325 replies to this topic

[FLOMBIE]

This really leaves me stunned. And this painting would be the only connection? I see nothing. Absolutely nothing but a fine painting.

[JonathanVonErich]

Rlyeh, on 25 May 2012 - 05:50 PM, said:

This is the face the OP is talking about. How on earth he can tell its a human face and who it belongs to, I have no idea.

I agree 100%, this is probably the worst theory we have seen yet.

Mr. Larner: You want to be taken seriously ?? Then please share:

- A timeline of events showing that Van Gogh could have committed the crimes.

- Handwriting analysis showing the similarities between Van Gogh's handwriting and the authentic Ripper letters.

- A motive for the crimes, anything showing why Van Gogh would have committed the crimes.

In other words please share some REAL evidences and not something based on speculation and fantasy. The fact that in your opening post you only shared information on what you allegedly found in the pictures and shared nothing on the timeline or handwriting is highly suspicious to me. Seems like you have absolutely nothing solid connecting Van Gogh to the case. Nothing,

[Rlyeh]

If Van Gogh was painting the crime scene, why would he include the breasts? According to you, he got the details right down to the broken thigh. Yet he adds breasts.

Your theory isn't very convincing, you've basically accused Van Gogh of murder based on pareidolia.

[Dale Larner]

BrianPotter, on 25 May 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

I cant make anything out in the pictures at all....im not disagreeing with your idea but i just cant see them...sorry.

Thanks for your honesty. Have you tried watching the videos? I describe the position and shape of the images in detail. Perhaps watching will help bring the images to life.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[Dale Larner]

RavenEyes19, on 25 May 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

Same here.
I can kind of make out a skeletal face in the flowers, but what makes you conclude that this Mary Kelly? It just looks like a skeletal face to me. It's not hard to make out faces in patterns or in random things like inkblots or clouds. Our brains are actually wired too..it's called pareidolia.

I love looking at clouds and such and making out images, but that isn’t what’s happening with the Irises painting. The lines and tones and colors are too distinct and purposeful, and the images are to complex to be happenstance. Van Gogh created the hidden images with the intent of concealing them.

It’s a good first step if you can make out the skeletal-like face. Seeing this face in the flowers was the first hidden image I saw, and I saw it because I first saw the photo of Mary Kelly not too long beforehand. The image jumped to life because I recognized it as Mary Kelly’s face, and this broke the spell of the magician, and the other hidden images then also came to life, and so did Van Gogh’s hidden life.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[Imaginarynumber1]

It's certainly a.... unique hypothesis, to say the least.
I will, however, have to agree with the others that you will need more than an interpretation of a painting to convince anyone.

[Englishgent]

It's lucky that nobody noticed this alleged link with the Ripper murders at the time Van Gogh painted his picture.  Can you imagine poor old Van Gogh standing in the dock saying ''But m'Lord, it's only a painting!'' and the judge saying ''Yeah yeah, pull the other one. I can see Mary Kelly in those flowers. Guilty as charged. I sentence you to be hanged by the neck until you die!''

[Dale Larner]

Taun, on 25 May 2012 - 12:31 PM, said:

I don't for a moment believe that Vincent Van Gogh was - or could have been Jack the Ripper...

However, good luck with your book. Getting published is a difficult feat and you are to be commended for 'sticking with it' through the process...

Thanks. That’s very kind of you.

I understand your difficulty in believing the concept. I was a big admirer of Van Gogh before I made the discovery and started the book. As a painter, it was his painting style that I wanted most to emulate. But when I read his letters, I realized he wasn’t the poor, misunderstood artist that the popular image of him portrays. And when I dug deeper, I found he was a much darker character than I could have imagined.

All the best,
Dale Larner

[JonathanVonErich]

Mr. Larner

I am a 2nd year student in Criminology and I've read numerous books about this case, so please answer my post.

I seriously hope that what you "see" in the painting is not the only "evidences" against your suspect, because quite frankly it's really weak. What you allegedly found in the painting is not solid proof of Van Gogh's guilt. Again you are accusing somebody of being a serial killer, you need REAL and SOLID evidences to convince anybody that your theory might be true.

You need to share :

- A timeline of events showing that Van Gogh could have committed the crimes.

- Handwriting analysis showing the similarities between Van Gogh's handwriting and the authentic Ripper letters.

- A motive for the crimes, anything showing why Van Gogh would have committed the crimes.

Thank you for your time.

Edited by JonathanVonErich, 26 May 2012 - 02:37 AM.

[Grimm24]

I find it fascinating the whole Ripper subject, like did they ever discover if he ever had any background in the medical field or whether or not that was all just hokum. I do find it extremly hard to believe that Van Gogh was the Ripper though. Iv been extremely interested in his case for a while now though and any new theories are always refreshing.

[Dale Larner]

JonathanVonErich, on 25 May 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:

First of all: No disrespect to you mr. Larner, and good luck with the book.

I have to say: the "evidences" you have against your suspect are incredibly weak, and your theory is based on nothing more than speculation and fantasy. Where are the real evidences ?? Show me the evidences. If you were a serious researcher you wouldn't have shared the info about what you "found" in the pictures, you would have shared a timeline of events proving that Van Gogh might have committed the crimes or some kind of SOLID evidences linking him to the crimes. There's nothing in the pictures resembling the face or body of Mary Kelly, absolutely nothing. Wishful thinking on your part ?? probably. You are accusing a man of being a serial killer, you need real evidences to accuse somebody of such a crime.

Instead of sharing with us the thing you "found" in the pictures, again something based on fantasy and whishful thinking in my opinion, why don't you share more about the handwriting analysis you made ?? And you compared Van Gogh's handwriting to which one of the Ripper letters ?? Because now most researchers agree that only 2, maybe 3, of them were authentic.

Of course you'll be able to find a publisher. Why ?? Because your theory is sensational and your suspect is a well-known artist, exactly the type of books that might attract the attention of people who wants nothing more than a good read. I, as a criminology student, wants more than a good read and a sensational theory based on nothing more than speculation and fantasy, therefore I won't buy your book sir. With all my respect, of course.

If indeed you have REAL, solid evidences against your suspect then share them with us instead of talking about what you allegedly found in the pictures. The fact you talk about the pictures instead of talking about the handwriting, instead of sharing a timeline of events showing that Van gogh might have committed the crimes is highly suspicious to me.

Last thing: I've seen that you used the tag "Case solved" for this thread; no, the case is not solved, we need real solid evidences to close a case.

Thanks for at least wishing me good luck with the book.

Sorry to hear you won’t be buying a copy. Hope you change your mind.

I’m also sorry that you can’t make out the face or body in the painting. Have you watched the videos? I describe in the videos the layout of each of the hidden images in detail. That may bring them to light for you.

I realize you want to see all of the evidence I have so you can truly evaluate what I’ve got, but it’s simply too much information and too detailed to cover in this format, which is why I chose to do a thorough job of it by writing a book.

To give a little extra info, though, I will note that I believe Van Gogh wrote most of the Jack the Ripper letters. This conclusion was drawn from an analysis of the letters based on such criteria as content, location, dates, handwriting, and such.

Being that you are a 2^nd year Criminology student who has read Jack the Ripper books, it will be a real shame if you decide not to buy the book.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[Dale Larner]

rashore, on 25 May 2012 - 05:21 PM, said:

I gotta say, I'm pretty leery of the notion that Van Gogh was the Ripper just because some of his paintings got some weirdness going on.

What would he motive have been? He would have had to have some serious motive going on for him to decide to nip out the hundreds of miles and days of travel between the south of France and London just to knock off some, er, ladies of the night.

And besides, Van Gogh may not really have been accountable to anyone in Arles, but to my understanding it's pretty well documented that he was there and painting when the commonly accepted murders happened. If some of the other alleged victims were indeed the Rippers work, it becomes even more difficult to imagine that Van Gogh did it.

I too would be interested to know if there was any sort of handwriting analysis between what may be the Rippers handwriting and Van Gogh... Unlike the Ripper, there are several known examples of Van Goghs writing, especially during the Arles era.

The hidden images are just the beginning.

Van Gogh moved to London in 1873 at the age of 20, fifteen years before the Jack the Ripper murders, and I believe he committed his first murder of a prostitute while there. Because of this, and for various other reasons, he then had a strong pull to return to London later for more murder, and he did, many times.

Thanks,
Dale Larner

[JonathanVonErich]

Thank you for your answer mr. Larner, I appreciate it.

Dale Larner, on 26 May 2012 - 08:34 PM, said:

Being that you are a 2^nd year Criminology student who has read Jack the Ripper books, it will be a real shame if you decide not to buy the book.

Well I'm gonna buy the book if I know that you have solid evidences proving that your suspect could have committed the crimes, that's all I ( and everybody having an interest in this case ) want. Yourself, as a researcher, must admit that it takes a lot more than what you might "see" in a painting to accuse anybody of being a serial killer, right ?? Therefore it would be great if you could share a little more of what you have found.

Do you have strong evidences that Van Gogh was in London at the time the murders were committed ?? That's the entire case right there, you need to prove that Van Gogh was in London when the crimes were committed.

That's all I want to know, I won't bother you again with my questions.

[Night Walker]

Vincent wanted to represent himself in the Irises, and he chose to do so by using a Dogman-like image. The Dogman is facing to the left and down, as viewed. The flattened dark area is the nose, and below it is the mouth turned up in a growl.

http://vincentaliasj...cut_dogman.html


Hmmm... this looks like a job for...<wait for it>...

[Realm]

Well, sounds feasable, hell, somebody was the Ripper.