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

I find the theory proposed by mr larner to be a long shot, to say the least !, however i wonder if mr larner has referred to the book the yellow house by martin gayford in his research. It mentions that vincent, a voracious reader and interested in a wide range of subjects, may well have read about the murders in the french press. He also writes that vincent visited whitechapel when he was preaching in his spare time when he lived in london (this was pre 1888).

Gayford also writes that catherine eddowes, one of the ripper victims, had her right ear cut off, and that vincent of course cut off his right year in an act of self mutilation.

Vincent also had complex relationships with prostitutes, living with one at one point and using them often throughout his life. In one biography of vincent the authors write he saw them as 'sisters of mercy'.

I still find the theory far fetched, it seems any famous person around in 1888 is to be accused of the crimes. I also don't see why vincent would travel from the south of france to london to commit the murders. Surely he could've found prostitutes to kill in france ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of the bible code lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale can you link me to anything that says Mary Kelly had dogs placed in her and around her? I can't find anything at all about that online... just wondering where it came from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the theory proposed by mr larner to be a long shot, to say the least !, however i wonder if mr larner has referred to the book the yellow house by martin gayford in his research. It mentions that vincent, a voracious reader and interested in a wide range of subjects, may well have read about the murders in the french press. He also writes that vincent visited whitechapel when he was preaching in his spare time when he lived in london (this was pre 1888).

Gayford also writes that catherine eddowes, one of the ripper victims, had her right ear cut off, and that vincent of course cut off his right year in an act of self mutilation.

Vincent also had complex relationships with prostitutes, living with one at one point and using them often throughout his life. In one biography of vincent the authors write he saw them as 'sisters of mercy'.

I still find the theory far fetched, it seems any famous person around in 1888 is to be accused of the crimes. I also don't see why vincent would travel from the south of france to london to commit the murders. Surely he could've found prostitutes to kill in france ?

It does sound farfetched, doesn’t it? But keep doing what you’re doing, and you just might begin to see the viability of Van Gogh being a psychopathic serial killer. What I means is, keep looking at the biographies, keep searching out the info about Van Gogh, and you’ll begin, possibly, to see past the illusion.

Van Gogh presented a false image of himself when he was alive and that false image is in the minds of the public today as being the real Van Gogh. But reading his own words and delving into the facts reveals Van Gogh’s true nature. Keep digging and you might see it more clearly. Then, instead of believing that Van Gogh was reacting to the deeds of Jack the Ripper, such as cutting off his ear because he had read about Eddowes’ ear being slashed off, it could become clear that he cut off his own ear because he had cut off Eddowes’ ear earlier, and also Mary Kelly’s ears the previous month.

Van Gogh wasn’t only being influenced by what Jack the Ripper was doing, he was Jack the Ripper, and therefore, what he was doing in his known life was affected by what he was doing in his hidden life.

Best of luck seeing past the devices of the master illusionist.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And dale is back

Did anyone buy the book yet

I’m sure you know I’ll let you know the moment I have a publisher. The nature of the claim makes it a hard sell. But at some point, either because the story breaks or because the right person takes a deeper look, the book will be bought up.

Sorry for the long delay. I feel certain you can’t wait to get your hands on it, and I am also looking forward to that day. A little more patience. Don’t lose heart. I’ll get there. The world will realize what I have is real.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale can you link me to anything that says Mary Kelly had dogs placed in her and around her? I can't find anything at all about that online... just wondering where it came from.

The only link you will find is on my website, and that’s because I made the discovery. I’m presenting that there are dogs in Mary Kelly’s crime scene photo, and matching to this, that Van Gogh painted dog heads hidden in his Irises painting positioned around the representation of Mary Kelly’s body.

The Irises painting acted as a key to breaking the code of Van Gogh’s hidden life, and part of what it reveals is that, while acting under the direction of his created persona Jack the Ripper, Van gogh positioned dogs, along with other items, in and around Mary Kelly’s mutilated body, mainly to escalate the shock value.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I'll have what ever it is your on. lol sorry but I can't see jacksh1t in any of he's paintings.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow I'll have what ever it is your on. lol sorry but I can't see jacksh1t in any of he's paintings.

It sounds like you’re looking for the wrong substance. Try seeing faces and dogs and things, as in what’s outlined on the website. And it’s not necessary to take any sorts of psychedelic drugs to see the images—just a little time and some understanding of why Van Gogh painted the hidden images.

Keep looking and good luck.

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This reminds me of the bible code lol.

Bingo!

The Irises painting acted as a key to breaking the code of Van Gogh’s hidden life ...

Edited by Slate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale can you link me to anything that says Mary Kelly had dogs placed in her and around her? I can't find anything at all about that online... just wondering where it came from.

http://victorianripper.niceboard.org/t601-enhanced-crime-scene-photos

Here is just 1 link to pics of the Ripper victims. There is also a crime scene photo of Mary Kelly - NO dogs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this whole thread just a spoof of that Jackdaw guy who keeps posting walter sickert's paintings with the claim that they contain hidden corpses and knives and faces and cell phones and sunglasses and the like, with enhanced images of nothing, but with a red outline around that nothing claiming it's mary kelly, and whatnot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this whole thread just a spoof of that Jackdaw guy who keeps posting walter sickert's paintings with the claim that they contain hidden corpses and knives and faces and cell phones and sunglasses and the like, with enhanced images of nothing, but with a red outline around that nothing claiming it's mary kelly, and whatnot?

Sadly, no, this isn't a spoof.

This guy Larner is claiming Van Gogh is the Ripper. He's tried pulling this crap on other sites, only to get utterly discredited on them, as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s been a long and lonely road, but the book has moved a step forward. Not yet a publisher, but I have obtained a highly perceptive literary agent who is enthusiastic about what is contained within the pages of VINCENT ALIAS JACK. A little more patience, then hopefully an excellent publisher, and then it’s out to the world for all to see who the murderer was that hid behind the persona of Jack the Ripper.

Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s been a long and lonely road, but the book has moved a step forward. Not yet a publisher, but I have obtained a highly perceptive literary agent who is enthusiastic about what is contained within the pages of VINCENT ALIAS JACK. A little more patience, then hopefully an excellent publisher, and then it’s out to the world for all to see who the murderer was that hid behind the persona of Jack the Ripper.

Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

And for your sake, I hope that the "proof" you claim to have in your book is actually verifiable, and not something that you "see" in a painting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HIGHLY amusing.

The guy has a book he's trying to sell.

Of course, like most serial killers, JTR was probably some nobody who's name wouldn't mean a thing to anyone.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HIGHLY amusing.

The guy has a book he's trying to sell.

Of course, like most serial killers, JTR was probably some nobody who's name wouldn't mean a thing to anyone.

Glad I could provide you with some amusement.

I actually agree with you. Jack the Ripper was probably some nobody whose name wouldn’t mean a thing to anyone. The name Vincent van Gogh didn’t mean a thing to anyone during his lifetime. He was a nobody. So you are likely correct.

It wasn’t until many years after Van Gogh's death that he became know for his paintings, and it took over a century for him to now be known for his murders.

Such fun,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Lerner,

I would like to hear your theory in regards to James Kelly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beyond silly. Everyone knows van Gogh was friends with the Doctor. The Doctor would have never taken Amy to go visit him if he was a murderer.

*nods sagely*

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your still going on Dale..

Ok since your still about it.. i will ask again..

Please post up what qualifications you have in forensic handwriting..

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s been awhile, and I know it’s taking forever, but I’m getting a little closer to bringing the book out into the light. It was a little large at over 800 pages, and my agent wanted the page size reduced, so lots of editing, and now it’s down to a more reasonable 672 pages. Ha! There’s just so much evidence against Van Gogh.

But don’t despair, all the goodies are still there.

It’s tighter and leaner, and the conclusion is just as clear as before—Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper!

Thanks for your patience. It will be worth it. The case is solved.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beyond silly. Everyone knows van Gogh was friends with the Doctor. The Doctor would have never taken Amy to go visit him if he was a murderer.

*nods sagely*

he was also friends with Chairman Mao.

Not Van Goch, the Doctor. And Boneparte. He laso thought the French Revolution was he favourite point in human history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh not another famous painter did it theories!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh not another famous painter did it theories!

So many times in history the truth is surrounded by lies. There can only be one truth to who Jack the Ripper was, and all the evidence points to one man—Vincent van Gogh.

Van Gogh was not famous in his lifetime. He was a nobody. He had no job. He came and went as he pleased. He traveled to London undetected and blended in with the East Enders, killed his victims, and then returned to France, and no one was the wiser.

Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So many times in history the truth is surrounded by lies. There can only be one truth to who Jack the Ripper was, and all the evidence points to one man—Vincent van Gogh.

Van Gogh was not famous in his lifetime. He was a nobody. He had no job. He came and went as he pleased. He traveled to London undetected and blended in with the East Enders, killed his victims, and then returned to France, and no one was the wiser.

Vincent van Gogh was Jack the Ripper.

Thanks,

Dale Larner

Oh wow! Now I am convinced!

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.