Posted on 04/16/2011 9:17:07 AM PDT by Beowulf9
I think we get one of these about every 6 months, don’t we?
“I think we get one of these about every 6 months, don’t we?”
Yes, this particular one appeared Oct. 5, 2009. It’s old news.
At least....
Of course speculation on just who Ol’ Saucy Jack was is as big of a cottage industry as the JFK assassination.
(Personally, my money’s on Montague Druitt....)
I watched a TV show many years ago in which they had a bunch of top detectives listen to everything which is known about the case.
I recall they had an agent from Interpol, one from the FBI etc.
After presenting all the evidence they had each one vote in secret who they thought it was.
Every single one of them voted for the Polish Butcher. Several suspects such as Queen Victoria’s Son were dismissed as absolutely impossible.
I just bought my mother the Mariott book. Theory being he went from Whitechapel to NY, it’s true, a merchant marine did this and there were a couple of murders in NY similiar to Jack’s handiwork. He got the chair, (heheh, NY in the 1900s!)
Trevor Marriott, a retired detective thinks Jack the Ripper was a German merchant sailor Carl Feigenbaum.
I don't think the identify of the Ripper will ever be conclusively found. Both him (assuming it was a man) and everyone else living during that time are long dead and forensics and investigative science were primitive to say the least back then compared to now. This is the Mother of all Cold Cases! All the investigators profiled did agree on one thing, however, and that was given the current state of forensic and investigative science it is extremely unlikely the Ripper would have escaped justice had the Whitechapel murders occurred today.
There are so many Masonic symbols found in/around the murders (including the manner of dismemberment) that whoever did it was obviously a Mason.
The Polish butcher was not a Mason.
I believe there are quite a few of the suspects who were Masons.
Also, the Police Commissioner was a Mason, so this may explain why evidence, like the handwriting on the wall, was destroyed.
When are they going to claim he was a member of the Tea Party?
Well, that's an appropriate publisher.
(PSST.... Silly Saturday and your taxes are due Monday)
I have to say, in 1986, years before Patricia Cornwell claimed to have solved the ripper murders, Stephen Knight put out a book with the same theory, called Jack the Ripper, the Final Solution.
Claiming of course it was Walter Sickert the artist, whom I’ve read was out of the country for the murders most of the time and his last painting, which looked like Mary Jane Kelly, could’ve copied the pictures released in the newspaper prior to his painting being done.
Ripper ping
Robert Mann
A while back I took a personal tour of the Black Museum in New Scotland Yard.
The curator has case notes and an interesting book published shortly after the retirement of (and I forget) one of the leading supervisors on the case. In the margin of the page that starts the chapter on the Ripper, in hand-written script in pencil, you can clearly read the “final chapter” (actually, a couple of paragraphs) that identify Aaron Kosminski as the Ripper and offers up proof.
When asked why he has not released this book and proof, the curator stated he has done so with various authors, but as he said, while the authors found the proof of the Rippers identity compelling and certainly close the case, it would hurt other books that they are writing. Why end a good run on a great conspiracy?
There are reasons the police did not arrest the Ripper, and it had to do with a number of things:
1) A Jew found to be the culprit would inflame already passionate anti-Jewish hostility in London and in Europe, and the commissioner at the time, under pressure from the politicians at the time, did not want to go there.
2) The Ripper was sent to a sanitarium where he was watched closely and upon his release into the custody of his brother, lived a quiet life of no further crime — he was watched constantly until he died.
3) There are surviving relatives and they are aware of the infamy of their ancestor and do not grant permission to release the record.
4) And finally, the museum is for learning not for voyeuristic purposes, and therefore will not release to the general public, as all the items in the Black Museum are officially evidence and held as such.
Saw this on History Channel, last summer or fall. Pretty good theory.
Oh don’t even get me started on this either...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.