Archive through March 07, 2001

** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **

Archive through March 07, 2001

Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: Specific Victims: Catherine Eddowes: The Goulston Street Graffito: Archive through March 07, 2001

Author: stephen stanley Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 05:21 pm
As one who reads the Boards much more than he contributes..I add my voice..Don't go Tris. Steve S
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 05:36 pm
Dear All, I would kiss all your thumbs better if I could -blood however, does funny things to me. A dab of iodene? And if you want a good joke..."they" refuse to let me be myself, finally...I am forever, condemned to be bloody "Rosemary"! Revenge is a dish best served cold, eh Joseph. Erm...Rosemary
Author: Joseph Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 06:30 pm
Dear Ms. Bakys, I carry no "weight" at this web site whatsoever. I have made some very dear friends, and assorted acquaintances, here at the Casebook because there is a mutual respect thing happenin'. I don't believe we constitute your idea of a "voting block"; my friends don't hesitate to tell me when they think I full of baloney. I have never made an effort to persuade any of the folks I know here to my way of thinking. If my arguments are sound and valid, I'll have their support, if not, I won't. You give me the impression that you have a sermon you need to preach, so please continue to give everyone the best view possible of who you are, and who you identify with. By Rosemary O'Ryan on Tuesday, February 27, 2001 - 07:57 pm: Edit Dear Jade and Joseph, The truth is... Love, Rosemary, Davidoz, Ed. The above message, by the Hydra, is self explanatory to most everyone. I lumped you together with this Jackanapes because you seemed to conduct yourself as its "straight man". It made a fool of you, and you bent to kiss it's boot; it engaged in "spamming" multiple threads with it's stupidity, and you chose to indulge this behavior by painting it as avant garde chic. Whether you like it or not, we are judged by the company we keep. I prefer the company of Caz, Paul Begg, Rick Parminter, Tom Wescott et al. Who do you prefer? Respectfully ma'am, you are talking like a duck, so...... You have also managed to completely miss the point of my message (By Joseph, Monday, March 05, 2001 - 10:00 pm); it must have gone over your head as you were arranging your soapbox. My question, and the accompanying explanation of my point of view is an effort to establish the parameters of what the board moderators feel is acceptable behavior here, as opposed to the chatsky. Ozzie, a contributor of frantic twaddle, is at the "twit" end of a spectrum, while a gentleman like Mr. George, a contributor of factual information and serious discussion, is at the opposite pole. There is plenty of room between these extremes ("dain bramage" and sensible good humor) for people to expand their thoughts, to make friends, and have an enjoyable experience; they can speculate wildly, conservatively, or not at all if they choose. I don't think one individual posing as a number of different personalities is necessarily outside the spectrum, unless one of their talking heads diminishes a discussion by pretending to offer serious input, only to turn around and belittle the other participants for believing him/her/it, but that's my opinion; I'd like to find out where the moderator/administrator draws the line, on this issue. "If Joseph is allowed to continue making up nasty allegations against posters who are perhaps odd, outspoken, or even stick up for themsleves then anybody that he accuses of being Rosemary/Davidoz is going to have a hard time on these boards. I have made a friend on here whom I email privately, (not Ed) although I do email Ed also now I will have to email him and tell him we can't chat anymore because the seed of doubt has been sown, he might not take me seriously, he might but I don't want to compromise him, just a little doubt he has might make him uncomfortable.. Thats the damage people like Joseph do." (By Bakys, Tuesday, March 06, 2001 - 12:14 pm) Accusing me of Making up nasty allegations is a serious implication. Are you sure you want to go there? Do you have any evidence to support your statement that I am "making up" anything at all; if you don't, then I strongly suggest you retract that statement real soon. "Thats the damage people like Joseph do". Where is your proof that I am doing any damage? Your value system is askew Ms. Bakys; you defend a Jackanapes who was banned from the Casebook for disruptive behavior, and then you insinuate that I belong to a judgmental caste that perpetrates damage on the reputations of unusual personalities. Where is your sense of right and wrong? I supported the right of the entity known as Ed Carter to state his hypothesis free from chastisement, I was polite to the entity calling itself Rosemary O'Ryan; I exchanged good humor, and intellectual tèt a tèt with the anus known as Davidoz. Where is your proof that I belong to a group of people, engaging in social ostracism? You may also want to re-think that statement. BTW, You need not apologize, however, you do need to re-evaluate your habit of making accusations without portfolio. Hi Alegria, I understand, and agree that the formats of the chat room and the Casebook are different, and need different degrees of leeway for personal expression. I am interested in knowing, what level of bizarrity is acceptable for one person posting with multiple screen names. Is it permissible for them to simply interrupt with inane remarks, or do they have to be foaming at the mouth? Does the tolerance level depend on the serious or casual tone of the conversation? Is there any conversation where inanity is inappropriate? Hey Tom, My attitude is: If it waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck, draw your own conclusions. Rick, If I have offended you in any way, please accept my apologies.
Author: David M. Radka Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 06:35 pm
I (we) admit it! Joseph Triola and David Radka are one and the same! Like the hermophroditic Hindu deity Ardanari Iswara, we are male and female persons joined together in a single body, experiencing life as One. Talking about two joining together as one--let me ask if people here have a tendency (like me/Joseph) to curl up at bedtime with the works of famous Ripperologists. We do. Last night we had Martin Fido in bed with us, the night before Stewart Evans. Begg, Sugden, Harris and others have all been in there too, and sometimes two or more of them at once! Are we alone in this bibliographical eros, or do others have confession to make here as well? KissKiss, Joseph/David
Author: Joseph Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 06:50 pm
Mr. Radka you surprise me. I never thought you'd give me top billing. :-)
Author: Warwick Parminter Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 07:40 pm
Hello JosephJ Youve got nothing to apologise for, we're mates aren't we? I do wish you and Jade would "kiss" and make up though. I quite enjoy the presence of both of you, Best regards Rick
Author: Tom Wescott Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 07:54 pm
Hello, Man, this is some strange sh*t. I must admit that the side of me who enjoys mindless controversy is having a bit of fun with it, though...Ed is obsessed with bricks, Jade is a typical girl, and Rosemary can't decide how her name is spelled (scroll up to her next to last post). I was recently in the middle of a big debate on the Eddowes board, but at least it hinted of social relevance. This stuff is straight off the playground. I think Joseph had every right to post what he did. If someone thinks I may be getting taken for a fool, I'd want them to tell me. However, by posting that accusation without positive proof to back it up, Joseph would have had to expect a backlash, which Jade had every right to give. If you ask me, the jury is out, and frankly I don't care as long as their contributions are worthwhile at least some of the time. Some of you people need to stop being so sensitive. I wouldn't write something on here for the sole purpose of making someone angry or upset, but by the same token I'm not going to sugarcoat everything I say for fear of striking a nerve with the little sewing circle of bleeding hearts on here. I think we all need to just chill out a little. To some of you I say... JOSEPH - You may be wrong, at least partially. JADE - If he's wrong, leave it alone. People will figure it out for themselves. If he's right, adios. ROSEMARY - Get a life. ED - Put down the bricks and stop staring at that photo of Mary's table. PAUL - Please don't put Victoria on the cover again. DAVID - Imagine having Shirley Harrison in bed - Blah!!! (see photo in 'Interviews' section). TRISTON - I've been where you're at, buddy. Being the new guy can be a bit overwhelming and it's natural to be a little insecure at first. It wears off, I promise. STEPHEN STANLEY - Let your voice be heard! We need more fresh opinions from men such as yourself. STEPHEN RYDER - Where'd these gay little happy face icons come from? WALTER - Who the hell are you and why are you running the chatroom? ALEGRIA - I'll bet if you had a dime for everytime someone called you 'Algebra'... SYBIL - Too many cooks in the kitchen... As you might imagine, most of the above posts were done in fun, something that seems to be lacking in here these days. Yours truly, Tom Wescott
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 08:18 pm
Dear Rosemary, Now I am definitely confused. Welcome to Hell! Tom Wescott.
Author: Joseph Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 08:33 pm
Hi Rick, Someone once said to me that I should relax, and let a particular issue drop because so and so got under my skin and I was pursuing the thing for personal satisfaction. I had to laugh at that summation, because nothing gets under my skin, at all. Having said that, I can assure you that, if in fact Ms. Bakys is an individual apart from Erm, then perhaps we could, at the least, be civil, I won't hold a grudge. But for now, I'll stand by my conviction; it doesn't take a Sam Spade to uncover who is who. Ms. O'Ryan, The uninitiated must rely on literature or the movies for their source of insight; to me, revenge is an art form. Ms. Bakys, "I didn't understand were Joseph was coming from to be honest", (Bakys, Wednesday, February 28, 2001 - 05:03 pm) My observation is: You were right the first time; stick with it. Tom, dude, you crack me up man no s--t. Keep on rockin'.
Author: Jeff Bloomfield Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 10:02 pm
It's a rather sad commentary on this Board that a lot of time gets wasted on personal confrontations rather than research. This thread is supposed to be about the graffiti on Goulston Street, and it has ended in a lot of confrontations. Let's try to get back to the Goulston Street graffiti folks. And it's unnecessary for people who might contribute to silence themselves by leaving the Board. Let's just drop the rancor, and resume where we were before it began. I have a question. Has anybody found any case regarding an actual murder (of any type) prior to 1888, where a clue was written upon a wall near the murder site? Jeff
Author: Tom Wescott Tuesday, 06 March 2001 - 11:41 pm
Jeff, You know what? That's a helluva good question. None come to my mind. I'll have to look into it. Anybody else? Yours truly, Tom Wescott
Author: Jade Bakys Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 03:01 am
Joseph I am really not interested in what you think. Jade
Author: Joseph Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 07:12 am
Ms. Bakys, You still haven't answered my question. "Do you have any evidence to support your statement that I am "making up" anything at all; if you don't, then I strongly suggest you retract that statement real soon". You seem to be afraid to address this issue also. "Thats the damage people like Joseph do". Where is your proof that I am doing any damage? Your value system is askew Ms. Bakys; you defend a Jackanapes who was banned from the Casebook for disruptive behavior, and then you insinuate that I belong to a judgmental caste that perpetrates damage on the reputations of unusual personalities. Where is your sense of right and wrong? I supported the right of the entity known as Ed Carter to state his hypothesis free from chastisement, I was polite to the entity calling itself Rosemary O'Ryan; I exchanged good humor, and intellectual tèt a tèt with the anus known as Davidoz. Where is your proof that I belong to a group of people, engaging in social ostracism? You may also want to re-think that statement. These are legitimate questions, and you should have no trouble answering them, unless, of course, you are growing out of the neck of a large lizard.
Author: Triston Marc Bunker Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 07:25 am
Back By popular demand (you are a sentimental bunch when you all get going aren't you, thanks) Now, this graffiti, I have a question about it. As we all know it was removed to prevent any racial tension or hatred. So my question being Were Joe Public aware of the graffiti shortly after it was removed (I.E it was leaked to them)? And if so are there any corospondence about it between the police and the vigilance comittee lurking about that may be worthwhile reading (maybe in the countless books doing the circuit? Tris (Lord of The Space Monkeys)
Author: Martin Fido Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 07:32 am
Yup. The only cases I can think of are the later to much later ones of W.H.Bury, William Heirens, and the Manson family at three sites. Martin Fido
Author: Martin Fido Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 07:50 am
Welcome back, Tris. I'm sorry you got between me and the postings to Jeff and Tom to which I was responding. Martin F
Author: Alegria Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 08:05 am
Joseph, Could you e-mail me please? I have some information to share that might cause you to abandon your three-headed hydra scenario. You may then take up the three separate hydras working in collusion if you choose. Ally
Author: Jade Bakys Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 08:25 am
Joseph like I said please drop it, I am sure you will get your proof soon enough, and if and when you do, I don't want an apology either. If one good thing comes out of this it is that maybe you will not be so quick to accuse others of being involved in what ever game you have been playing.
Author: Caroline Anne Morris Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 09:12 am
Hi All, Hi Martin, I will let Keith have that post you mentioned, although I won't be giving him anything else from this thread! He's probably been overdosing on poison penpals with personal problems as it is! :-) Great fun all this - thanks to Tom, Joseph, David, Martin, Alegria, Rick, Jeff and others (you know who you are) who have established themselves as being genuinely interested in learning or contributing to everyone's knowledge here. I do feel sorry for those (of indeterminate number) who seem to be here for another purpose entirely. Sometimes they manage to disguise their cry (or cries) for help even from themselves, so it's no wonder we are confused by it all, and I can see why I should be thinking more of pity than ridicule or anger. But then someone spoils it all by saying something stoopid like "Joseph is the man who should be blamed for everything" and I can then taste what this thing is all about, and how long it has been eating away at the poor souls-in-collusion. This situation, I firmly believe, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 2001 newcomers. Love, Caz PS I fully admit to being a twit sometimes, though not always. I guessed Peter would know about Tris being a 'real' person. But, to take a leaf out of Peter's book, I throw this in as a mere observation and let others make of it what they will.
Author: Jade Bakys Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 10:18 am
Hi Caroline so because I have said that Joseph is the instigator of these games that I am Davidoz now! Is there no end to this. Joseph has a go at me say's I am part of the three headed twit hydra, because I responded like many others to posts by Rosmary. At that he asks, didn't I like his poetry, I respond 'I don't know where he is coming from'. Then this thread starts some posters say their piece. That is fine what people make of my contribution to posts is entirely up to them I have no problem with that, when people accuse me of being something I am not I will defend myself. Joseph has done me a favour really I realise I am not well liked so what I can live it, but please don't now label me Davidoz. How can these wild accusations carry on without proof. I first found this board about three or four weeks ago. I am leaving these boards, but not until this situation is resolved. And I hope I never have the displeasure of meeting some of you again!
Author: Alegria Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 10:34 am
Jade, You have a tendency to read more into a post than was intended, misunderstand the meaning of a post or attribute comments to people who did not make them. If this conversation is boiling your blood to the point that you cannot think or respond rationally, it is probably better for you not to reply until you calm down. No one is attacking you here (except for Joseph) so you should probably take that into consideration before you post. You are not supporting your case by flying off the handle at every comment someone makes and treating it as a personal attack.
Author: Tom Wescott Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 10:50 am
Martin, Jeff's question, and the one that befuddled me, is if there are any known cases involving graffiti similar to that found in Goulston Street PRIOR to the Jack the Ripper murders. I can't think of any, but then again my knowledge of serial killers pretty much starts with Jack and moves forward. Yours truly, Tom Wescott
Author: Triston Marc Bunker Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 10:59 am
I think we should all quit the "Hydra" talk. I'm beginning to find the whole thing boring now. So what if some choose to go under various titles ? Jade looks to be having the same crisis of faith as I had last night and looks to have been here for the same amount of time as me (for god sake don't even start thinking we are the same person, that would be very childish and unwarranted). There are cries going up all around for us to keep the subject going. For those of you who have forgotten what it is I suggest you read the subject heading. Let the "Hydras" keep going and I hope they still make valid contributions (as they do in general, with few exceptions). Jade - I guess you'll do a u-turn like I did. As for you being unliked, now that was a silly statement. How can anyone dislike anyone they haven't met ? We all have a go at Melvin here at one time or another, that doesn't mean we don't like the man (erm..... maybe I should re-think that that end part. Only joking Mel mate.) Now, does anyone have an answer yet for my earlier question about the graffiti ? Were the public made aware of it at the time ? Tris (King Kongs' cousin twice removed and supreme ruler of the Planet of the Apes)
Author: Caroline Anne Morris Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 11:00 am
Hi Jade, You may have missed a line in my post. I'll repeat it here for you: This situation, I firmly believe, has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with 2001 newcomers. Here is one of your own lines: I first found this board about three or four weeks ago. Sorry for any confusion. I hope this helps with your dilemma over who is labelling who with what. Love, Caz
Author: Jade Bakys Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 11:01 am
Well sorry Alegria but you can hardly blame me, I am absoloutely fed up of this, and I do want to leave these boards but with my reputaion what is left of it intact. I may have mis-interpreted Carolines post you may have noticed from past posts when I am in the wrong or I realise I have been too defensive I realise my mistake and apologise. It was inferred that the culmination of this is: But then someone spoils it all by saying something stoopid like "Joseph is the man who should be blamed for everything" and I can then taste what this thing is all about, and how long it has been eating away at the poor souls-in-collusion. What else can I infer, I take this to mean that Caroline might believe it goes back along way. I read posts on here from way back, only yesterday I was on a board from some of the firsts boards, the vitriol was ever present then which included Paul Feldman I was amazed he ever posted at all, that is the only reason I made my comment that Joseph stalked Davidoz, I read posts all the time, I like to know what has been discussed previously so I am not reinventing the wheel, but I have only been here three or four week I read the posts when everyone thought Caroline was her daughter Carly. I now feel something of which she went through. it is frustrating, I have just shown these threads to my husband and he can't even see what the fuss is about he advises me to just stop and says they are not worth it. Perhaps he is right there is no point in convincing anybody otherwise. So I will leave it there
Author: Jade Bakys Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 11:08 am
Hi Caroline You must have posted your message while I was posting mine. Sorry that I misunderstood you. I am reading into things that are not there. Really sorry. Tris nice to see you back, your post always brighten me up! I am going now honest!
Author: Caroline Anne Morris Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 11:23 am
Don't go Jade. Your posts and your writing style intrigue me. I meant what I said about newcomers. No newcomers in 2001 need have any fear whatsoever of being blamed for something that started at least two years ago, possibly more, need they? And please don't worry about me. Only a couple of people ever confused me with Carly, now 13, and it gave us both real fits. The really serious and heavy stuff concerned something else entirely, which you evidently haven't yet come across from reading some of the old posts. Love, Caz
Author: Matthew Brannigan Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 11:40 am
Hi, I'm new to the casebook and I was wondering if there was a message board anywhere dealing with the Goulston Street Grafitti :-) Matt
Author: Alegria Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 11:47 am
Most of the posts by our previous pest have been deleted. This may explain why Jade was defending him as being not that bad. From what is left of his posts that any newcomer would read, it doesn't seem that bad. This may explain why Joseph takes offence at Jade's defending him, and also why Jade feels justified in her defense.
Author: Caroline Anne Morris Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 11:52 am
Hi Matthew, Point taken. Though something tells me this can all at least be related to the subject of mystery message-writers and their motives. Love, Caz
Author: Jade Bakys Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 11:59 am
Hi Caroline I remember when I first read your daughter's post I was amazed at her articulation. You must be very proud of her. I remember trying to get my niece Charlotte interested in Jack the Ripper (she is 15), with a few video's and she did me the great injustice of falling asleep. My husband and I don't have any children sadly, but I have my nieces over at weekend Charlotte and Donna, and my nephew Jack who is four, and of course he his adorable. I don't want to fall out with Joseph I see that maybe some bridges cannot be mended. I will think about it in a couple of days and realise that he probably had a point. This whole casebook is a learning curve on life, I think you made an observation in one of your earlier posts: I will remember, but without anger, because it all gets filed under 'experiences gained' and 'friends I never quite made'. You are quite right with the above comment Caroline. If you are reading this Joseph, I aplogise for going over the top, and for my first post. Would you please believe me when I say I am not Rosemary or Ed. I have a hot temper, which only serves me to look ridiculous most of the time. I don't know you, and Tris has pointed this out in a post in a general way, so it is deeply offensive of me to make rash and personal comments and for that I do apologise. I wont post for a while, but I will observe the posts. I want to see if Melvin ever releases what he knows J Best wishes Jade
Author: Caroline Anne Morris Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 12:13 pm
Hi Jade, Carly can be proud of herself - she can articulate far better than I (I am as articulated as a lorry by comparison!). She has just come in from school, thrilled to bits for landing the part of Tallulah in her school's production of Bugsy Malone. She could hardly believe that someone managed to winkle out those two or three posts she made when teaching me some basic computer and internet skills two years ago! Best wishes, Caz and Little Caz
Author: John Omlor Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 12:39 pm
Hello all, Please forgive the intrusion, but I have been lurking for some time on this board and trying to follow the discussion concerning the words scrawled on the wall above the bloody piece of apron... Now I seem to have lost track. Exactly how many variations of spelling and word order are now regularly in play among those who are discussing this issue? Are the variations multiplying? I apologize if I should know this from the reference books, or if there is a complete list of these on the Casebook that I have not yet discovered. I know what is recorded officially and reproduced in the Companion or discussed in the A-Z, but it seems to me that more have been popping up in the discussion here. Perhaps that is a mistaken impression. How many phrase possibilities have we got? --John
Author: Martin Fido Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 01:50 pm
Hi Tom - No, I don't know of any previous hand-written clues or pseudo-clues. Given that there wasn't anything approaching universal literacy until Gladstone's Education Act of 1870, I shouldn't (on reflection) expect there to be, either. Hi Tris - yes, the public did know about the graffito. See Evans & Skinner pp.233-34 for The Times report of Halse's and Long's testimony at the inquest. (What a blessing to have this Vade Mecum of sources!)There was also a picture on Illustrated Police News of Sir Chas Warren examining the writing which has always interested me because it shows him wearing a sort of kepi (much like a US Civil War uniform cap) and this is the only evidence known to me of the Commissioner's undress uniform ever carrying such an item of headgear. (No doubt Richard 'Nutty' Sharp, 'the Great One' of the Met Police Archives would know, as he has immense expertise on uniform changes). Martin F
Author: Warwick Parminter Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 02:33 pm
Jade, Joseph, Can I, as one who likes to see both your names come up on the boards, suggest this to both of you. If you can't make peace, have a truce. Correspond and talk to anyone on the boards except each other, don't mention whatever it was that upset you both, and if none of the other posters mention it, it'll drift into the past. You both seem to be getting bitter and brooding about it, thats no good at all, this is only a game, forget it, lifes too short. Hopefully Rick
Author: Simon Owen Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 02:40 pm
Hello ... did I miss something ? Whats going on here ?!!
Author: Simon Owen Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 02:43 pm
To digress slightly , I am curling up at the moment with Stephen Pressfield's ( yes he did write Bagger Vance ) excellent novel of the Battle of Thermopylae , " Gates of Fire ". Morituri David ! ( I'll find that quote about cutting off Annie's head when I have time ! )
Author: E Carter Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 02:58 pm
Jon,you can obtain the main events concerning the spelling of the word 'Juwes' from Eddows inquest, I believe it's in this casebook. Long was unsure what he had written, but he said it could have been'Juwes'when it was put to him;though Jeuws also came into the picture. He was sent off by the coroner to get his notebook. On his return he was still unsure why both he and the inspector had written'jews, but thought it was because he had written Jews before the inspector had noticed the strange spelling. Halse, I believe meant that the graffiti was written in three lines of brickwork, thus the dado effect he described. The next section is actually leading onto the graffiti, but before looking at the wording itself, Do you mind if I first look at the events leading up to it's discovery in Goulstone Street. And believe me, I am not going to win any friends here! But anyway, let me run this one by you. I think Fanny's suddenly appearance at her street door in Berner Street caused the killer to make a hurried contingency plan. Leon Goldstien therefore left Dutfields yard, went through the back of the club and returned into Berner Street via a small alley three houses down from where Fanny stood. He walked past her took the blood soaked rag from one of the killer's and left it in Batty Street, where it was discovered. The couple, who according to Fanny were on the corner, both 'before and after the murder must have taken place' were actually keeping watch. This was the same couple seen earlier by Brown, the man stood with his back to Brown to cover appearance, placing an arm up to cover his female accomplices face. The dialoge heard by Brown 'not tonight some other night'! Was her attempt to normalize the couples presence on the corner. Her initials were D Z. The following day Goldstein went to Leman Street to assess how much the police actually knew. Strangely he took William Wess, who was both a compositor and the club secretary for support. William Wess,(his real name was Woolf Wess). Later Wess gave a well known anarchist, Voltrine de Clair a guided tour of Whitechapel. Throughout the book she calls him 'Will Wess'. The tour focused upon sites where several fights with the police had taken place. This is why I thought his presence was slightly odd. I have to stop here as I have to go to work! O'K, I know what you are thinking,and no,I do not think that Will Wess is 'Jack the Ripper'. But let's, just for once, try to look at this scene from a different angle. Just consider the idea! Best wishes ED. Just think about it!
Author: Simon Owen Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 03:16 pm
Hooray ! Ed is back ! By the way Ed , Joahim and Boaz weren't made of silver and iron , but of brass. Simon
Author: E Carter Wednesday, 07 March 2001 - 03:22 pm
Simon, I said 'Gates'! And I think you misunderstood. Best wishes ED. PS, Simon, if there is a slipper on Kelly's table, do you think she answered the door to him, he came in, then suddenly attacked her. After overcoming Mary with chloroform he threw her on the bed. During the mutilation process, he pulled off the slipper and threw it on the table, exactly where he had thrown the intestines? ED