325 replies to this topic

[freetoroam]

I clicked on the first link and there it was, Dale Larner`s book.
Suppose it saves on paying for advertising.

[G Donnelly]

freetoroam, on 18 February 2013 - 08:17 PM, said:

I clicked on the first link and there it was, Dale Larner`s book.
Suppose it saves on paying for advertising.

Well it does look like a shameless plug...
So who do you think did it personally yourself?
Bearing in mind it had to be someone who removes organs with surgical precision.
I know my next piece of logic is based on Hollywood...
But the Queen didn't  want a scandal even on the behalf of feeble- minded Albert.
I wasn't suggesting Albert did it himself but his personal physician.
Tumblety has good prospects as well because not only was he a quack but a charlatan too.

But I would keep an open mind on the Vincent Van Gogh theory.
You'll have to admit that there was a bit of artistic flair the way the lungs were arranged on one of the victims.

Edited by Medium Brown, 18 February 2013 - 10:15 PM.

[Lava_Lady]

wolfknight, on 18 February 2013 - 08:03 PM, said:

REALLY REALLY are you serious and famous painter Jack the Ripper. What a load of crap. This so called writer is just trying to get his 15 minutes of fame and sell his book of lies.

I think all writers want to be famous, right?  

Back in the day, there were quite a few "famous" suspects Van Gogh was unknown at the time.

I don't know of there is any validity to this theory but I will reserve judgment until after I get all the information.  We all should.

Edited by Lava_Lady, 18 February 2013 - 10:47 PM.

[Lava_Lady]

I don't understandthe hostility some of the posts are expressing... did anyone else do any research?  Doe anyone else have credentials to disqualify this theory?

I'm not saying I agree with this idea, especially since I haven't read the authors other points but I'm curious so I read the op.

I don't understand why so much energy is being expended being nasty to a complete stranger.  of course he's plugging his book.  If you don't like it, don't click on the link or report him to the admins if you think its wrong.  

If anyone can disprove this theory than please tell us about it, because if love to read it.   The case of Jack the Ripper has been an interest of mine for a long time and if love to hear more fresh ideas on the killer.  Let's just be civil to each other.

[tyrant lizard]

Lava_Lady, on 18 February 2013 - 11:02 PM, said:

I don't understandthe hostility some of the posts are expressing... did anyone else do any research?  Doe anyone else have credentials to disqualify this theory?

I'm not saying I agree with this idea, especially since I haven't read the authors other points but I'm curious so I read the op.

I don't understand why so much energy is being expended being nasty to a complete stranger.  of course he's plugging his book.  If you don't like it, don't click on the link or report him to the admins if you think its wrong.  

If anyone can disprove this theory than please tell us about it, because if love to read it.   The case of Jack the Ripper has been an interest of mine for a long time and if love to hear more fresh ideas on the killer.  Let's just be civil to each other.

No one can disprove it because no one knows who Jack the Ripper was. But that doesn't make it true. I could say it was Zippy from Rainbow and ask people to prove it wasn't for all the good it would do.

[Mikko-kun]

But even us amateurs can tell there's certain things that limit the range of suspects. A) someone with money or otherwise access to tools to perform such cuts. Someone who lived back then and was neither an infant, smalll child (unless extremely talented and taking his victims by surprise) nor anyone too old or with a serious moving disability, unless had help in moving oneself. And then there's of course the surgical precision and hint of artistry all over there, letters and the way people were executed and left to be there. Artistry might not shut down ordinary people and narrow down it into artists, but the surgical precision would narrow down certain areas. It's not just a matter of being able or unable to prove in a black-and-white perspective, but in how strong case can you build compared to others. Of course strong cases mean nothing before truth, but they can be pretty enlightening. As an astrologer, I wouldn't judge Van Goch only because of how his art feels like, even if the feeling-vibrations matched really well, not just the ways some paintings or things behind them are portrayed, because the thing about artistry is that when you're good at it, you can mimic and create illusions out of almost anything, like the best actors, dancers, painters and others do. Perhaps painting gruesome work like corpses and death and such was considered a taboo or something inproper at least in those times, that why we might not see too many succesful Scorpio-oriented artists from past eras, and while Van Goch's surreal and line-twisting style is more Piscean and Neptunian to me at least (breaking borders), I think you could discern Scorpioish and Plutoistic elements from there, especially if you have an eye for art.

Just out of curiosity, what would be the minimum and maximum birth time ranges of any alleged killers? Assuming they couldn't be too old nor too young during the time murders occurred, especially not too young since even in a twisted world it usually takes some time to develop both such good surgical skills as well as such a gruesome way to use them.

[Lava_Lady]

tyrant lizard, on 18 February 2013 - 11:43 PM, said:

No one can disprove it because no one knows who Jack the Ripper was. But that doesn't make it true. I could say it was Zippy from Rainbow and ask people to prove it wasn't for all the good it would do.

Not exactly, if one really wanted to disprove the theory all you have to do is work on a timeline for the murders and Van Gogh's whereabouts.  

But why so much hostility?  It's just a theory.  If you think it's bunk well, thank you for you're opinion, no need to get angry and start name calling.

I don't get that.  

I don't understand why some people are getting so defensive over the mere thought that the artist could have been the Ripper.  Who knows?  Stranger things have happened on this planet.  And I, for one, do not know enough about the artist to make a statement as to whether he is guilty our innocent.  But it's interesting and when I'm done reading about it then I'll decide if it's bunk or not.

[Dale Larner]

wolfknight, on 18 February 2013 - 08:03 PM, said:

REALLY REALLY are you serious and famous painter Jack the Ripper. What a load of crap. This so called writer is just trying to get his 15 minutes of fame and sell his book of lies.

Yes, very serious. Three years of research & 2 ½ years to write. Committed my life to it.

Yes, Jack the Ripper was a famous painter, but when doing his work, he painted in flesh and blood. Jack would write, “Ha! Ha!” to that.

Yes, once it’s available, I do want to sell the book and have lots of readers—naturally.

No, no lies. Prefer only the truth, and I really do try to avoid creating things that stink, but the readers will be the judge of that.

Yes, thanks for your comment,
Dale Larner

[tyrant lizard]

The picture that supposedly shows the Mary Kelly hidden within the flowers doesn't hold much water with me, and it's the main selling point. If he was jack the ripper, and he did kill her, why did he make his representation of her from the same place the police took their picture of her? That's quite a coincidence, considering there were a hundred other places he could of of been standing when he made that mental picture.

[Moon Gazer]

Well I don't know a great deal about Van Gogh and have never researched the information available on Jack The Ripper either.  Based on what the author has posted in this thread, I would say that it is no way enough to accuse someone of being a serial killer.

The writing similarities have not been verified by someone with sufficient qualification to say any likeness gives a good probability of being the same person.  Pulling out a skull figure from a painting of flowers is not particularly impressive either.  I used to do it all the time when I was a child with the flower patterns on my wall paper and really freak myself out as the more I looked, the more I could only see skulls or scary faces!

Saying that someone COULD have travelled to London in sufficient time does not mean that Van Gough actually DID travel there.  If he could do it, then so could thousands of other people.

So far what I have read in this thread is just speculation and not edvidence or proof.  I hope that the book goes in to much more detail of actual evidence.  You know, showing that he actually DID travel to London on these particular dates or something else that actually does place him in the same locations.  Still doesn't mean he did it, but if you could prove he was there and that the handwriting matched then it would increase the chances.

It's unlikely I will buy the book as I don't have too much interest in this but if I did I would probably buy it, even if it was just to put a review on Amazon saying if there was real evidence in the book or just more speculation.

Mr Larner, I do wish you luck in getting your book published and "out there" and hope as you say, there is loads more real solid evidence in the book than you mention on here (can see why you wouldn't post everything as then why would anyone buy the book? lol)

[Moon Gazer]

Just a thought, but with regards to the ripper letters that you were matching up to the Van Gough letters, is there no post mark on letters in those days?  I just wondered with regards to the timing of the letters being received in London and when Van Gough would have had to post them.  Does the timing of the letters and how much time Van Gough would have had to spend travelling tie up?

And is there no doubt in your mind Mr Larner that maybe Van Gough may have had an unhealthy facination with the Ripper murders?  He was seen as quite an unstable chap.

[freetoroam]

Medium Brown, on 18 February 2013 - 10:11 PM, said:

Well it does look like a shameless plug...
So who do you think did it personally yourself?
Bearing in mind it had to be someone who removes organs with surgical precision.
I know my next piece of logic is based on Hollywood...
But the Queen didn't  want a scandal even on the behalf of feeble- minded Albert.
I wasn't suggesting Albert did it himself but his personal physician.
Tumblety has good prospects as well because not only was he a quack but a charlatan too.

But I would keep an open mind on the Vincent Van Gogh theory.
You'll have to admit that there was a bit of artistic flair the way the lungs were arranged on one of the victims.

There are a few theories but Van Gogh? No, not IMO.
Artistic flair to how the lungs were arranged maybe but it was not done with a paintbrush flair.

Edited by freetoroam, 19 February 2013 - 12:25 PM.

[freetoroam]

1888 - 1889
He moved from the Hôtel Carrel to the Café de la Gare on 7 May,^[94] where he became friends with the proprietors, Joseph and Marie Ginoux. Although the Yellow House had to be furnished before he could fully move in, van Gogh was able to utilize it as a studio.^[95] Hoping to have a gallery to display his work, his project at this time was a series of paintings including Van Gogh's Chair (1888), Bedroom in Arles (1888), The Night Café (1888), Cafe Terrace at Night (September 1888), Starry Night Over the Rhone (1888), Still Life: Vase with Twelve Sunflowers (1888), all intended to form the décoration for the Yellow House.^[96] van Gogh wrote about The Night Café: "I have tried to express the idea that the café is a place where one can ruin oneself, go mad, or commit a crime."

===================================================================
he was pretty painting in 1888 and just because he mentions 'or commit a crime" does not indicate he was going to England killing women.

[freetoroam]

The rooms were unfurnished and uninhabited for some time. He was still at the Hôtel Restaurant Carrel, but the rate charged by the hotel was 5 francs a week, which he found excessive. He disputed the price, took the case to a local arbitrator and was awarded a twelve franc reduction on the total bill

=========================================================

Does not sound like a man who had enough money to travel back and forth to England.

[monk 56]

This thread takes me back to when i was a young man, living in London i visited all the crime sites, it is extremely unlikely we will ever be able to prove who Jack the Ripper was, a likely suspect is Tumblety, but there is perhaps another that is a new suspect being Robert Mann who worked in a mortuary near all crime scenes, obviously we all have our own take on this, thats what makes it interesting, link to Robert Mann below:-

http://www.independe...ed-1798095.html