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

Van Gogh had previously lived in London, and I believe he committed his first murder while living there. He then returned to London fifteen years later to kill more prostitutes as a mature serial killer using the name Jack the Ripper. He was highly motivated to make the trips from Arles to London.

He didn’t murder in Arles because it was too small a town and would attract attention to him. Arles was his safe place.

Not rubbish and not slanderous.

Did you see the handwriting comparison? It looks like evidence to me.

http://vincentaliasjack.com/wordpress/vangogh_ripper_matches/

Dale Larner

What looks like evidence to you, as has been said many times, would NOT stand up as evidence in a court of law!

You refuse to have a handwriting expert look at the handwriting. Why? Are you afraid they might tell you that you are wrong?

And you dont have any other evidence.

Slanderous? Quite possibly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Van Gogh had previously lived in London, and I believe he committed his first murder while living there. He then returned to London fifteen years later to kill more prostitutes as a mature serial killer using the name Jack the Ripper. He was highly motivated to make the trips from Arles to London.

He didn’t murder in Arles because it was too small a town and would attract attention to him. Arles was his safe place.

Not rubbish and not slanderous.

Did you see the handwriting comparison? It looks like evidence to me.

http://vincentaliasjack.com/wordpress/vangogh_ripper_matches/

Dale Larner

It's completely slanderous you have very little evidence

This is just a stunt to promote your book and no way will people believe your rubbish talk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doubt Van Gogh was the Ripper.The Ripper was most likely someone local to London, and knew the area.Who it was don't know. It might have been a sailor, that theory has been around for awhile.Certainly it had to be someone who knew that area well. Besides, Van Gogh could have traveled to Brussels or Paris or some other big city to kill without going to london.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Someone who is looking it the right way is someone who's asking for REAL EVIDENCE.

We gave you many chances Larner, yet you are unable to provide one single piece of evidence showing that your theory is true. You've been doing this for months, on numerous forums.

You are obviously not a serious researcher. You are just another liar trying to find a way to pay his mortgage by creating a false theory about the Ripper murders. We have seen this a thousand times, and I don't understand why the Mods are keeping this thread open.

You won't find a publisher. Why ?? Because you are accusing a legendary figure of being a killer without having a single piece of real evidence to back up your claim. No serious publisher in his right mind will publish your book, because if he do that he'll be sued by relatives of Van Gogh, simple as that.

You are committing a crime Larner. Accusing somebody of being a serial killer when you have no evidence to prove it is a serious crime.

I hope you won't make any money out of your lies. I really hope so. I, as a student in Criminology, can't stand liars like yourself. You said in your introduction in the community lounge that you are a dreamer. Well....Keep on dreaming, dreamer.

And the personal attacks continue.

I don’t know what college you are attending to get your Criminology degree, but I think they need to add a few courses on civility and integrity. Since, as you’ve noted many times before, you are a second year Criminology student, then I have to presume that you simply haven’t taken those classes yet, and therefore you haven’t yet learned that thinking you know everything as a second year Criminology student is being pompous.

A boy stayed up all night one night. He wanted to see the sun come up, and then it dawned on him. Hope that happens to you . . . and soon.

You seemed to have missed the handwriting comparison I presented. Even though your objectivity is gone with this and what’s being presented might not be clear to you until after you have your Criminology degree, try to take a look with fresh eyes.

http://vincentaliasjack.com/wordpress/vangogh_ripper_matches/

Always a dreamer,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seemed to have missed the handwriting comparison I presented. Even though your objectivity is gone with this and what’s being presented might not be clear to you until after you have your Criminology degree, try to take a look with fresh eyes.

http://vincentaliasjack.com/wordpress/vangogh_ripper_matches/

Always a dreamer,

Dale Larner

Dale would you be so kind as to post up your qualifications you have in hand writing analysis

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And the personal attacks continue.

I don’t know what college you are attending to get your Criminology degree, but I think they need to add a few courses on civility and integrity. Since, as you’ve noted many times before, you are a second year Criminology student, then I have to presume that you simply haven’t taken those classes yet, and therefore you haven’t yet learned that thinking you know everything as a second year Criminology student is being pompous.

A boy stayed up all night one night. He wanted to see the sun come up, and then it dawned on him. Hope that happens to you . . . and soon.

You seemed to have missed the handwriting comparison I presented. Even though your objectivity is gone with this and what’s being presented might not be clear to you until after you have your Criminology degree, try to take a look with fresh eyes.

http://vincentaliasjack.com/wordpress/vangogh_ripper_matches/

Always a dreamer,

Dale Larner

Dale. Yet again you harp on about your handwriting comparison.

You then have a go at JonathanVonErich suggesting he pays more attention in his criminology lectures.

As DingoLingo suggests, perhaps you could let us know what qualifications you have.

I am happy to give you my qualifications here and now.

30 years as a UK police officer including 6 years in forensics (CSI) where i studied fingerprints, photography, handwriting comparisons, ballistics, to name but a few subjects.

I eagerly await your list of qualifications :)

edit. By the way. The boy stayed up all night wondering where the sun had gone. It finally dawned on him. Your version doesnt quite hit the nail on the head lol :)

Edited by Englishgent
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And the personal attacks continue.

I don’t know what college you are attending to get your Criminology degree, but I think they need to add a few courses on civility and integrity. Since, as you’ve noted many times before, you are a second year Criminology student, then I have to presume that you simply haven’t taken those classes yet, and therefore you haven’t yet learned that thinking you know everything as a second year Criminology student is being pompous.

A boy stayed up all night one night. He wanted to see the sun come up, and then it dawned on him. Hope that happens to you . . . and soon.

You seemed to have missed the handwriting comparison I presented. Even though your objectivity is gone with this and what’s being presented might not be clear to you until after you have your Criminology degree, try to take a look with fresh eyes.

http://vincentaliasjack.com/wordpress/vangogh_ripper_matches/

Always a dreamer,

Dale Larner

Dale

Nothing personal. If I was disrespectful then accept my apologies.

Just ask anybody here: I'm a very nice guy. Integrity ?? I'm full of it. I lost my temper because I've asked you at least 4 time to provide solid evidence that Van Gogh was the Ripper, yet you still haven't provided any evidence yet. You are aware that you need a lot more than handwriting to accuse somebody of being a serial killer, right ?? The handwriting is interesting, I agree, but there's not enough to say that Van Gogh was indeed the Ripper.

You need to offer solid evidence, like a timeline showing that Van Gogh was indeed in the area at the time of the murders. Something solid. Prove that Van Gogh could have been on any of the crime scenes.

I am a very good student ( at Université Laval by the way, one of the finest University in Canada ) and as a student it's simply normal for me to ask you to provide solid evidence to back up your theory.

Again no disrespect, I have my suspicions about you and your theory, that's all. :)

Jonathan

Edited by JonathanVonErich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale

Nothing personal. If I was disrespectful then accept my apologies.

Just ask anybody here: I'm a very nice guy. Integrity ?? I'm full of it. I lost my temper because I've asked you at least 4 time to provide solid evidence that Van Gogh was the Ripper, yet you still haven't provided any evidence yet. You are aware that you need a lot more than handwriting to accuse somebody of being a serial killer, right ?? The handwriting is interesting, I agree, but there's not enough to say that Van Gogh was indeed the Ripper.

You need to offer solid evidence, like a timeline showing that Van Gogh was indeed in the area at the time of the murders. Something solid. Prove that Van Gogh could have been on any of the crime scenes.

I am a very good student ( at Université Laval by the way, one of the finest University in Canada ) and as a student it's simply normal for me to ask you to provide solid evidence to back up your theory.

Again no disrespect, I have my suspicions about you and your theory, that's all. :)

Jonathan

Hi Jonathan.

I get the impression we can ask until we are blue in the face. We wont get any further with this topic :no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to think about is that a lot of the Vincent letters we have is that they're actually rewrites of the original letters by Vincent's sister-in-law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And the personal attacks continue.

Of course they continue. And I have no problem piling on. You're a liar, fraud and criminal. You've entered multiple forums to peddle your smut and been called out on every single one of them. You've made a mockery of yourself all because you think you have the potential to prey on the ignorance of others. You don't even have enough integrity to sell out out for real money....just the idea that you "might" make money. You want to talk about personal attacks? How about your attacks on documented historical records based on nothing more than your fabricated BS. The real insult in your insults on our intellegence.

Your decent into internet self destruction contines. Google now recognizes a new category for "Dale Larner". There are now 378,000 results returned for "Dale Larner Fraud".

You're exposed and like any self absorbed egocentric fool you don't know how keep yourself from digging a deeper hole. The more you talk (post lies on the internet) the worse it gets and you just can't stop talking can you.

Classic charlatan. Lets hope you don't have a wife and kids. The shame that they'd be forced to live with. Sad.

Edited by BishopRyan
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale

Nothing personal. If I was disrespectful then accept my apologies.

Just ask anybody here: I'm a very nice guy. Integrity ?? I'm full of it. I lost my temper because I've asked you at least 4 time to provide solid evidence that Van Gogh was the Ripper, yet you still haven't provided any evidence yet. You are aware that you need a lot more than handwriting to accuse somebody of being a serial killer, right ?? The handwriting is interesting, I agree, but there's not enough to say that Van Gogh was indeed the Ripper.

You need to offer solid evidence, like a timeline showing that Van Gogh was indeed in the area at the time of the murders. Something solid. Prove that Van Gogh could have been on any of the crime scenes.

I am a very good student ( at Université Laval by the way, one of the finest University in Canada ) and as a student it's simply normal for me to ask you to provide solid evidence to back up your theory.

Again no disrespect, I have my suspicions about you and your theory, that's all. :)

Jonathan

You have nothing to apologize for here. If anything he owes you an apology for calling you pompous. You were direct and right to the point. He chose to deflect(again) from our demands by making the debate about anything other than his unsubstantiated lies.

Hilarious how a guy can fabricate a bunch of loose lies then redirect the questioning to attack your educational background to avoid the actual topic. We can now add hypocrite to the Dale Larner index.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

imagine if a man went to prison for having similar handwriting to someone ha. there be uproar.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale must of been put back in his box!!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe he's searching for REAL evidence that Van Gogh could have been the Ripper, something he clearly doesn't have.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe he's searching for REAL evidence that Van Gogh could have been the Ripper, something he clearly doesn't have.

ya he has no idea what he is on about. i think i should accuse him of being some serial killer. id have as much evidence as he has!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he has brought up some intriguing points. Maybe not too much for evidence thus far, but you can't really expect a guy to put the entire book out there for free.

At the very least it is an interesting theory. I see posts on this forum all the time making far more ludicrous statements with far less to back them up.

Last I checked, alot of the sections on this forum are dedicated to subjects most people would consider "crazy". So I'm not quite sure why there is so much hostility.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Dale,

I think I know what you are doing, because I did it myself...on this board.

In the Cryptozoology forum I posted this post: "Real life dinosaur footage, caught on tape !"

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=231362

The title was a copy of the title of a YouTube video.

The video is an obvious hoax and I showed why;

So why should I not post that as a reply on YouTube itself? Well, that's because since Google/Gmail took over YouTube, I can't access my YT account anymore, and they can go to hell for my sake.

But my point is this: I know for a 100 % people will start googling after they watched that video, and guess where they most certainly will end up? Here, at UM (one of the largest boards on the internet), and the thread I started.

Now you come along, and start promoting your book and discovery. People respond, discuss, bicker, and so on. The thread grows and grows..... and anyone unaware of this site or this thread who starts googling your name... or just Van Gogh's name... or just The Ripper's will end up HERE.

People who would never have made the connection between The Ripper and Van Gogh will now come here, and read about your book.

Very clever way of making your book known, Dale.

.

Edited by Abramelin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he has brought up some intriguing points.

What intriguing points? He's brought up some of moot points, but nothing intriguing so far.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what? I think you're being very unfair to Dale. Do I think Vincent was the Ripper? No, of course not - that's just silly! But I'm quite prepared to accept that Dale does, simply because if he was deliberately lying, his theory would be one heck of a lot better than this. He obviously has pretty good literacy skills - better than some of his detractors - and he seems to be fairly intelligent. And I assume that he really has written a probably unpublishable 800-page book, because he wouldn't be going on about it this much if it didn't exist. So in a way, you have to admire the man.

I also doubt very much if Van Gogh's descendants could possibly sue. Given the amount of nonsense that has been written in this context about numerous people with living descendants, including members of the British royal family, I assume that it's legally impossible to sue somebody for claiming that some long-dead guy was a serial killer on the shakiest of evidence. I mean. somebody wrote a whole book (that was less obviously a symptom of mental illness than this one and therefore actually found a publisher) proving that Jack the Ripper was Lewis Carroll! He even admits it in his published writings - you just have to rearrange the letters. Rather a lot. But hey, at least he was in the right country!

However, I don't think we need feel too guilty about continuing to be profoundly skeptical of this theory. Dale Larner may not be lying to us, but he's certainly lying to himself. As he explains on his website, he spent several years trying to teach himself to paint like Vincent by copying his paintings (sometimes with added pink cartoon *****-cats). Then, just it was starting to dawn on him that he would mysteriously never be anywhere near as good as one of the best painters who ever lived, he suddenly had an amazing epiphany that proved he was better than VVG after all, just in a different way.

It's no good asking him for proof - he hasn't got any, apart from subjective impressions that in his own unshakeable opinion make him smarter and more observant than anybody else in over a century, That, and the fact that Vincent, like virtually every other person in Europe, could theoretically have been in London at the correct times. What it comes down to is a pretty clear case of some sort of mental illness on the part of the author. Which is a shame, but it does mean that nobody will ever publish an 800-page book with numerous colour plates - how much is a copy going to cost if they do? - with no argument at all beyond "it's true because I say so on account of I don't like Vincent any more so yar boo sucks!" Unless he's crazy enough to self-publish. In which case, good luck, Dale, but I hope you aren't too fond of your house or your car or not being poor.

Oh, and Dale, you do know, don't you, that if it had been Picasso you'd tried unsuccessfully to emulate, you'd currently be trying to flog an 800-page book "proving" that because Guernica includes a lot of violent imagery, including bullet-wounds, Pablo P wasn't really a very nice guy, and he could theoretically have taken a plane to America at any time, he was obviously Zodiac?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question. Vincent could come and go as he pleased in Arles. He had no job and was accountable to no one. His younger brother, Theo, who lived in Paris, paid all of his bills.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

And there is nothing in the records of Vincent or Theo that enough money was given for trips to London.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Van Gogh had previously lived in London, and I believe he committed his first murder while living there. He then returned to London fifteen years later to kill more prostitutes as a mature serial killer using the name Jack the Ripper. He was highly motivated to make the trips from Arles to London.

He didn’t murder in Arles because it was too small a town and would attract attention to him. Arles was his safe place.

Not rubbish and not slanderous.

Did you see the handwriting comparison? It looks like evidence to me.

http://vincentaliasjack.com/wordpress/vangogh_ripper_matches/

Dale Larner

I live where people find the face of Jesus in a tortilla. Your work would be far more marketable if you would drop the Vincent thing (you never attack an endeared person, it just doesn't sell books or attract publishers) so why not prove that the ripper was a woman? How about Eleanor Marx, daughter of Karl? Lived in London, committed suicide at a young age . . . . all the ingredients and they you have something an editor would think again about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there is nothing in the records of Vincent or Theo that enough money was given for trips to London.

Actually, just the opposite is true. Vincent routinely thanked Theo in his letters for the money he received, noting the amounts. Vincent's own words reveal that he received enough money for each of the trips, and the railway guide of the time provides the fares. Vincent had the means, and he made the trips, and he committed the Jack the Ripper murders.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who wish to join in the fun and help break the story, please send an email TODAY to *Snip* Thanks.

*Snip*

Edited by Still Waters
Rule1e. Participation requests: Do not ask members to take part in offsite surveys, petitions, contests, campaigns or fundraisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • [*]Well, I've never heard anything of this nature about Van Goghe before.. Very unusual and interesting. At the very least I think this theory could sell books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just...silly. But, hey, gotta make your money from something. Hope you're able to.

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.