| The "Ripper-through-the-years" theory may be made clearer if the
read Rumbelow's book (see below).
I posted the following in the UCOUNT::TV file. I'd normally say
access that file but the node is bogged down and it would take you
10 minutes to find the note. I first answered the question of
which book I was refering to when I mentioned P.J.Farmer's Ripper
theory. And it was my understanding the files were closed in 1888
with the std. 100 yr. seal--this was the hook for the Fox broadcast.
Don
=====================================================================
The Farmer novel is GODS OF RIVERWORLD. It contains the 3-man
coverup theory.
As for the Channel 25 broadcast, it was nothing but a Fox
viewer poll.
It was hinted new evidence from the previously closed files
would be revealed. Not even. Opinions of the panel were
expressed with little or no background evidence. Rumbelow
(JACK THE RIPPER: THE COMPLETE CASEBOOK) was interviewed:
one whole question. He did have the post-mortem knife found
in the supposed Ripper's effects, which made good copy. (In
retrospect, it wouldn't surprise me if all the reenactment
info came from his book!) And they had the nerve to offer
two quotes from a letter (written by Warren, I think)
recorded in their files and NOTHING ELSE--with 5-6 thick
volumes of evidence strewn around the table! (I think the
actual Ripper file was a few pages stuck in the book Leeming
was reading from, and we were being hyped.)
Now, no mention was made of the potential "2nd man" but they
did touch on the possibility of a conspiracy by the 5 women to
blackmail the prince, resulting in Gull, Warren, and another
ranking govt. official (name escapes me) murdering them in such
a way as to indicate a madman's work. Ustinov linked the word
"Juwes" found written on a wall the night Stride was murdered
("The Juwes are not the men that will be blamed for nothing.")
to the Freemasons, of which Gull & Warren were members, so, to
protect the Prince (also a Freemason), they took it upon
themselves to eliminate the threat. This theory wasn't posed
to the "panel of experts".
Ah, the experts.
-Pathologist Wadell dismissed *all* Ripper letters as hoaxes,
making no explanantion of why one contained info which should
have been known only to the Ripper himself.
-The FBI's Hazelwood gave a fascinating profile of Jack, but
nothing specific. Also, Douglas (the 2nd FBI man) agreed with
Wadell, saying the letters didn't fit the profile. The profile
pointed to one man.
-The British judge (Queen's Counsel Mallalieu), when asked who
was the least likely suspect, immediately picked (need a drum
role?) Prince Albert. Well, of *course* he didn't do it. He was
never near the place. He had witnesses who would swear on a
stack of titles he was elsewhere; why, during one of the murders
he was in Scotland. (Wasn't he?) And wouldn't shew just like to get
Queen Victoria on the witness stand!
[Incidentally, I don't think the prince was the Ripper.]
As for the rest of the suspects:
-Sir William Gull couldn't be the one, as he was 52 and had had a
stroke (sticking to the single man theory) and was too genteel
and intelligent to fit the profile. The Queen's physician? Be
serious! (Wonder why Ustinov chose Gull--never did explain his
reasoning. I guess when its your job to cast the deciding vote
in case of a tie and the panel is unanimous you feel you'd be
pissing in the wind.
-D'onston, who wrote acticles which seemed to have info only the
Ripper could know, and claimed to know who the Rippers was, was
dismissed as a suspect because the killings had no signs of
devil-worship. I wonder if the Yard looked for any?
-M.J. Druitt, a failed lawyer and teacher lived near enough to
the murder scenes to do the deeds and vanish quickly. He
was a strange one; even his family thought he was the Ripper.
-Kosminski, the last suspect, was a Polish immigrant who did odd
jobs and was purported to be mad, winding up in an asylum for
the rest of his life. He was a sleazy, unwashed, anti-social
fellow who lived in the shadows of life who also lived in the
area. A night person who fit the bill as someone who'd be
out and about and on the prowl at 4AM.
The producers' theories were interesting but the experts ignored
them. The only suspect which I felt didn't fit was Dr. D'onston,
the Satanist, who came off from all angles as a publicity hound.
The experts didn't mention the tunnel which might have been used
by Druitt for a quick & quiet escape, and no mention was made
if the police patrolled it or not. So what did they do? They
chose the path of least resistance. See after <FF>. And, both
producers and experts ignored a few points made by the TV-movie.
(See after <FF>.) One of the burning questions I had was why the
manhunt was called off when Druitt was fished out of the Thames,
and I waiting for the panel to address it. Seems the police thought
the Ripper was finished, whoever he was. Or was Scotland Yard just
lucky the killings stopped? [I was wondering if maybe his goal was
to thoroughly cut up a person and when he has sated himself he either
killed himself or experienced a complete personality change. Or
moved away.]
Rather, it was mostly reenactments of the murders, repetition
of producers' theories and pre-commercial hints at "new
evidence" & startling disclosures. The show was quite thorough
in providing known info and their own speculations, but few
fact-based conclusions.
And every 15 minutes Ustinov was telling you which numbers to
call to cast your viewer vote! How could the show be anything
else but a Fox ratings poll when they wanted you to call in your
vote after each suspect was "examined"!?!?! Can you imagine
doing that during an actual jury trial?
And the commercial breaks increased in frequency as the show
wore on. And when it was over all I could think was "Gotcha!
They trolled and you took the bait."
In short, my wife summed it up with one word: "Bogus."
re -.1 Right on! The clue was given when Gull was looking at
Kelly's photo. He mentioned he had practised vivisection (not
uncommon, but you need a callous streak to do it.) And perhaps
you felt a twinge when he didn't bat an eye when he first looked
at the photo.
No new (significant) evidence was revealed. The panel didn't
identify the Secret Identity of Jack the Ripper, they *guessed*.
The path of least resistance was Kosminski. No family, no friends,
no social life, little interaction with hardly anybody (sorry;
any*one*). It seemed to me the most damning evidence was that
his MTBB (Mean-time-between-baths) was quite large. No distinction
there, as Whitechapel was a haven for the poverty stricken--4 pence
for a night's lodgings, no bath.
Some more unanswered questions:
-How did the Ripper manage to kill 4 and slice up 2 victims out
in the open w/o an outcry? True, Whitechapel murders were more
common than you'd think, but with the vigilance of the people
and the police it is amazing how silent he was, and how expertly
he carved in the dead of night. #4 was cut up in less than 10
min., according to the police patrol rounds reports. Evidence
seems to indicate it would take more time. Did he act alone, or
have a confederate?
-He easily he made his escapes, too. Why, with all the patrols,
and people on their way to work in the early AM, did no one spot
him? Given the spurting of blood everywhere, he must have been a
gory sight on at least two occasions.
-Was Jack or wasn't Jack surgeon-like? The doctors disagree on that
point, but the Yard seems to have leaned towards a strong medical
connection. Having a post-mortum knife doesn't make you an expert
on anatomy. Unless they used to come with instructions.
-Why, really, was the "Juwes" note washed off the wall before a
photo was taken? Since Pizer, the Jewish butcher, was cleared
of all charges, and the note indicates the Jews weren't going to
take the heat for it, why was it so important it be wiped? It was
recorded, so a photo wouldn't be much worse. (Apparently this view
was shared, because Sir Charles Warren resigned soon after. Or was
it because he was in on it and felt morally obligated to resign.
And do good deeds, like the Boy Scouts.)
-Why did a witness identify Kosminski (a down-and-out nobody) and
then refuse to testify? I suppose you could say he didn't want
someone to know he goes to Whitechapel, but you'd think the
notoriety of being The Eye-witness who nails Jack would far outway
other considerations. And there were conflicting reports of what
happened to him after incarceration.
-Why has so much documentation disappeared over the years? You'd
think the compilation and safe filing of the most grisly serial-
murder to date would be primo in the eyes of Scotland Yard. Even
despite the City Police/Scotland Yard rivalry.
So who really was Jack the Ripper? (Answer after <FF>:)
Insufficient data.
Don
==================================================================
I perused the book a few days ago. The author picked Lukes (oh
Darn-I can't recall the exact name) although he (and I) really
liked the Gull theory.
We'll never know, but one thing we can be almost certain of:
The Ripper is dead.
Don
|