Author: Desdinova
Wednesday, 28 July 1999 - 12:43 pm |        |
Hi everyone!
As some of you who talked to me may know, I think McNaghten is Jack. (I also think I am the only one to think this...)
My reasons are:
1. The police and media spend all their time searching for the person on the streets. They would not suspect an inside job.
2. McNaghten has a lot of influence on all his subordinates. He could persuade them to believe it is someone else (e.g. Druitt, Barnett)
by "creating" evidence.
3. He could afford to look well off, therefore not raising any suspicion to the prostitutes until it's too late.
4. He could bribe criminals / journalists to write the letters. This would draw attention away from himself, and if he was under suspicion, witnesses will back up his statements.
(Of course, point 4 only exists if any of the letters are real..)
Feedback?
Desdinova
(Just had a nasty feeling that this should have gone in the Ripper Suspects section!) |
Author: D. Radka
Wednesday, 28 July 1999 - 02:26 pm | |
Wasn't McNachten still in India in 1888?
David |
Author: D. Radka
Wednesday, 28 July 1999 - 02:27 pm | |
Wasn't McNaghten still in India in 1888?
David |
Author: Jon
Wednesday, 28 July 1999 - 05:17 pm | |
Hello Des.
Your perfectly correct..
Your absolutly right, dead on the money, no question about it, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
I couldn't agree with you more....
Yep, your right....
Your the only one who thinks Macnaghten was the Ripper.
Regards, Jon |
Author: Desdinova
Thursday, 29 July 1999 - 01:03 am | |
Thanx Jon!
David, McNaghten came back from in India in 1887.
He, however did not join the police force till 1889.
Cheers,
Desdinova |
Author: Diana Comer
Thursday, 29 July 1999 - 02:40 am | |
| Des, I do not agree with your position but I will defend to the death your right to pursue it. I suspect that if the truth is ever discovered, it will be discovered by a small cadre or possibly even just one person. They or he or she will most certainly be laughed at at first. Your argument could just as well apply to Abberline (now there's a thought!) or Sir Charles Warren. |
Author: Desdinova
Monday, 02 August 1999 - 12:13 pm | |
Thanks Diana!
I love support!
I'm trying to pursue it as you put it, but I'm completely stuck on what the murder weapon could be.
Any ideas anyone?
See ya,
Des. |
Author: R.J. Palmer
Friday, 18 February 2000 - 12:11 pm | |
Perhaps you might consider Occam's Razor as a possible murder weapon.
Sorry, but the theory is scrambled. |
Author: miriam
Monday, 02 April 2001 - 10:00 pm | |
| to me it seems as though it was an insider, someone who had access to everything about the case. I agree with the first person. Not that it is necessarily McNaghten but definitely someone who knew where the police were up to and what they had and hadn't discovered. They also would have had to have access to the files so he could find out the addresses of the witnesses. remember that letter that was sent to the two witnesses? how would someone off the street have been able to find the witnesses names? As you know the police are the only one's who knew the names of the witnesses when they gave their statements so I think it was either one of the policemen or someone who had connections in the force. mim |
Author: Christopher T George
Tuesday, 03 April 2001 - 09:38 am | |
Hi, Miriam:
The crimes were well reported in the newspapers of the day. The newspapers actually gave the addresses of many of the witnesses, particularly if they testified at any of the inqests.
Chris George |
Author: miriam
Thursday, 05 April 2001 - 01:10 am | |
| how long have you been interested and how long have you been studying jack? although i am very young i think i know who he is. by the way i'm not in England i'm Australian. |
