|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 **
Jack the Ripper(my own thought on who there's a possibility of it being.)
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Letters: General Discussion:
Jack the Ripper(my own thought on who there's a possibility of it being.)
Author: Scottie
Friday, 21 January 2000 - 12:36 am |        | I happen to believe that Jack the Ripper could also have been one of the witnesses. It somewhat makes sense. He kills one of them, then he goes to the police as a witness, and since he's set as a witness he's ruled out as a suspect at the time. I don't know why, but even at this tender young age of 15, I have the urge to look into this whole Jack the Ripper thing as much as possible to see if I can somehow work it out. For anyone who looks into this thing with Jack the Ripper even more deeply than I am, could you check the witnesses and see if any of them have or had a job at "Central News Agency"? I assume that it could possibly shorten your search.
Scottie |
Author: Bob_C
Friday, 21 January 2000 - 04:52 am | | Hi Scottie,
I wish you luck with your tender years. All of us would be pleased to be able to 'work it out', young and old. New ideas are always welcome, so don't hold them back, but don't forget that there are hundreds, when not thousands, of expirienced and industious historians who have troubled themselves over the centuries to do what you, and I, would like to do. There aren't many stones left unturned.
As example, that Jack could have been a witness (e.g. George Hutchinson, Joe Barnett)has been discussed at length, plus any connection to the CNA (including the 'Dear Boss' letter).
That Jack would offer himself as witness is, I think, unlikely. Why bring himself to the notice of the police and thus increase the danger of detection? To be a witness does not generally allay any suspicion against you, and why should it? Indeed, some witnesses come under suspicion just because of that.
I suggest that you read a basic work on the Ripper (such as, but not only, Phillip Sugden's 'Complete History of Jack the Ripper') if you haven't already done so. Most of us come in at the top, and work our way down. (I did). Maybe you could try it the other way round.
Best regards
Bob |
Author: Scottie
Sunday, 23 January 2000 - 11:37 pm | | | thanks Bob. I won't get much time to look in on Jack the Ripper, since I've got school and everything to worry about. But I will still be looking into it. Something just told me to look into it when I heard his name in our French class and how they have the exhibit of one of the women he killed. Well, once again, thanks |
|
|
|
|
