Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
Dale Larner

Was Vincent van Gogh Jack the Ripper ?

326 posts in this topic

From one sales person to another, don't hand me phecies and tell me it's roses. The last guy that danced around the truth I gladly walked out of the interview.

I understand your view and how you could possibly conceive this as your idea. But it is skeptism placed on blue mooned events to say the least, with in saying the evidence you have is on a hunch that VG was a bored mastermind that didn't like paying for prostitutes well practically. There has been very good points brought to your attention that need no more going on about, but the most to note is about the performance of your effort in to showing your case has been nothing more than advertising. Cheap marketing that for the first 3 pages on this thread you could not even give the effort as to actually writing it, you just copied and pasted your sales pitch over and over and for that you have done your own deed. I personally lean towards the theory in which it was the chief surgeon under order of the royals, it just fits their isle of horrors so well and would have more reason.

But for your effort on the forum in trying to state your points you have done poorly, the most of watching you squirm and sell. TO WHICH might I add if your book is not released how in the blue hell can I purchase it? What is the point of advertising if it is not available? [ouch... I hate pointless telemarketers so much...] That I believe has been the biggest puzzle of them all that we have uncovered here. You are indeed phishing for success by stiring some controversy over it, but when you have several people telling you that the letters were bodged and you keep refrencing to those same letters... it doesn't help or stablise your point.

This brought instant laughter because I immediantly thought of this scene, come to think of it you will notice you and the other bloke have both got themselves shot in the leg in this thread.

*only relevant for about the first 10 seconds* (damn youtube give me more control :P)

http://youtu.be/s1xtYLIP8CU?t=13s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a way you are saying the imagination is a better tool at making us think than what is really before us?On the Don Mc song :lol:

It's not a pre-U exam my dear chap, the tool fits the purpose or the purpose fits the tool ?

It's appreciating a painting, in this case it doesn't matter if Vincent was not famous or if his painting broke more art auction sales records, or if he was even Jack or never shot himself, this painting would still be what it is. A great painting.

It applies to songs and movies, all things art I guess but that opens that strange can of worms : "What you mean Art ? " :lol:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a pre-U exam my dear chap, the tool fits the purpose or the purpose fits the tool ?

It's appreciating a painting, in this case it doesn't matter if Vincent was not famous or if his painting broke more art auction sales records, or if he was even Jack or never shot himself, this painting would still be what it is. A great painting.

It applies to songs and movies, all things art I guess but that opens that strange can of worms : "What you mean Art ? " :lol:

Agreed man,well said!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but the readers will be the judge of that.

Readers? There won't be many. You're a fraud and one of the worst kinds. You've fabricated garbage in the hopes of preying fiscally on the stupidity and ignorance of others. Its only slightly less disappointing that this forum has continued to allow you to post your lame self aggrandizing sales pitch. You're an embrassment to the real people who spend the time to document and pass on accurate historical information.

The slander you attempt to pass off as fact borderlines on criminal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not arguing with you Lava_Lady, you misunderstood me, I was applying the profile you provided as a better fit for Warhol.

you mentioned you wanted to know more, I posted what I know about Vincent in relation to topic, there is a lot more and you simply have to read about Vincent, his bio and letters to Theo is a must.

Regarding "why" he cut off his ear you'll have to read all we know about the incident. It was not just one irrational act, a lot of things were happening the days leading up to the incident. You'll have to decide for yourself, Paul Gauguin was there and has his version of the event.

I've been reading up on Vincent since I was in my early teens, he was the reason I chose Fine Arts to tell the truth,

I apologise if I caused you some distress

~edit : laziness leaves a mess everywhere :lol:

Hmmm...yes, you did cause distress, of the irritation kind when you wrote,

Sorry Miss, your unsub profiling is too general and based on it Andy Warhol is a better fit than Vincent.And the association of both to Jack is overwhelmingly inconsistent to timelines.
I think you thought I was applying the characteristics I listed to Van Gogh. Why else are you saying "I'm sorry miss"

You also wrote,

Going by the line of deductions based on amateurish profiling,...
so, yeah... "distress". Clearly you thought I was saying Van Gogh was guilty. But, whatever my "distress" won't make me lose sleep.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could he have done the murders with one ear and a paint brush in his hand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could he have done the murders with one ear and a paint brush in his hand?

He could have tickled them to death with his paintbrush...

However that's unlikely because the crime scenes are too blood splattered.

Edited by Medium Brown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He would sooner cut off his ear than to harm another woman, even if she was a "prostitute"

Vincent loved life, loved women or the pureness of a woman. read more about the man, he was a gentle soul. He would sooner harm himself than let harm come to others, specially the ones he loves.

One book I recommend for new readers of Vincent : Lust for life by Irving Stone or if you're not a reader, the movie with Kirk Douglas as Vincent

We know a lot about Vincents life, it is well documented

We know more about Vincents life now because it is well researched, from other documented sources.

We know Vincent, he is not Jack

Vincent was not a gentle soul. His 800 letters reveal his irascible and argumentative nature. For instance, when he moved back home, he was ruthless in his arguments with his preacher father, so much so his father threw him out of the house. This was mostly related to Vincent’s irrational love for his cousin. She didn’t want anything to do with him, but he continued to pursue her relentlessly, like a stalker,

Vincent then went to live with a pregnant prostitute.

His forgiving father allowed him to move back home again later, and Vincent’s arguing and obstinate behavior only intensified. He continued to cause his father harm to the point that others stopped visiting. Vincent was damaging his preacher father’s reputation, and he added to it by dating a neighbor of theirs and kicking up a stir with her family, which caused her to poison herself. She lived, but had to stay away from Vincent.

When Vincent’s father then suddenly dropped dead, his sisters and many in the town blamed Vincent for it because of the stress he had put on his father.

Vincent was not a gentle soul. He was a troublemaker, and he made trouble wherever he went for everyone he came in contact with.

Vincent van Gogh was not as he seems.

And I haven’t even touched on his murderous ways.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Not a coincidence. It had to do with the layout of the room. The room was small. The headboard and the right side of the bed were against walls. The location the picture was taken from was really the only angle that would include the full view of Mary Kelly’s body and face, and also the only angle to draw a sketch from.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Yes, they stamped letters with postmarks back then, and yes, the matches in timing to the dates of the Ripper letters and to Van Gogh’s life match up very well, ridiculously well, in fact.

If my research had not led to numerous matches between Vincent’s life and Jack’s deeds, then perhaps the reasoning of it only being an unhealthy fascination from afar would be viable. But it turns out he did have an unhealthy fascination with the Ripper murders, though, but it was up close—he committed them. A very unhealthy habit, indeed.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vincent was not a gentle soul. His 800 letters reveal his irascible and argumentative nature. For instance, when he moved back home, he was ruthless in his arguments with his preacher father, so much so his father threw him out of the house. This was mostly related to Vincent’s irrational love for his cousin. She didn’t want anything to do with him, but he continued to pursue her relentlessly, like a stalker,

Vincent then went to live with a pregnant prostitute.

His forgiving father allowed him to move back home again later, and Vincent’s arguing and obstinate behavior only intensified. He continued to cause his father harm to the point that others stopped visiting. Vincent was damaging his preacher father’s reputation, and he added to it by dating a neighbor of theirs and kicking up a stir with her family, which caused her to poison herself. She lived, but had to stay away from Vincent.

When Vincent’s father then suddenly dropped dead, his sisters and many in the town blamed Vincent for it because of the stress he had put on his father.

Vincent was not a gentle soul. He was a troublemaker, and he made trouble wherever he went for everyone he came in contact with.

Vincent van Gogh was not as he seems.

And I haven’t even touched on his murderous ways.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

YOu've just lost the entire plot now haven't you ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's as good a theory as any that's around but

The timeline of Van G's life has been mentioned many times in this thread.

It wasn't Vincent.

Starry, starry night....

The timeline of Vincent’s life matches very well to the Ripper murders, as presented by the dating and contents of his own letters.

I know it’s hard to take, but it was Vincent. He was not as he seems.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Part of what I present in the book is that Vincent had enough money to travel for each of the murders. His brother, Theo, provided him with the means, and Vincent thanked him in his letters for the amounts he received, providing the evidence of how much he received.

Vincent could travel roundtrip to London for less than 100 francs. He had the money, and he made the trips, and he committed the murders.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So. I'd gather that the book contracts aren't forth coming?

I've read this thread from the start and the whole thing is nothing but self promotion for a project that you want someone else to publish.

Why not self-publish? If you believe so much in your theory, ebook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So. I'd gather that the book contracts aren't forth coming?

I've read this thread from the start and the whole thing is nothing but self promotion for a project that you want someone else to publish.

Why not self-publish? If you believe so much in your theory, ebook.

Thanks for the interest and reading through the thread.

Of course, I’m hoping a book contract is forthcoming. My agent is currently pitching the book to publishers.

The traditional publishing route provides distribution.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Thanks for the interest and reading through the thread.

Of course, I’m hoping a book contract is forthcoming. My agent is currently pitching the book to publishers.

The traditional publishing route provides distribution.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Okay. I'm glad to support your tenacity, but not your theory.

Edit: Good luck Dale.

Edited by Likely Guy
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting,well thought out,but as others have said the timeline of van gogh's location at the time does not add up.

Thanks. It has been well thought out. Also well researched.

Ah, but the timeline does add up. It must be understand that Van Gogh was not announcing to others that he was traveling to London to murder. As would be expected, he wanted to hide his deeds. But the timing and content of his letters help give him away, among other things. This goes for his Ripper letters too.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Vincent spent all those time traveling and killing he couldn't have painted all the paintings that we know off, his paintings and sketches done during his time at Arles is a more accurate diary than his letters to Theo.

Vincent was also under strict observation during this period of his life. Theo, concerned and worried kept a keen eye on Vincent's well being from afar.

I know Vincent, he is not Jack.

Vincent did not cut off his ear and enter the hospital until Dec. 23, 1888. He was not under any observation during the Ripper murders from August to December 20, 1888. He was free to travel and murder, and he did just that.

Right you are about Theo keeping a keen eye on Vincent from afar, but being in Paris, Theo couldn't keep a keen enough eye on him, and Vincent did a good job of keeping Theo’s worries in check through his letters with misdirection. Vincent manipulated others with ease, especially Theo.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an avid reader of anything JTR, I find these responses quite childlike. I may not agree with he author on his claims, as I have not read the book, however, I have read a plethora of material regarding the murders. I've bee fascinated for as long as I can remember.

One of the things that does make me wonder, is that Van Gogh was mentioned years ago as a possible suspect. I believe that as a writer, we do have a certain responsibility to insuring our facts are supported by evidence. Without reading the book, who are we to judge?

I do not believe that Van Gogh had anything to do with the commission of the crime. I find other suspects much more plausible.

Despite my feelings of self promotion, and individuals seeking attention for something, this person has what many scientists call a possible theory. We once thought the earth was flat, did not believe in the possibility of flight, etc.

Please give others respect and carry on with your civil discourse.

@maureen_jacobs

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Part of what I present in the book is that Vincent had enough money to travel for each of the murders. His brother, Theo, provided him with the means, and Vincent thanked him in his letters for the amounts he received, providing the evidence of how much he received.

Vincent could travel roundtrip to London for less than 100 francs. He had the money, and he made the trips, and he committed the murders.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

I wish you luck with your book. In this case i will not be purchasing as I personally do not believe in your theories. But there may be some out there who will, even if they read it to come to the conclusion that it was not him, but reading 1 persons theory is not going to give a person the answer when there are so many others to look at. I doubt will ever be solved.

The reason I do not agree with your theory is because I have read other books and other theories and some have been much more likely than this one. BUT again, i do wish you luck.

Edited by freetoroam
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vincent never had money, cash.

Whatever Theo sent was to pay for his debts, he was always in debt.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vincent never had money, cash.

Whatever Theo sent was to pay for his debts, he was always in debt.

I think the idea is to buy the book, not to come out with facts on here. nodingsmilie.gif

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the idea is to buy the book, not to come out with facts on here. nodingsmilie.gif

I may give it a read,even if it cant convince me sounds like a decent mystery novel

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I may give it a read,even if it cant convince me sounds like a decent mystery novel

If it came out under fiction and the title was changed to..lets say...Is Vince Van de Pogh Johnathon the ripper, then I too would consider reading it as a mystery novel. :tu:

Edited by freetoroam
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it came out under fiction and the characters were changed to..lets say...Is Vince Van de Pogh Johnathon the ripper, then I too would consider reading it as a mystery novel. :tu:

Its all in the imagination free :lol:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.