|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Donald Souden
Chief Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 532
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 7:51 pm: | 
|
Colin,
See what you started. Anyway, if you are truly interested in the Ripper and in making further posts I think Jane's advice is on target.
As for your comment about Jack's body count, though his number of known victims is much less than that of the other murderers you mentioned he does have one distinction they do not -- he was never caught, never even identified so far as we know. That, I would suggest, accounts for much of his fascination today.
Don.
"He was so bad at foreign languages he needed subtitles to watch Marcel Marceau."
|
Stan Russo
Detective Sergeant
Username: Stan
Post Number: 150
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 8:26 pm: |
|
Donald,
Whoa whoa whoa there. What's with the information to Colin about Jack's body count? Where have I seen something like that before? Oh yes, in my post which you said wasn't helpful.
My post (not helpful):
Why do you emphatically believe there were only 5 victims? Add some of your research as to why you believe the canon, if those are the 5 you believe, are the true and only victims of 'JTR'.
Your post (helpful):
As for your comment about Jack's body count, though his number of known victims is much less than that of the other murderers you mentioned he does have one distinction they do not -- he was never caught, never even identified so far as we know. That, I would suggest, accounts for much of his fascination today.
I guess unless you give the advice on what you feel is the appropriate topic of discussion it's not helpful. They have a word for people like that Donald. It's called a hypocrit.
Colin,
Listen to Donald, because his answers are much better than mine, not because they actually are, but because he believes they are, so they must be.
Jane,
As far as Colin's honest opinion, why does he get the "out of jail free card", yet an author like Cornwell, whose whole book was about as deep as Colin's post, gets lambasted by all?
There's a word for that. It's called hypocritical.
If you don't like my advice that i offered to Colin then that's fine with me. It's just par for the course. Although the irony is you guys from "Diary World" seemed to have taken my advice when I said you should branch out and infect other threads of the boards with your narrow minded opinions and holier than thou attitudes.
From Day 1 I've always said I call them how I see them. It's the act of a hypocrit to bash my advice, then offer advice that is even less helpful to the whole point of why this newcomer believes so emphatically that there are 5 victims. It's a hypocritical act to lambaste one author for expressing opinions without any foundation yet not hold all up to those same standards. You have seemed to elevate Colin to some heirarchial level. All because you disagree with my comments on why people shouldn't just spout opinions emphatically without offering any background information. I call Cornwell on it, and I owe it to Colin to do the same.
Point blank this site has lost many noted authors for the exact reasons I have listed above, and this crap still continues. These authors used to answer serious questions when they were asked and help people gain knowledge about the case, but the constant supply of BS has made it not worth their while to help anymore. And for a long time you guys have gotten a free pass. But not from me. When I see it, I call you on it. And the reality is that you guys just don't like it. That's really just it. Hopefully Colin will study the boards and see what is so plainly obvious to most.
When you want a question answered people know where to come to. When you want indignation, superiority, mocking, lambasting and outright hypocrisy, go visit the deluded inhabitants of "Diary World".
SJR |
Jane Coram
Inspector
Username: Jcoram
Post Number: 398
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 8:44 pm: |
|
Hi Stan,
Just a very quick post as enough of this thread has been taken up already ...........
Ridicule does not encourage learning.....it inhibits.........neither does it encourage new ideas or personal growth. That isn't a lecture, just what every educator is told in their first week of their own learning curve.
And if you can't see the difference between your post and Don's then there really isn't any more to say on it.
Jane
Oh and by the way, I have never taken any part in the diary debates, as they are not my field of expertise........so I can only assume that you weren't refering to me in that respect in the above post. Just to clarify, in case there is any misunderstanding.
(Message edited by jcoram on April 27, 2005) |
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 151
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 9:09 pm: |
|
Jane,
You may be 100% right. Ridicule may not encourage learning, and perhpas my post can be taken as ridiculing Colin, in order to further a more important point. I can make the distinction that I may not be right all the time, or in every endeavor I undertake.
On that note, I publicly challenge you or Donald Souden, or any other person to show me one post, from those who object to my post to Colin, where Patricia Cornwell is extended the same courtesies that Colin seems to have had thrust upon him.
While I may have been wrong for ridiculing Colin, although my main intention was to show that just sprouting opinions that are presented as fact, without backing them up with anything, is detrimental to the case. And i held Colin to those same standards, whether he is a newcomer or not. And for those who selectively hold certain individuals to different standards, I call them out on that.
As far as "Diary World" goes, I don't venture into that insane area because going around in circles makes me dizzy, but I recognize that deluded logic being transferred over to this thread, perhaps taking my advice in an earlier post this week. So if you believe that you do not have to hold Colin to the same standards as Cornwell, then perhaps you can become an honorary member of "Diary World", which has less to do with the Diary and actually more to do with existing in a fantasy world unto their own, where no steady rules apply.
And if Colin doesn;t think I helped him with his statements, in working toward a better way to present them in a public forum, then so be it. He can continue to just randomly say stuff, whenever he wants. No substantiation needed. I'll continue to call him out on it, just as I do to Cornwell and every post like that I see.
SJR |
Howard Brown
Inspector
Username: Howard
Post Number: 345
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 - 10:22 pm: |
|
Yo folks...chill.
Answer your buddy's question over here...
Which venereal disease did Kelly get in 1882?
Syphilis ? No cure until the mid 1940's...
Anyone know? I read Tully's book and it simply says, "venereal disease".
Thanks.....now go back and fight. |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2250
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 3:59 am: |
|
hello!! (I'm sorry to infect something, but hey!)
you guys really did give Colin a perfect demonstration of Ripperology!
Stan,
here is the difference between Coin and Cornwell,
Colin made an unregistered post on an internet site.
Cornwell spent millions of pounds researching a book.
Surely it is acceptable to expect more from the latter. No offence to Colin.
Jenni
ps you have diary world bang to rights!
"It's time to give a damn, Let's work together come on"
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3409
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 6:37 am: |
|
Howie, my friend
Just an elaboration and clarification:
Actually, I am not so sure there wasn't a "cure" for syphilis and other veneral diseases in Victorian times -- mercury treatment was wide in use and with quite a lot of success, as long as the illness hadn't reached the lethal stages.
The treatment in itself was dangerous and painful, and caused other severe side-effects, but if it was set in during an early stage of the illness, it was rather effective.
The problem is, since those first stages often retraced by themselves anyway after some weeks, it was impossible to know, if it was the mercury cure that did it, or if it was part of the natural process of the illness.
However, for the third and final stage of syphilis (with insanity, nerve damages and death as main components), there was with certainty no cure until -- as you say -- the 1940s, when antibiotics came in use.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on April 28, 2005)
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 152
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 2:31 pm: |
|
Jennifer,
I have thought about your post for about 8 seconds and come to the conclusion that you are absolutely wrong.
Holding Cornwell to some higher standard is not fair. Its absolutely not fair to Colin, who might earnestly want to learn about the case.
This isn't about how much money someone spends on research. You are talking about apples and oranges. Should I be held to a higher standard than you because I spent more money researching the case for my book? That's not fair to you. By that logic authors like Begg, Evans, Sugden, Paley and the like should be held to higher standards because they spent more money on the case than I did. That's not fair to me. I want to be held to those same standards. Whether the standards are met, now thats another apples and oranges situation. But I want to be held to them.
And I shall hold Colin to them just the same as I hold Patty Cornwell to them. Imagine a world within the case where random opinion offered as fact without so much as basic substantiation, didn't exist.
That's a case world I wan't to be a part of. That's how we should work together. This is supposed to be an academic website dedicated to an horrific set of unsolved murders, not a toddler's 7th birthday at Chucky Cheese where everyone should be able to just shout opinion, yet shout it as fact. Because that's what Colin did. Even though he uses the words "I believe", he doesn't offer any reasoning behind why he believes, and doesn't ask anyone to comment on his beliefs as to whether they are solid in foundation. That's stating opinion, his opinion or beliefs, as fact. Cornwell shouldn't do it. I don't do it. You don't catch Begg, Fido, Evans and the like doing it, because they know its wrong. And when newcomers like Colin do it they should be made aware how wrong it is.
SJR
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2276
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 3:56 am: |
|
Hi Stan,
whatever you say.
I feel we stray off point
Jenni
"It's time to give a damn, Let's work together come on"
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1610
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 4:29 am: |
|
Colin,
Colin Ireland?
That is an unfortunate name to have.
Monty
Doc-tor? The Doc-tor??? - Dalek
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2278
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 4:40 am: |
|
No, I admit it you've lost me there.
Why is it?
Jenni
"It's time to give a damn, Let's work together come on"
|
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1837
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 4:54 am: |
|
Stan,
Most of us on here dont actually aspire to become published writers.Having said that the distinction between fact and fiction in this particular case has to be somewhat arbitrary
simply because it happened so long ago and much of the "factual" side has been lost.
I myself would therefore go to someone like Paul Begg or Chris Scott for "facts" or this casebook
for reports,census information etc and to Donald Rumbelow or AP Wolf and a number of other authors for an interpretation of some of these "facts".
I would be pretty bored "just" reading information and facts actually and feel that the function of a "writer" is to dress these facts in interesting and colourful and exciting language language while being as accurate with the facts as possible.
Natal;ie
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1611
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 5:33 am: |
|
Jenn,
Colin Ireland was/is? a Serial Killer who murdered Gay men in London during the early 1990s.
I believe he got 5. He made calls to the police and the media.
A very similar story.
Cheers,
Monty
Doc-tor? The Doc-tor??? - Dalek
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2279
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 6:16 am: |
|
Oh i see,
so basically the whole post was a joke to start with.
Jenni
"It's time to give a damn, Let's work together come on"
|
Monty
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Monty
Post Number: 1612
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 6:45 am: |
|
Jenn,
Not saying that at all.
Just commenting that Mr Ireland has an unfortunate name.
Monty
Doc-tor? The Doc-tor??? - Dalek
|
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 2280
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 6:56 am: |
|
hi Monty,
oh ok my mistake.
i hate to make mistakes as well
Jenni
"It's time to give a damn, Let's work together come on"
|
Lars Nordman
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 28, 2005 - 4:53 am: |
|
This rocks! Much better than Diary World!
;-)
Lars |
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 153
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 4:55 pm: |
|
Natalie,
I'm sorry but you have missed the point entirely.
The point: - Everyone should be held to the same standards. Or else its demeaning for the people that are held to lesser standards.
My understanding of the problem with my idea is that Colin, because he is newer and hasn't invested as much money or time in the case, should be treated with kid gloves. That to me is not fair to Colin. Why not just pet his head and say "good boy", whenever he spouts his opinion as fact, without backing it up with anything that would make us understand why he thinks that.
I'm not saying his belief is wrong or his belief is right. thats not the point. The point is, once again - give us some reason for why you believe this idea about the murderer. We expect it out of those we consider experts. Why shouldn't we expect it out of those who want to learn more ande comment on the case? Re-read his post Natalie. it's not as if he stated that opinion and then asked for feedback. That is a wholly different animal.
SJR |
Natalie Severn
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Severn
Post Number: 1843
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 5:25 pm: |
|
Stan,
I realised that was your point and I agreed with you as a matter of fact.
I came in on the matter of writers because
I disagreed with an earlier post of yours on this thread where you were pointing out that Begg,Fido etc dont post here anymore.
I dont think it really matters.It would be good if they did but we have other people here with a wide range of talent
including published writers -your good self included!The casebook is so much the richer for all the variety!
Natalie |
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 154
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 11:11 pm: |
|
Natalie,
I agree variety is important, and necessary as the case invariably becomes stale after awhile.
I for one wished the great historians of the case would have stayed and done what I do, call a spade a spade. They chose another path, and i respect them for that. My way is just to call people on their crap, but to think that the casebook is actually richer due to their absence is arguably laughable.
Here's another concept that most people do not understand when it comes to those three authors in particular. It's a theoretical concept so bear with me. Line all 3 of them up in a room and ask them to reveal who they believe the murderer was, and why. As most who know the case also know that all three favor different suspects and motives for murder. As a result, at least 2 of them are automatically wrong. Basic mathematical certainty.
So it's not that I exault those three authors above the opinions of the newcomers. But there are questions about the case that they would know simply due to their storied background in studying the case. I'd put my knowledge of this case up against anyone's knowledge and if you know any of those three authors ask them how many times I have asked them a case related question? Tons of times.
It is important to have varied opinions and theories, but it does seem a shame that certain people have driven away those with an abundance of knowledge on the murders, that could help even lowly newbie authors like myself.
SJR |
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 155
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, April 29, 2005 - 11:19 pm: |
|
To all,
Back to the actual point of this thread. is James Kelly a good suspect?
My own answer is absolutely not. From a theoretical perspective James Kelly is an awful suspect due in large part to the fact that after escaping from Broadmoor in January of 1888 he would not have waited around England for 6 months, before then starting to murder prostitutes.
This of course does not eliminate him from consideration as a suspect, because there has been no proof as to his whereabouts during the time of the murders. One would think that Kelly would have left London after escaping, and realistically not return to London to commit senseless murders. Logically there is no foundation for his candidacy. Yet to eliminate him completely is foolhardy.
Any thoughs?
SJR |
Dan Norder
Chief Inspector
Username: Dannorder
Post Number: 644
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 2:41 am: |
|
Hi Stan,
My thoughts are that a known killer with a history of mental illness, a strong reason to hate prostitutes, experience slashing the neck of a woman, and familiarity with the East End and who can't be traced for the very important time period in question is a heck of a lot better candidate than the vast majority of them out there.
There is no real evidence that would indicate he was involved, but he's at least the right general type we should be looking at and, unlike what passes for suspects in most theories, there is no evidence (at least not yet anyway, as far as I know) that points against the idea that he was involved.
So that's not exactly a thumbs up from me but looking pretty good comparatively for not getting a thumbs down.
Dan Norder, Editor
Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
 Profile  Email  Dissertations  Website
|
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 156
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 2:56 am: |
|
Dan,
Interesting.
Since we are working from a theoretical perspective doesn't it bother you that Kelly escaped from Broadmoor at the end of January, yet the first murder was not committed until the first week in August?
Strictly from a logistical standpoint doesn't that push James Kelly toward the "probably not" side? It is a hard hurdle to overcome, that Kelly, an escaped criminal, remains in London for the next 10 months.
SJR
|
Restless Spirit
Sergeant
Username: Judyj
Post Number: 48
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 7:23 am: |
|
Dan
I agree with you with respect to Kelly. He has always been a favourite suspect of mine. It is true that he didn't make an appearance for some months, however, if I read correctly, he was hidden by friends and was in the position financially to pay for their silence. Emerging only when he felt confident to do so. Remember Jack was no doubt mad, sadistic etc, etc, but was also smart enough to avoid capture and for that matter left no clues to point to him.
I think he makes a really good suspect, I have since I read Tully's book.
Stan
Certainly no offence is directed towards you. I read your book recently on Jack the Ripper Suspects and enjoyed it from beginning to end. You are no doubt well versed on this topic, an excellent author with a no nonsense approach to the obvious B>S> we have so often come across in our quest to find J t R.
all the best
Restless Spirit
|
Glenn G. Lauritz Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3416
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 7:30 am: |
|
Dan,
A good post that pretty much took the words right out of my mouth. I agree.
All the best
G. Andersson, author/crime historian
Sweden
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 387
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 11:16 am: |
|
" I read your book recently on Jack the Ripper Suspects and enjoyed it from beginning to end. "
Let me echo that -- Stan's book is great and deserves a place next to the critical JtR reference books, such as the A-Z.
Sir Robert
'Tempus Omnia Revelat'
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Stan Russo
Inspector
Username: Stan
Post Number: 157
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, April 30, 2005 - 2:52 pm: |
|
Restless and Sir Robert,
Thanks for the kind words about my book.
Glenn,
I'm glad you agree with Dan.
Dan,
Is it possible that a pre-conceived notion regarding what wer expect the murderer to be can cloud the issue and deflect logistical fallacies, such as the remaining in London for 10 months after a prison escape? I once showed my actual theory to a noted researcher in the case and his response was that my deductions were excellent and well researched yet my conclusion just did not jibe with his own pre-conceived notions on who the murderer was.
I can produce the name of a suspect who mirrors the criminal history of James Kelly, with respect to the items pointed out by Dan, which took the words right out of Glenn's mouth. That suspect doesn't have the detrimental factor of having escaped from a London criminal asylum 7 months prior to going on a mini-murder spree.
So by that logic does Kelly now becomes less of a tangible suspect because that other suspect is more tangible? That is the problem I have with including suspects based on a general profile of what the murderer should be.
Most importantly the murderer was never caught, therefore a full profile can not be accurately used against 'JTR', because we just don't know for sure how clever the murderer was. To escape detection we might be willing to say that all the actions of the murderer were in fact contradictory to his outward public profile, thus actually eliminating James Kelly, and other criminals as suspects.
Just some thoughts.
There are however leaps forward that can be made, but dissenting opinions on certain factual deductions severely hurt that progress.
SJR |
A Smith
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 8:01 am: |
|
Stan
How do we know where he was in the period between escaping and Nicolls' murder? How do we know that Polly was the first victim?
The fact that he was named as a suspect at the time and his former residence was raided on the morning of the discovery at Millers Court indicate that he was suspected at the time.
Was he cleared?
I dont know, nor I suggest do you.
This post is not a gauntlet being thrown down as an invitation to criticise each others ideas for about 6 posts but a genuine enquiry as to your thoughts.
Alan |
Mikael
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 7:09 pm: |
|
Many here appear to discard Kelly on the basis that January-September is an awful amount of time for a serial killer to be idle and not do anything.
Well... straight from the Casebook:
(end of Jan-beginning of Feb) "Kelly heads for London by a roundabout route to escape detection. The journey takes 4 days and ends at a lodging-house in the docks where he lies up for a week or more.
February 1888 - James Monro, head of the Metropolitan Police CID, takes a particular interest in the case.
February - June 1888 - Having obtained money from friends Kelly heads to Liverpool. He walks the whole way to avoid being spotted on public transport. He is harboured by relatives for a while. After obtaining more money from friends he resolves to escape to the Continent. He sets off walking again to Harwich, where he arranges to work his passage on a ship. He is spotted on the deck by a sharp-eyed policeman and narrowly escapes. He heads back to London, arriving sometime before the end of June."
I think the timing is almost perfect for the murders, especially if we include some of the earlier victims.
The only problem is: if he really had a strong desire to go back to the East End and mutilate prostitutes who might have given him syphillys, why was he so keen to escape to the continent... it appears Kelly was almost forced back into London in the summer of 1888. Maybe the murders weren't planned at all though and he just acted spontaneously (although this weakens the motive). |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page