2 and 3 ? joke right? maybe you should write a book on humour, now that i would buy. (you can include your Jacque Le Ripper theory in it too.
Please note: express trains did not pass through a tunnel in those days and it was necessary to take a boat as part of the journey. So for him to get a train and boat from Arles to London - Victoria station, then to the East end, find a prostitute, kill her without being noticed then return to Victoria station (I can`t believe I am putting this, its just too funny) to catch the train then get a boat to catch another train then get another train to Arles, would be cutting it very fine to say the least!
My wheels are steady and I’m driving straight ahead. Not pushing hard, just stating the facts as they are. I’ve done the research. I know the subjects well.
I like humor, but I can’t find why #3 & #4 would seem humorous. Again, I’m simply stating the facts.
It’s understandable that some might jump to the conclusion that train travel was slow and unreliable back then. This could be true for local trains, but not for the express mail trains. They made few stops and sped along from Marseille to Paris and Paris to Calais and Dover to London, and back. The steamers were timed to meet the trains on their arrival at places like Calais and Dover, and the steamers could get across the 21 miles in 90 minutes.
This is not guesswork or speculation. It’s the way it was, and I put the work in to get to the truth. I prefer to work in facts. Bradshaw’s Continental Railway Guide of March 1888 is my source for the train and steamer schedules. Can’t get better than that.
I don’t see why it would be so difficult to imagine a man catching trains and steamer and murdering and then catching a train and steamer and trains to return home. It wasn’t such a hard thing to do. The trains and steamers were on a schedule. As for the murdering, well, most would find that hard to do, but not Vincent. Ha!
Having lots of good clean fun,