Author: Howard Brown
Sunday, 17 November 2002 - 10:00 am |        |
| Dear Posters; Since 1888,there are numerous myths surrounding the world's most famous serial killer. What I mean by myth does not necessarily mean an untruth,but rather a perception,of the Ripper. The "black bag"....the hat(s)....the assumption that he was a "gentleman" killer.....etc. For an example; When I first saw the 60 Minutes program here in the States about Maybrick,I remember going out and buying the book ,opening it to the photo of MjK's mutilation and,I will admit it,I dropped the book on my table. The hair stood up on my neck. I had mistakenly thought that Old Black Bag had simply cut the poor women's throats. That photo still bothers me. Which myths surrounding the Ripper affect YOU the most,dear reader ? What fact,which particular aspect,or what myth is still predominant in your mind today ? Thanks HB |
Author: Esther Wilson
Sunday, 17 November 2002 - 10:11 am | |
I have to agree with you on the Mary Kelly photo. When I saw the other victims pictures I knew they were bad...but I didn't know evil until I saw MJK's death bed.
Esther |
Author: Jeff Bloomfield
Sunday, 17 November 2002 - 07:58 pm | |
Hi Howard,
Actually the Kelly photos have always profoundly
disturbed me. I had read discriptions of the
way Mary was found, but the photo revolted me.
In fact, it still does.
I have considered that Mary's murder is rather
unique in its setting. There were few Victorian
homicides committed in the victim's bedroom.
A few years earlier there was a killing of a
prostitute, Mary Ann Yates, in her bed at Burton
Crescent, London. But Ms. Yates was strangled,
not butchered (the killing was in March 1884, and
has not been properly studied). Earlier, his
Lordship, Lord William Russell, was killed at
his Park Lane home (in 1840)by his valet Francois
Benjamin Courvoisier. His lordship's throat was
cut in bed, but no mutilations occurred, as the
killer wanted to make it look like burglars did
the murder.
Jeff |
Author: Warwick Parminter
Sunday, 17 November 2002 - 09:05 pm | |
| Howard, the thing that makes me squirm when I think of Mary Kelly's murder is,-- the time she was concious of some one in the room, till the god-awfull moment when she felt hands on the bed and then at her face,-- as the Irish would say "God love her,--the poor girl! Rick |
Author: David Radka
Sunday, 17 November 2002 - 11:44 pm | |
The so-called myths of the case is a subject often discussed by the chandala element of Ripperology. If there are myths, the sheep think, then we'll have a good career for ourselves disabusing the public of them, all the while providing spotlessly clean empirical data on the case as replacement. Richard Whittington-Egan himself once appeared to me in a dream, astride a sheep. Thus do sheep lead the sheep.
Baaa |
Author: Monty
Monday, 18 November 2002 - 07:58 am | |
Howard,
That photo holds a 'JFK' moment for me. I know exactly the day,month, year. Even the smell of where I was when I first saw it.
Monty |
Author: spaceyram
Monday, 18 November 2002 - 12:54 pm | |
Dave
I cannot let this opportunity to go by so please
do not take any offense, none is intended.
Maybe Egan was a pervert and was actually trying
to catch the sheep for purposes I need not
explain.
Julie |
Author: David Radka
Monday, 18 November 2002 - 02:53 pm | |
spaceyram,
Witty-Egan is not the pervert. All the rest of us are.
David |
Author: Stewart P Evans
Monday, 18 November 2002 - 03:35 pm | |
| I have just read the above posts to Richard and he said, "I'm very amused. A fellow dreamt of me and I was riding on the back of a sheep - that's crackers." |
Author: Howard Brown
Monday, 18 November 2002 - 04:22 pm | |
| Monty.........I can see how that first glimpse of the scene would leave an imprint like that. I'm not too squeamish,as I have seen numerous people lose fingers,etc.,at work. However,that photo blows all that away. ------ Rick: I hear you brother ! Hopefully,JtR made short work of her and reduced any prolonged suffering. -------- Jeff: I know you've seen pictures of Andersonville prison camp( which,ironically a relative of mine,Capt. Henry Wirz,was for at time in charge of and subsequently hung after the Civil War ) and you have to admit that MjK tops those atrocious proto-Gulag,proto-Dachau photos.Truly unhuman-----------Dave, I wasnt aware that there were any offspring of Subra males to Brahman women ( the definition of chandala) at Casebook...Likewise the definition as used by Nietzsche( another perpetually plagued by illness,real or otherwise,misunderstood -in his- time man ) infers that there is a class of Untermenschen that belong to Ripper related study. Re-read my initial posting and put down the Zarathustra for a moment,O Obtuse One. |
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 18 November 2002 - 04:39 pm | |
I do of course find the MJK photographs revolting but I also find what was done to poor Kate Eddowes in terms of facial mutilation and evisceration, as shown in the sketches of Mitre Square and the mortuary photographs of her, to be appalling as well.
Chris |
Author: Monty
Tuesday, 19 November 2002 - 11:44 am | |
Howard,
Its not the destruction that hit me or a case of me being squeamish.
It was Kellys right eye looking back at me............I mean straight at me.
Monty |
Author: Peter Wood
Wednesday, 20 November 2002 - 03:17 pm | |
I must be really weird ... I can spend hours looking at that photo of MJK, intricately trying to work out what's what and thinking that, only a few hours earlier, the man we are all after was by that bed.
I "like" the not so often published picture of Catherine Eddowes too, the one that shows her throat slashed before it was all stitched up - I think that gives you some idea of how much force, energy and - maybe - pent up anger the ripper used.
I find those photos fascinating. They don't disturb me. I just wish they could talk.
Peter |
Author: Esther Wilson
Thursday, 21 November 2002 - 10:48 am | |
Peter--I keep trying to study that MJK photo myself and try to make out anything. In another post someone mentions that they can see Mary's eye....I can't quite make that out anywhere in the photo. And if you are really weird then I am joining you in that group for you are not alone. 
Esther |
Author: Peter Wood
Thursday, 21 November 2002 - 01:27 pm | |
| Phew! Thanks Esther, there's me thinking the men in white coats had come to take me away when all they were doing was delivering pizza! |
Author: Philip C. Dowe
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 06:50 am | |
Hi Howard,
Isn't the whole figure a myth? Everybody is looking for one suspect who committed between four and eight murders, wrote letters to the press, sent a Kidney to Lusk and left a grafitti.
Philip |
Author: Dan Norder
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 07:28 am | |
I think the tall hat and the bag are absolutely required of any popular depiction of Jack the Ripper these days.
Speaking of, couldn't Stephen find a photo of Sickert without a hat on for the Suspects page of this site? Cornwell could have saved the $6 million and just shown that photo to everyone:
"But he wasn't even in London at the time..."
"Oh yeah, look at this hat!" (Shows picture.)
"Damn... you're right. That is a Ripper hat. Sorry to have ever doubted you."
Dan |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 12:54 pm | |
Hi Philip,
I agree - in fact I think some of the common notions adhered to by "Ripperologists" are more myth than fact.
Ironically, I find it interesting that so many get so exercised about mythological or fictional attributes to the case, but with few exceptions I think almost all of us were drawn to the case by what was untrue rather than the reality.
Indeed, the entire case was a media sensation later turned to melodrama. The facts of the case are rather mundane and ordinary as serial murders go.
Rich |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 12:58 pm | |
Hi Philip (again),
Another myth, commonly accepted today, are the various numbers of victims suggested by different people. The fact is we simply don't know.
Today, it seems, most opt for five victims. The genesis for this notion is Sir Melville's memorandum. It is interesting that the number of victims from that document has stuck while so much of the other "facts" in the document have proven demonstrably untrue.
Rich |
Author: Howard Brown
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 06:26 pm | |
| Rich.......I agree with you 100 percent in your post of 12:54 PM Friday the 22nd. What do you make of the undying interest? Mr. Evans has stated that it was the "romance of the period". What particular myths got you going ?? Thanks, Howard |
Author: Richard P. Dewar
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 07:15 pm | |
Hi Howard,
I saw an old documentary on the case as a young boy which depicted the murderer as a caped, top-hatted, dagger wielding, gladstone bag carrying, fiend who authored sinister, sarcastic letters to the police.
I think for me, at the early age, the myth of the killer appealed to my sense of curiousity. Plus, the story seemed very scary and as I child I enjoyed being frightened.
Rich |
Author: Howard Brown
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 08:45 pm | |
| Dear Rich....ditto,buddy. Don't take this the wrong way,but....there is an "attractiveness" to him that other pathetic bipeds like Speck( pre-bosom beef-up and post...ever see that? ),Richard Ramirez,and the others don't have. Maybe its his anonymity,but I think its there....which of course would disappear if we knew him. He is the bogeyman of bogeymen... |
Author: Timsta
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 09:05 pm | |
Howard:
( pre-bosom beef-up and post...ever see that? )
I don't even know what that means. Neither do I care to.
Yeah he is the capo de tutti bogeymen, for sure. I like Spring Heeled Jack too. Someone who knows stuff oughta post some SHJ links. Or maybe I could go find some myself if anyone's interested.
Beefcake!
Timsta
PS I think JTR has cachet 'cos he had the coolest name. That 'Doctor Death' guy is memorable, as is 'Doctor Evil Eyes'. And I think they gave Crippen a 'cool' nickname in the press, too.
PPS 'The Acid Bath Murderer' isn't bad either. |
Author: Howard Brown
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 10:08 pm | |
| Timsta.....Speck,one of the most loathsome critters on his or any cell block,actually developed a set of "breasts" while being a recipient of 3 hots and a cot at the expense of Illinois taxpayers.....A real freak. |
Author: David Radka
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 11:04 pm | |
People are not attracted to the case by its myths. They are attracted by the implied promise of its payoff.
David |
Author: Howard Brown
Friday, 22 November 2002 - 11:31 pm | |
| Dave.......what would be the "payoff"? Financial? Some psychological goal acheived? Please explain your statement of "implied promise"....I am not an interleckshul or B.A. in B.S. |
Author: Diana
Saturday, 23 November 2002 - 11:20 am | |
| In the Bible we are told that man was created in the image of God and thus was perfect. As a consequence of the fall, chosen by our ancestors Adam and Eve, evil was introduced like some horrible infection into the human heart. Miller's court is a vivid illustration of the horrible effects of sin. It is possible to laugh off all of this. But one glance at the MJK crime scene photo should convince anyone that something is terribly wrong with mankind. The first reaction is, "Hey, I'm not like JTR, don't lump me in with him." We can only surmise what kind of dysfunctional family Jack came from. Nobody's family is perfect (another illustration of the fall) but most of us were probably raised in environments better than what Jack had. Who is to say what any of us might do if that were not the case. The Bible describes every one of us (me included) as sinners. "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23) Calvary, Bergen-Belsen, Millers Court, Helter Skelter, Lizzie Borden, Stalin, 9/11. How much more proof do we need that something is wrong? Thank God, Jesus died to pay the price of sin. Otherwise heaven would not be a possibility for anyone. All of us at one time or another have done things we were not particularly proud of. It is unlikely that any of us has committed an atrocity equal to Miller's court. But the infection is there, within every one of us. Given the right set of circumstances . . . The solution is in John 3:16. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." |
Author: Brenda L. Conklin
Saturday, 23 November 2002 - 04:36 pm | |
Esther, Peter,
I always thought of the MJK crime scene photo as just an undecipherable mess, the face especially. You will see the photo in a whole new light if you take time to read the following thread:
Ripper Victims: General Discussion: Markings on Mary Jane Kelly.
Probably the most fascinating thread on the whole site, it features the photo reproduced with markings to show what some people believe to be the eyes, etc. It helps to put the whole photo in perspective. It also covers the question of whether there was the word "five" carved into Mary's face. Doggone it, it looks like a "Five" to me!!!!!!!!! Also across Mary's forehead, it looks like a great big "F"!!!!
But anyway, you must make it priority to read through this thread. |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Saturday, 23 November 2002 - 05:45 pm | |
Dear Diana,
You took the very words out of my mouth. But what is holding the mirror?
Rosey :-)) |
Author: Paula Wolff
Saturday, 23 November 2002 - 06:27 pm | |
Dear Diana,
It's nice to have someone who has the information every person needs for this life and the next. That we have life everlasting through Jesus is an unbelievable and unspeakably holy gift. Nice to see something good on the board. And yes, there is EVIL in the world, in some way more so than the GOOD. What if there was no John 3:16? Can't even imagine and don't want to.
Thanks for you input.
Paula |
Author: Warwick Parminter
Saturday, 23 November 2002 - 07:59 pm | |
| I would have loved to have met Charles Shultz |
Author: Philip C. Dowe
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 03:42 am | |
I have more faith in the Big Pumpkin than in any other mythological figure!
Snoopy rules! |
Author: Harry Mann
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 03:55 am | |
If you think Millers court was a mess,I would suggest you follow a serial murder case being tried in South Australia at the present time.
There will certainly be a book about it one day in the not too distant future.
Already two jurors have have cried off,as it seems the revelations that unfolded were too horendous for them too bear.Likewise it seems that some of the subject matter was too lurid to be printed in the daily press.
The full story has yet to be told,but it does indicate that there is no limit in what one person can do to another.Perhaps even a sane one. |
Author: Warwick Parminter
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 05:56 am | |
| Okay, but MAISIE has to be No 2, |
Author: Esther Wilson
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 09:49 am | |
Thanks Brenda--I've just found that thread and it shed a whole new light on how I look at that picture.
Esther |
Author: Dan Norder
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 09:56 am | |
I do hope everyone looking at the Markings on Mary Jane Kelly thread got far enough to see that the word FIVE isn't really there. While we are at it, there are no words written on the wall either.
A thread about the mythology of Jack the Ripper certainly shouldn't continue to spread recently concocted ones that have been thoroughly debunked.
Dan |
Author: Howard Brown
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 01:34 pm | |
| Dear Dan.......Good point,in my opinion....Maybe someone could start a thread including those "markings",the "writing on the wall",etc . I don't know about you guys,but to me its like looking at the clouds( I think someone previously said something like this,in retrospect...)and Dan Norder sees the Valkyries riding toward Valhalla and Howard sees a doggie and a piggy...well,you get the drift. |
Author: Vila
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 02:07 pm | |
Dan,
Sometimes we have to re-debunk some of the myths all over again. I remember back in '96 when I did the scans of one of the MJK deathbed photos that has long been posted in the Casebook that stirred up that particular "markings" myth yet again. After much heated debate in the chat room, most everyone was persuaded that the markings we percieved were actually artifacts of the photocopying process. That is, that repeated copying of the copy of the copy of the copy (ad infinitium, ad nausium) of the original photograph had managed to blur together random marks & discolorations into what we "saw" as recognisable numbers & letters. The human eye & mind seeks patterns, even where none exist. That is why we also have the myths of canals on Mars, the face of Jesus on a scorched potato chip, words from the Koran spelled out in seeds in the middle of melons, animal-shapes in clouds, and conspiracy theories.
Oh, one other thing, addressed to all posters; Please keep in mind that not everyone shares the same religion. While some of we posters are Christian, some of us are Morman, some of us are Buddhists, some are Moslems, Muslems, Hindu, Wiccans, Scientologists, Pagans, Free-Thinkers, Agnostics, and even Atheists... Probably the only religious group you won't find represented here are the Amish, since there aren't too many of them online. So please, let us remember those who choose a different path may also choose to dismiss your arguments unread if you lean too heavily on the religion of your choice within your posts.
I'll get off my soapbox now,
Vila |
Author: Dan Norder
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 02:54 pm | |
I think the writing on the wall was also shown to be an artifact of someone having indented the words "Kelly, Mary" or something to that effect on an earlier reproduction (perhaps the photo was resting under some paper that was written on) and continous copies of copies just enhanced the words. The "Hart" people saw came from the "Mary" (the M descender looked like a crossbar on an H, and the top of the Y became filled and looked like a T) and the "Polly" some people saw above that was a distorted "Kelly". Some people also saw other weirds things there too. I think some of the more bizarre Ripper conpiracy theories especially depend upon this stuff.
We know that the words weren't really on the original wall because the earlier photos didn't have it, the official documents never mentioned it, and some of the letters overlapped the bed or a door or something so couldn't have really been real.
As far as the FIVE on the face goes, the I was actually the shadow of her teeth and the E was what was left of the nostrils of the nose, the F and V were just shadows thrown together to try to make meaning out of it. The photo taken from another angle showed quite conclusively that the word did not exist.
I know a lot of people hope that Jack left some obvious in-your-face clues like that that nobody else somehow noticed until recently. After all, it's easier to solve the case if it's an elaborate word puzzle instead of treating it like a typical serial killer investigation.
Dan |
Author: Paula Wolff
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 06:53 pm | |
Dear V,
My apologies for any offense about what I wrote referring to my faith in Jesus. You are right, this is not a soapbox for religious threads. I should have written a private email to the sender I was talking with. Thank you for the post.
Paula |
Author: David Radka
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 08:27 pm | |
With respect to the Whitechapel murderer, I'm not sure we are talking about a person who would nominally be considered a sinner under Christian principles in the usual sense. It doesn't seem correct to me to assume that JtR was necessarily tempted by the lusts of his mortal body, or by the devil, to do what he did. Temptation would, it seems to me, best be used to explain normal human perfidousness. Someone thinks they can profit somehow by breaking the rules, so they are tempted to do so, and then they do so. But it would seem hard to imagine what JtR's payoff for breaking the rules he broke would have been in his mind. Did he experience the lust of anger or revenge against the women? Was it sexual lust that drove him? But if his motivation were shaped along these lines, it doesn't seem to me that we'd find such a cool customer reflectd by the crime scene evidence. We'd find examples of lustful satiation at the crime scenes.
David |
Author: Vila
Sunday, 24 November 2002 - 11:33 pm | |
Paula,
I took no offence, and I appologise if I offended you. I merely pointed out what a wide variety of people that we have here on the Casebook and that others *might* take offence. Sorry for any misunderstanding I might have caused you.
Vila |
Author: Paula Wolff
Monday, 25 November 2002 - 08:29 am | |
Dear Vila,
Of course you did not offend me! I'm not ashamed of my faith, but a time and place. This is for Jack the Ripper and he's so much fun, isn't he? You have put up some very interesting and entertaining posts and I really appreciate them. I like your sense of humor.
Now, no misunderstanding, no nothing. Friends?
Great!
With regards,
Paula |
Author: Harry Mann
Tuesday, 26 November 2002 - 04:04 am | |
One myth that seems to linger is the reported attack on Stride as witnessed by Schwartz.
Drunken,frenzied,murderous or anything in between.Whenever her murder is discussed the same arguement crops up.She was assaulted by the drunk walking in front of Schwartz.
Now can anyone tell me of any evidence that an assault took place.I would be pleased to know of it.
Before you begin,I know that a hand was placed on her shoulder and that maybe technically that can sometimes be claimed an assault.I know she is said to have fallen or been pushed to the ground,but what real evidence is there to show she was punched,kicked or otherwise severely molested in front of Duttfield Yard. |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Tuesday, 26 November 2002 - 08:18 pm | |
| Hi Harry, The problem is that what should be a clear cut set of events ended up as a bloody mess because either the police or the press could not do the job they were paid to do. We only have the evidence of Schwartz and that comes in two versions.N01.She was pushed. N0 2. She was thrown to the ground. No ABH or GBH just common assault. |
Author: Harry Mann
Wednesday, 27 November 2002 - 03:45 am | |
Hello Ivor,
Hope you are well.She could also have twisted and fell of her own accord.
The assault version seems to have originated from Arnold,though one might think he would have studied the autopsy report before jumping in with two feet.
You are so right about the police and press.If some of the senior officers at the time had considered evidence instead of moonshine,our field of realistic suspects would be much smaller.
A quick comment on the Stride scene.If the habits of persons,and the architecture of the houses in Berner St were given thought,there is a good reason why Mrs Mortimer may not have seen or heard anything.
As to whether the scene in Berner St could change much in 15 minutes,study some of the webcams on the net that cover street scenes.Or stand on a corner with a camera,and take a photo
of a street every minute.
What you shouldn't do is accept that a persons position makes them more able to assess a situation, that in reality needs but close scrutiny and a bit of common sense. |
Author: Ivor Edwards
Wednesday, 27 November 2002 - 06:36 pm | |
| Hi Harry,I am very well thanks and I also hope you are in fine fettle. You can get a situation and produce any number of witnesses and the chances are every one will give a different description of the offender/offenders and various accounts of what exactly happened or what was said.It happens all the time in court cases. |
