be sweet. |
TomSlemen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, September 25, 2004 - 4:15 pm: |
|
By the way Tom, here's the original copy on the piece you quoted (presumably from the local press website):
http://www.geocities.com/tom_slemen/maybrickdiary.html
Only a British editor would change breasts to "body parts". The research is going well, and the writing; I have unearthed some fascinating gems regarding the Ripper - and his friends.
|
Richard Frakes
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, September 23, 2004 - 8:05 pm: |
|
On Radio up here (Manchester) I heard a book reviewer say Tom Slemen has been offered over two million pounds for his research, and what I heard sounded very convincing to me. I will write to the radio station's book review programme and post their reply. |
TomSlemen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, September 25, 2004 - 3:56 pm: |
|
From one Tom to another, *shakes hands* - just wait until the book's out, I'll give you a copy for free, and you'll see what I mean. The quotes about "body" parts on table were editor's doing, as I cannot mention "breasts" in the local press, even though the crime reports are very "vivid". They called breasts "body parts".
Hope attachement loads; drawing of female human womb by Claude Reignier Conder. |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 220
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 11:18 pm: |
|
Tom,
Thank you for setting me straight on the 'body parts' quote. I found it absolutely remarkable that you'd think that about Kelly after having researched the case for as long as you have. I will post as such on the 'Ripperologist' thread as well. I do, in fact, look forward to the book.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Thomas C. Wescott
Inspector
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 221
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 11:27 pm: |
|
Mal writes: yes and it'll be very interesting to read your book too Tom when it comes out,
Tom replies: Thank you for the interest Mal. However, it will be some time...probably years, before my book comes out.
Mal writes:i'm busy studying VISICA PISCIS at the moment;
Tom replies: Just to make it clear to everyone, Visica Pisces is Ivor Edwards' theory, not mine, and the argument for D'Onston's candidacy as the Ripper certainly doesn't hinge on it. I believe Ivor would agree with that. Having said that, Mal, you might enjoy an article I have coming up in the next issue of Ripper Notes which, in part, is an exploration in the Vesica Piscis idea (though not an endorsement)with some new information.
Mal writes: along with a few friends of mine and D'ONSTON is starting to look very shaky indeed ha ha.
Tom replies: I can understand why you feel that way. I used to believe he was the absolute worst of the contemporary suspects. But then I really started to research the case and agree with Donald Rumbelow that he's worthy of serious consideration. Hopefully, your opinion will change when my book (eventually) comes out. But even if you still don't believe him the Ripper, I think you'll find some neat new stuff in there.
Mal writes: i'm also in contact with James Randi so we'll be waiting for you, revenge will indeed be sweet.
Tom replies: I don't know James Randi, and I'm sure he doesn't know me. Should the name be familiar? Revenge? Whatever do you mean? Good to see you're still around, Mal, and I hope all is well with you. You are, far and away, one of my favorite Ripperphiles.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott
|
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 313
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 11:47 pm: |
|
I'm not sure which Tom "Mal X" was referring to, but James Randi is a famous debunker of supernatural claims. I would think that that comment would be aimed at Tom Slemen, as he is the author of ghost stories, an article claiming that Springheeled Jack was an alien from another planet, and other similar topics.
On the other hand with the D'Onston comment perhaps it was aimed at Tom Wescott. I'm not sure why James Randi would care one way or another. He tackles people who profess to have psychic powers and the like, not generally people writing about a theory that someone killed following trappings of black magic rituals. Saying that ghosts and aliens exist is pro-supernatural, saying that somebody believes in black magic and takes steps to try to follow the teachings isn't quite the same thing.
(Tom, you say you know Mal?)
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 3122
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 6:20 pm: |
|
Here's his "Times" obit Feb 17th 1910.
Robert |
Victorian
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 28, 2004 - 11:13 am: |
|
Well well well Mr Satan do i sense your slightly jealous about mr Slemen's up coming book on the Ripper? Surely the part where you said he's insulting others intelligence because they may have been trying to solve it in months maybe years yet he only researched it in 6 months? Why that must be wrong if he did a broadcast on the subject over two years ago? I would love to hear who you think was the Ripper Mr Satan and your personal theories perhaps? |
TomSlemen
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 29, 2004 - 3:17 pm: |
|
Didn't Sir Arthur Conan Doyle - who invstigated the Oscar Slater case and many other miscarriages of justice - write about fairies and the supernatural Mr Norder? Look, please just wait till the book is out. |
Mr Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 01, 2004 - 7:39 am: |
|
Guess what Victorian I don't give a monkeys about his theory. Either your Mr Slemen himself under a different name or some who thinks hes god and never can be wrong about anything. I questioned that because of the way hes posting when people are asking him fair questions yet he won't answer them using excuses. And the fact that he calls ripperologists armchair ripperolosgists. Also the fact of putting his name in the search engine I get stories which have details changed from other ones like wescott and other guys mentioned. In my opinion I don't think he'll never bring it out, it's been 4 years since he started reasearch and 3 and a half since he finised the research and the fact that his stories have been no longer than 10 pages long. Plus the mara website did make a good point about the ripper not having to be agile like a ninja because the british army wernt taught to be like that they use stealth but you don't have to be super fit to climb over 5 foot walls.
Heres that link again.
http://www.mara.org.uk/reignier_conder.htm
This other link also says that Conder was in Southampton at the time too so what makes Tom's info right and this one wrong then.
Plus Conder had a book out in 1889 so in the previous year wouldn't he be busy with that instead of killing prostitudes?
http://www.btinternet.com/~j.b.w/conder.htm |
Victorian
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, October 02, 2004 - 1:27 pm: |
|
Almost a week has passed and still no word from Mr Satan, i was indeed looking forward to his/her personal theory on who Jack The Ripper may have been. How long have you been researching this Mr Satan? Have you written any books on this subject i may be interested in? I look forward to hearing from you. |
Mr Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, October 01, 2004 - 7:43 am: |
|
Guess what Victorian I don't give a monkeys about his theory. Either your Mr Slemen himself under a different name or some who thinks hes god and never can be wrong about anything. I questioned that because of the way hes posting when people are asking him fair questions yet he won't answer them using excuses. And the fact that he calls ripperologists armchair ripperolosgists. Also the fact of putting his name in the search engine I get stories which have details changed from other ones like wescott and other guys mentioned. In my opinion I don't think he'll never bring it out, it's been 4 years since he started reasearch and 3 and a half since he finised the research and the fact that his stories have been no longer than 10 pages long. Plus the mara website did make a good point about the ripper not having to be agile like a ninja because the british army wernt taught to be like that they use stealth but you don't have to be super fit to climb over 5 foot walls.
Heres that link again.
http://www.mara.org.uk/reignier_conder.htm
This other link also says that Conder was in Southampton at the time too so what makes Tom's info right and this one wrong then.
Plus Conder had a book out in 1889 so in the previous year wouldn't he be busy with that instead of killing prostitudes?
http://www.btinternet.com/~j.b.w/conder.htm |
Victorian
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 04, 2004 - 7:18 pm: |
|
Mr Satan,
Sorry to disappoint you but i am not Mr Slemen and i do not think under any circumstance's Mr Slemen is god, but that comment gave me a good laugh indeed so i thankyou sincerely for that at least. From the look of it Mr Satan, whoever you may be? You seem very bitter towards Mr Slemen, please tell me what your Occupation/Profession is? Are you a ripperologist yourself? As you didn't answer my question in my first post, have you written any books i might be interested in Mr Satan? As it appears you seem to know alot about the Writing Profession.
How is it that you know so much about Mr Slemen i.e:
"it's been 4 years since he started reasearch and 3 and a half since he finised the research"
How is it you know Mr Slemen has actually 'finished his research'?
Makes one think that only the author of the actual 'book' would know when the 'research' has been finished.
And another classic quote of yours Mr Satan
"the fact that his stories have been no longer than 10 pages long."
Are you referring to Mr Slemen's other books, Ghost stories? If so i thankyou once again for a good laugh. Obviously
there is a difference between 'Ghost stories' and a book based on the 'Ripper' and how they are written.
You also say,
"Plus Conder had a book out in 1889 so in the previous year wouldn't he be busy with that instead of killing prostitudes?"
I ask again Mr Satan, Unless you are in the Writing Profession yourself, How would you know?
Everyone of course has a right to his/her own opinion, but your remarks and comments Mr Satan seem to be somewhat slightly 'disturbing' to say the least, one would say a personal 'animosity' against Mr Slemen himself.
I myself have been doing some research of my own on you Mr Satan, Very interesting indeed but that will keep for another time. |
Mr Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 04, 2004 - 11:03 am: |
|
I replied Straight away Victorian/Tom Slemen but it doesn;t show until a moderator approves it due to not being registered. Are you Tom Slemen himself doing this it sounds like your making out hes a god and hes fianlly solved who he was.
Sounds like this when he replied to Tom Wesscott:
You seem quite flustered, and it amuses me. No doubt you'll be grinding your teeth when the book comes out. Do you really have a clue as to who the Ripper was? I imagine you've been trying to find out for a very long time. Perhaps in another hundred years you'd be wiser?
Not only is he insulting peoples intelligence hes making out he can solve any case he wants like the Pru for exmaple if google his name you find it and JonBenet Ramsey murder. Plus he refuses to answer fairly asked questions like the D'onston story. If he can't back up or not have a answer to why he did it and only saying he never then he said he did then how can we take his theory seriously. I found alot of sites about him on google.
I strangely even came up on this site when searching google on his name.
www.slemenshrine.co.uk
It made me laugh my head off too. Also went on various websites he has with the same stories but changes the name of people or details and sets it in the different places like one says Liverpool then the other says California or something like that.
Heres they are.
www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Camera/9599/ghosts.htm
www.tomslemen.tk
Or you can check the Parragon books and the Haunted Liverpool books they have same stories but changed I've seemed to notice. So Victorian my question is why do think hes right and what makes the other conder sites I found to be wrong? |
Mr Cynic
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, October 07, 2004 - 4:13 pm: |
|
Lets face it. Its an unsolveable crime and whatever slant people want to put on it any hope of finding the culprit without the aid of a time machine is long gone.
Ripping tales, fascinating yarns and a pretty penny to be made but fiction based on fact is fiction just as it is in the Mockumentaries recently shown on British TV. |
Mr Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, October 10, 2004 - 7:52 pm: |
|
I agree we will never truly find out who he was without the aid of a time machine which is not possible in this era of time.
A lot of info is fascinating indeed. But if you research into something like the ripper dodging questions when there fair one and calling people stupid and not accepting anything else, then you better be able to take criticism and have good proof. |
GothicBlackRaven
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 18, 2004 - 6:50 am: |
|
I just wondered why Conder is not mentioned at all (despite the new evidence) in the main suspects list on this site. |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 332
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 20, 2004 - 4:23 pm: |
|
GothicBlackRaven,
Lots of suspects don't get mentioned on the main suspect list. The webmaster, Stephen, doesn't get a chance to update those all that often.
But as far as Conder goes, there is no new evidence (or any evidence at all for that matter) that I know of. Tom Slemen claims to have some but hasn't told anyone what it is.
Until his book is out, all we have is a huge question mark when it comes to why anyone should consider Conder a suspect. If Stephen listed every single last person anyone has ever claimed was the Ripper, the suspect page would collapse under its own weight from the sheer density of most of those claims.
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes
|
Stephen P. Ryder
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 3150
Registered: 10-1997
| | Posted on Thursday, October 21, 2004 - 9:23 am: |
|
Would love to get a precis on Conder up on the Suspects page, just a matter of finding the time. If Mr. Slemen would wish to contribute a short survey of his suspect I'd of course be happy to post it.
Stephen P. Ryder, Exec. Editor
Casebook: Jack the Ripper
|
GothicBlackRaven
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 25, 2004 - 11:44 am: |
|
Dan - I went along to his presention on Jack The Ripper at Woolton Hall, Liverpool a few months ago. He left me in no doubt to his theory at the end of it, and I am now looking forward to getting the book to convince my sister (who is adamant that the Maybrick diary was factual). |
Mr George T Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 25, 2004 - 2:58 pm: |
|
You'll most likely be doing that when the books out from the sound of Mr Slemen's post then. Heard that Mr Slemen said the five prostitudes were curriers for the Fenians or something like that too. I would like to see the publicity for this book when it comes out though and see how he answers the critics since researching something like the Ripper you got to keep your cool. |
Mr George T Satan
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, October 25, 2004 - 2:58 pm: |
|
You'll most likely be doing that when the books out from the sound of Mr Slemen's post then. Heard that Mr Slemen said the five prostitudes were curriers for the Fenians or something like that too. I would like to see the publicity for this book when it comes out though and see how he answers the critics since researching something like the Ripper you got to keep your cool. |
Dan Norder
Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 338
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 12:51 pm: |
|
Hi GothicBlackRaven,
You wrote:
"He left me in no doubt to his theory at the end of it, and I am now looking forward to getting the book to convince my sister (who is adamant that the Maybrick diary was factual)."
Sounds like you have quite a battle ahead of you, full of sound and fury...
Dan Norder, editor, Ripper Notes
|
GothicBlackRaven
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, November 02, 2004 - 5:21 am: |
|
Thats sisters for you Dan, LOL!!! Overall I am looking forward to the book coming out to hear the arguments against it. I am sure everybody on here will find it interesting reading though, for one reason or another. |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, November 05, 2004 - 1:09 am: |
|
Hi Cynic,
I disagree I feel the answer is out there. Somebody is just going to have to put the facts all together in the right order. Getting people to believe the explanation is a whole different story.
Your friend,CB |
GothicBlackRaven
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 09, 2005 - 3:09 pm: |
|
I wonder if we are any closer to the book being released? Looking forward to it. |
Pentagram
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2005 - 3:15 pm: |
|
Does anyone have a link to the story that actually happened in Hull? I can only find Slemen's version. I don't know about the book though I mean if theres been lectures on it and he has been able to tell his version of it then why is there a problem writing it and getting published? It's been years since it was researched. |
Pentagram
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 15, 2005 - 3:24 pm: |
|
To be honest though I don't think Tom is taking his own theory seriously. He would of took it further and brought the book out now instead of insulting people and thinking there jelous because he thinks his theories the one when theres so many! Even on here he wern't taking posts seriously and getting amused off insults. |
Pentagram
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, February 19, 2005 - 8:45 pm: |
|
A post from Slemen off his official forum.
TomSlemen
Site Admin
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 7
Location: Liverpool, UK
Posted: Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:12 am Post subject: Ripper book
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The book is still being written research is continuing, in fact I have just hired a researcher to help me out, because so much material is being unearthed. As soon as the book's ready I'll post it on here.
That is from.
http://slemenforum.6.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=65
If he hasn't finished his reaserch then why do articles say he has and why did he do talks on it? |
Hayley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, March 10, 2005 - 8:57 pm: |
|
Hi i tried that link you posted pentagram but theres nothing there anyway i just wanted to know if you had actually asked this man tom slemen about the book hes writing i'm sure he'd tell you the reasons? |
Pentagram
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 5:26 pm: |
|
He must of deleted it then since he acts strange when questioned about the ripper. Strange though when I hear he claims to keep getting new facts from people since it's his theory not theirs. Plus Conder was working on a book at the time so this sounds more unlikely to me. |
Hayley
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 06, 2005 - 12:07 am: |
|
What do you mean he acts strange?i would of thought theres new or different facts being found everyday just a case of reading his material when it comes out |
Pentagram
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, April 09, 2005 - 6:08 pm: |
|
Well when he's been questioned on the ripper or has been shown other so called facts he can be agressive about it or dodges a question as what he posted in this topic above.
But if he's not finished looking up matierial on it then why give a whole story in a talk and charge a £5 admission to hear it when it's not finisihed. He seems to keep coming up with different things when asked though.
Oh yeah like when Wesscott(one of the above posts) asked him a fair question about using someone elses story and changing it and claiming it as a true folklore, why didn't he answer it? He just dodged it and resorted to insults and being amused off it. |
MTR
Sergeant
Username: Rigby
Post Number: 23
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, October 20, 2005 - 4:27 am: |
|
http://slemenforum.6.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=414&highlight=
Tom Slemen (Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:13 am):
"...The book will be out in 2006, and has only been held up by the wealth of new information researchers have unearthed. No one wants the book out sooner than me, but I want to get as much into it as possible, and have checked, re-checked, and cross-checked all the factual information. I really do think the book will not only make a mockery of the hackneyed Tumblety-Maybrick-Duke of Clarence-Gull-Barnett-Uncle Jack theories, it will be a very hard act to follow. One television producer wants to serialise it as a TV drama but I want it in print before that. Thanks for being superhumanly patient, it will be worth the wait, believe me." |
