|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 14, 1999
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: Specific Victims:
Mary Jane Kelly:
The Kelly Crime Scene Photographs:
Archive through March 14, 1999
Author: Yazoo
Friday, 26 February 1999 - 11:47 am |        | Hey, All!
I'm not involved in tracing any bogus post-ers (if any exist). I don't really see why we should worry that much about it -- take the message for what it says, don't worry about the messenger.
If someone -- anonymously or not -- posts something you don't like, the only criteria for "checking up" on them may be if the post is a personal attack or is disruptive, disrespectful...all the disses! Simple disagreement -- even passionate disagreement -- combined with the Anonymous function is NOT abusive behavior or commits one of the disses. People are starting to simply dismiss ALL ideas SOLELY based on the fact that the post-er prefers to remain anonymous. This is a silly thing to do, no?
We have one legitimate minor who very rarely now posts to the Casebook. That post-er identifies themself so we all know who is speaking.
We have 18, 19, 20 year olds -- whom some of us "older" folks might think of as kids. We have some silly posts from unknown people where the content seems to be at a very low age group level (13 years old or younger). But this is a presumption, not a fact. And I think our favorite Little Post-er is not meant by any references to these "immature" or disruptive or goofy or spaced-out kind of posts.
If anyone with less years, less experience, less whatever -- who is not making themselves obnoxious -- is attacked on these boards...I've promised to be there. I will eventually arrive. The Casebook can implement other means to control the more disruptive types of posting-behaviors, but they have had no strong, compelling reason to do so yet!!!
Again...we'll all go crazy trying to figure out who's trying to "trick" us with fake identitites and posts. We have no proof that this is happening. And if it is, how disruptive is it really? Is it something we all want to bug Stephen about to make some general Casebook policy? Personally, I don't. Let the sys admin take the most egregious cases (if there really are any), one at a time, and deal with them quietly.
Until we are presented with proof by the Casebook sys admin, forget about it. The meaning is the message, not the identity of the post-er. Let's enjoy each other's company and ideas...even if a person has got many identities, just one, or wants to remain anonymous. (And "Anonymous" is a legitimate ID. Why automatically assume the worst when you see it? Someone may be very shy or concerned for their privacy and prefers anonymity. You can't lump every anonymous post-er into one persona called "Anonymous." Basically: "No harm, no foul," is the old street rule by which I've always played.)
My opinion.
Yaz |
Author: adam
Friday, 26 February 1999 - 12:30 pm | | Hi all
In most Ripper books Kelly's bed is described as
being "close to" the wall (which in reality was a
partition between Room 13 and the rest of the
house). This would seem to be no more than a foot,
but was certainly not "flush against the wall".
If the camera was placed against the wall (the
angle makes it plain that the partion door was not
opened to facilitate the camera.), it would
account for the resulting photo being of Kelly's
body outward, with none of the right side of the
bed or body shown.
In response ot Chrise George's comment of 29 Jan:
"In "The Illustrated Police News" of November 17,
1888, and it is captioned "Photographing the
body." This sketch shows the photographer on the
left side of the bed, i.e., presumably from the
angle of the second and smaller photograph."; in
this illustration the body is facing the camera.
This would indicate that the drawing is made from
the right hand side, ascertainable from the
drawing in respect of both the space allocated to
the photographer and the position of |
Author: kelly
Saturday, 27 February 1999 - 06:35 am | | | This is "kelly pippin" again: first i am a 32 year old MALE and not in need of a therapist thankyou. I have been fascinated with the ripper murders since i was a teenager for several reasons: here in america we dont have an equivalent in regards to the mystery and secondly the gruesomeness of the photos (everyone must admit to some degree of pleasure at viewing them) i agree that this is not for kids, but- here in the US at least, there is far worse on tv! i would love one day to go to london and soak up whats left of the "ripper aura": i have been to fall river mass to see the lizzie bordon crime scene and that was very interesting, so i assume the ripper scenes, or whats left of them, must be to. I am a fan of true crime, sharon tate et al the most fascinating other than ripper, and would love email from anyone else who feels the same. thanks for responding to an american. |
Author: D. Radka
Saturday, 27 February 1999 - 10:49 pm | | Dear Mr. Pippin,
We have had two other new posters like you over the past few months, a Mr. Zippity and a Ms Adrienne. Traditionally, we refer them to one of our own who shares your kind of interests, a Mr. M*** W*****, who often posts as *a*o*. I was wondering if he might volunteer a bit of assistance to you. Thank you.
David |
Author: The Viper
Sunday, 28 February 1999 - 08:16 am | | David.
I make it three times that you have posted a message of this type now. This sort of personal sniping is completely out of order and must stop. How does it help us to have serious discussions about the case? How much does it cost the Casebook in storage to have the server cluttered up with these posts? What sort of encouragement does it give to potentially good new contributors who are scanning the boards for the first time? And imagine serious Ripper researchers reading through all this dross in the future trying to find a few pearls. Some might be tempted to give up - as I am occasionally. The sooner these boards are cleaned up the better! |
Author: Julilla
Sunday, 28 February 1999 - 12:03 pm | | Mr. Pippin, I must disagree with your statement that everyone derives pleasure from looking at the crime scene photos. Even the descriptions from the coroners reports are disturbing to me.
Since I am not a psychiatrist, I'll withold making any speculation of your statement and what it might mean about you personally. Although I am disturbed that anyone would make any statement like the one you did.
Julilla |
Author: D. Radka
Sunday, 28 February 1999 - 05:08 pm | | Viper,
Perhaps it might be a good idea to review some of Yazoo's posts back around early January. You would find that he became irritated at me because I said that I had a theory that possibly would solve the case and was planning to write it up for publication after several months or a year. After insisting repeatedly that I must give it out in full to him immediately, he stated that because I had "annoyed" him by not giving it out, he would adopt an "extremely hostile" attitude to any further posts I made to these Boards, and would pre-empt on sight anything from me that he was priveleged to think got his nose out of joint.
This plainly-stated threat constitutes personal harrassment, intimidation, and interference with my free speech. Yazoo has made me in particular, David M. Radka, his target. No retraction of the threat against me has since appeared--it still looms every time my shaking hands reach out to the keyboard to begin a post. It is no coincidence that Yazoo does not make statements like this to Caroline, who often posts these boards and has taken a position clone-identical to mine--she says she has a theory that possibly solves the case and a suspect, but will not reveal it until she's ready later. The reason Yazoo doesn't attempt to command her manners as well as mine is because he remains aware that there are some here courageous enough to stand up to him, to deal with him on his own terms, and who will not hesitate to tweak his beak.
I can't imagine anybody writing these words unless they understood and really meant them as delivered: Please stop and place into perspective what "extremely hostile" means,
Mr. Viper.
Perhaps you might risk signing your real name to your posts, Mr. anonymous Viper, and then see how you like it should someone start publicly humiliating you by commanding what manners you must exhibit, what you must say and not say. In the history of this web site as far as I know about it, I am the only person ever to have their right of expression immediately placed in jeopardy, and am perhaps singly qualified to understand what the issue behind it is. It is this: It has to happen to you. Nobody comprehends the problem of freedom unless theirs is taken away from them and they have to do whatever necessary to get it back and keep it. Despite the support of some contributors which I greatly appreciated, I realized that I am free solely because I say I am. As far as your idea of conserving disk space is concerned; if our disk contains 99% freedom issues being worked out, and 1% case material, then I would think that 1% uncommonly well-earned and valuable.
David |
Author: Yazoo
Sunday, 28 February 1999 - 06:33 pm | | David,
If I never apologized for writing what I wrote, I am apologizing now. I am sorry I wrote those words and in that tone to you. I should not have done it. I should have apologized a long time ago.
I hope you will admit that I have not acted upon those words. I have not, nor will I, follow you around the boards, criticizing your thoughts and ideas.
I hope that some will give me credit for learning by my mistakes and not repeating them...hence, my attitude towards Caroline, her theory, and her hints (and sundry others besides Caroline, but she was singled-out in your post).
Yaz |
Author: Kat
Monday, 01 March 1999 - 02:01 am | | I'm really sad to see the way these postings have gone!!! It has gone from talking about the Ripper case to sniping at people...it really has to stop!!!
I agree, this gives no new evidence or anything constructive to talk about...how about getting back on track????
Long Time reader, seldom write upperer (if there is a word!) |
Author: Pickles
Monday, 01 March 1999 - 02:26 am | | Well Kelly Pippin, I must agree with Julilla regarding the Mary Kelly Pictures. I for one certainly DO NOT derive pleasure out of viewing them and can say I am certainly glad they are NOT in colour....Makes you wonder how the photographer of the time, or in fact any one connected with this murder, got through the day without being sick.
I doubt that they got any pleasure out of viewing the murder scene either!! |
Author: Edana
Monday, 01 March 1999 - 01:03 pm | | Hello folks!
I don't know how to say this without sounding like a madwoman, but I'll try. What are the *right* reasons to look at the Kelly photos? Science, research? Does it make you feel better to imagine that that pathetic corpse was once a breathing, laughing young woman and then to shed tears and feel pity? Do you have the curiosity most people have? Does something trigger in your brain when you look at it, something you would rather not admit was there? Personally, I used to not be able to look at the photo..I used to tape a piece of paper over it so that I could read the text on the opposite page without my eyes being drawn to that sorry sight. Then, I had to look. I had too. I needed to see. Why? I needed to see what JTR saw. I needed to see what the police saw. I needed to see what theorists and authors and casebook regulars saw. I needed to see. I still feel my gorge rise, but now I understand it more, now I can distance myself a little more, be more analytical. Still, I can see the carved flesh, I can almost smell the blood. It's horrible, but it's a part of human nature to be curious and creative. I am grateful that I wasn't a police officer assigned to the task of removing her body, or even just witnessing it. Hadn't one of them written about it, saying that that image never left them? Didn't someone slip in the blood? Now, having said all this...am I at risk of having someone talk to me quietly about my interest in the photos? Am I looking at the photos for the 'wrong reason?'. I really can't say, and I don't think anyone else can either.
Edana (disturbed, just a little) |
Author: Julilla
Monday, 01 March 1999 - 01:55 pm | | Edana, my comments were in response to Mr Pippin's assertion that everyone who looks at the Kelly crime scene photos derive 'pleasure' from looking at it.
Julilla |
Author: Edana
Monday, 01 March 1999 - 02:12 pm | | Julilla, Welcome to the boards! Yes, I know and what Mr. Pippin said disturbed me a bit too. I probably didn't successfully make my point in my last posting, maybe because it's not straight in my head yet. I was just a little worried that people judge other people on these boards. It's human nature, but it worries me a bit. Makes me think twice about my motives, my reasons for being on this messageboard, and that is even more disturbing than Mr. Pippin's comment.
Cheers,
Edana |
Author: Christopher-Michael
Monday, 01 March 1999 - 08:23 pm | | Edana -
Excellent opinion on the Kelly photographs, and I would not presume to add to what you have said so well. Only a quick note. It was in his memoirs, "I Caught Crippen" that Inspector Walter Dew (who was only PC Dew at the time) asserts he slipped and nearly fell into the sickening puddle of awfulness on the floor of Number 13.
He was also like many of us, in that when a policeman who saw Kelly's body before him cried "For God's sake, Dew, don't look!" Dew's curiosity got the better of him. He ignored the warning and saw the sight that haunted him to the grave.
CMD |
Author: D. Radka
Thursday, 04 March 1999 - 12:12 am | | Yazoo,
Thanks. I've always respected your thinking on the case.
David |
Author: Yazoo
Thursday, 04 March 1999 - 06:21 am | | No problem, David.
Best wishes,
Yaz |
Author: Matthew Nichols
Sunday, 07 March 1999 - 01:08 pm | | I am consumed by JtR and I wish to seek his true identity as well as his many (or few) motives. Maybe you fellow Ripperologists can help me with my lack of information.
Thank-you,
Dr. M Nichols |
Author: Caroline
Sunday, 07 March 1999 - 01:19 pm | | Think, everyone, think.
Love,
Caroline |
Author: Julian
Wednesday, 10 March 1999 - 09:56 pm | | Um
Jules. G'day |
Author: richie u.s.a.
Sunday, 14 March 1999 - 05:50 pm | | | would anyone out there know if there was, in fact, a third photo of the body found in miller's court? |
|
|
|
|
