Uncle Jack

[How Brown]

Anyone care to comment on John Williams...a.k.a. Uncle Jack?

From a buddy o' mine....who shall remain phenonamus..:rolleyes:


That new book Uncle Jack has some merit. John Williams figures as a major player in the saga even if he isn't THE major player.
He was the Queen's doctor, shades of Gull....
He knew Morgan Davies....
He was from Wales....
His family folklore said he had a girlfriend named Mary set up in London, a working class girl....Book says it was Mary Kelly....
He quit his practice in 1889....
He erased his diary entries of 1889....

[Magpie]

Sadly How, the book is terrible.

Even before it was proven beyond a doubt that the single bit of interesting evidence was faked, it wasn't a very convincing theory.

But the fact is that the "best evidence" was faked. Case closed, say goodnight, Gracie.:judge:

[tel]

Agreed. the whole thing was tenuous, tortuous and convuluted - one to miss (and I wish I 'ad)

[Magpie]

Agreed. the whole thing was tenuous, tortuous and convuluted - one to miss (and I wish I 'ad)


Personally I can't say that, tel, since it was Uncle Jack that rekindled my interest in the Ripper and eventually led my back into the Ripper community (like I said elsewhere, it was one forgery that forced me out and another that brought me back) but I would agree that Uncle Jack adds nothing to the study of the case except wasting people's time for a short while.

[How Brown]

Thanks for the posts guys...

Off the thread here....isn't it something how many people became interested or re-interested in the Case because of books like this one and a few others ( the Diary) ?

Maybe my phenomanus ( anonymous and phenomenal ) buddy will chip in here with a comment or two...;)

Thanks for the heads up to you guys....Money is tight and purchasing this one appears to be a no-goer.

[tel]

A wise decision How, the cash would be better spent on some 4" nails - for drivin' into yer forehead during idle moments - much less painfull

[Magpie]

Ah yes, I forgot to mention that I did not pay for my copy of Uncle Jack, which is perhaps another reason I am willing to be somewhat forgiving :)

[tel]

That explains a lot ;)

[STRAMBO]

Review of Uncle Jack

If your looking for the Holy Bible of Ripper Solutions you're not in luck. Uncle Jack isn't the answer the publishers claim but a new foray into the field by the latest newcomer, Tony Williams, who if nothing else, is an indefatigable researcher. Information related directly to Williams' uncle, Dr. John Williams, includes evidence that his possible "base of operation" for the Ripper crimes was the Whitechapel Workhouse Infirmary. The author proceeds to consider secret passage ways in and out of the Infirmary, after briefly considering the same scenarios for the other possible bases, the Eastern Dispensary and the London Hospital. Five pages on Dr. Morgan Davies who Williams proves worked at the Infirmary is an added bonus....
Anyone who treats this, and other newcomer books, like an archeological site or a mine quarry and sifts through the piles of information like dirt will be rewarded.

[Donald Souden]

Strambo,

Surely you jest in your encomium about Uncle Jack and its authors. Suffice to say, most of the arguments advanced have been discredited and it has been revealed that in at least one instance the authors (by their own later admission) used fraudulent documents to advance their cause.

Are you sure Tony Williams isn't your "Uncle Tony"?

Don.

[Dan Norder]

Well, if someone didn't read Ripper Notes or the threads on Casebook: Jack the Ripper that we posted about the topic, it would be fairly easy to miss that the book's claims were quite thoroughly debunked by Jennifer Pegg's investigation, so it's understandable that a new poster might not have heard of any of it. (All the more reason to subscribe to Ripper Notes and keep up on all of the groundbreaking discoveries in the field.)

At least one proven forgery of the most incriminating evidence (which was pretty weak to begin with), at least one direct lie after proof of this alteration was publicized, strong indications that alterations were not only made in the version of the image that was published but also to the original record at the National Library of Wales, references to some documents with alleged supporting evidence that don't exist where they were said to be found, trying to portray a T. Williams who supplied goods to a workhouse infirmary as proof that a John Williams worked there as a doctor secretely because it was against the law (other than the fact that it wasn't against the law), and so forth and so on.

Yeah, Uncle Jack is pretty worthless. It's a shame it got so much good press when it came out.

[STRAMBO]

Are you sure Tony Williams isn't your "Uncle Tony"?
Don.
I have family relations by marriage whose ancestors were Knights of Dudley Castle. Remember Lord Dudley of Trenouth's Epiphany? Maybe I should review that one, Baphomet or no Baphomet, deer head or no dear head. I've been through Trenough's hometown of Sudbury....chasing things you can't see....Ha ha!
You can edit as long as someone edits you....

[Tom_Wescott]

Anyone who treats this, and other newcomer books, like an archeological site or a mine quarry and sifts through the piles of information like dirt will be rewarded.

Your comparison of the 'information' in Uncle Jack to 'dirt' was pleasantly appropriate. And while there were certainly nuggets aplenty to be found within its pages, it's regrettable but accurate to say they were made of something less durable and far less valuable than gold.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Adam Went]

Unfortunately the biggest problem with books and theories like Uncle Jack is that, while it has already been proven false - very false - anyone with just a passing interest in JTR who happens to pick up this book and give it a read would probably find it a very convincing read, and then we have yet another person who believes in a long discredited theory, simply because they don't know the true facts. It's not the readers fault, it's the publishers and book sellers for keeping it out there. I actually bought a copy of Uncle Jack just for curiousity sake, and it certainly would convince a lot of people.

IMO, the best way to get a head start in Ripperology is if you read one of the better books as your first on the case. It just so happens that my first was Phil Sugden's The Complete History, and I reckon that's not a bad start! ;)
(By the way, for any newcomers to the case who happen to be reading this topic, the book mentioned above is certainly one of, if not the very best to read first off about the case. Buy it A.S.A.P., you won't regret it!)

Cheers,
Adam. :)

[Chris G.]

Unfortunately the biggest problem with books and theories like Uncle Jack is that, while it has already been proven false - very false - anyone with just a passing interest in JTR who happens to pick up this book and give it a read would probably find it a very convincing read, and then we have yet another person who believes in a long discredited theory, simply because they don't know the true facts. It's not the readers fault, it's the publishers and book sellers for keeping it out there. I actually bought a copy of Uncle Jack just for curiousity sake, and it certainly would convince a lot of people.

IMO, the best way to get a head start in Ripperology is if you read one of the better books as your first on the case. It just so happens that my first was Phil Sugden's The Complete History, and I reckon that's not a bad start! ;)
(By the way, for any newcomers to the case who happen to be reading this topic, the book mentioned above is certainly one of, if not the very best to read first off about the case. Buy it A.S.A.P., you won't regret it!)

Cheers,
Adam. :)


Hi Adam

I agree 100% with what you say that publishers and authors are culpable in pushing discredited theories and misleading the public.

I also do think that the better path is to get people to read such objective books as Philip Sugden's The Complete History of Jack the Ripper, which is the book, among others, that I always recommend to newcomers.

The good thing is that people such as myself and Stephen Ryder have come to the case after becoming interested in the Whitechapel murders through such theories as the Maybrick theory, though I am not sure that either Stephen or myself were ever truly persuaded that Maybrick could have been the murderer.

All my best

Chris George

[Magpie]

Suffice to say, most of the arguments advanced have been discredited and it has been revealed that in at least one instance the authors (by their own later admission) used fraudulent documents to advance their cause.




Did Williams finally admit to faking the documents then? Last I heard the publishers were still waffling...

[Adam Went]

G'day Chris,

Thanks for that, and you're spot on with what you say - unfortunately, publishers and authors who are simply out for fame and looking to make some quick cash don't really care about the facts, nor do they understand or perhaps even care about the amount of problems such false theories can cause to the JTR case and those who are genuinely interested in it. If only they could see sense and treat it the way the rest of us do, eh?!

Just out of curiousity, and I apologise if you've answered this before, but do you have a favourite theory/suspect? If so, what in particular led you to believe that?

Personally, I try to be objective but I've always felt George Chapman was the man - even before reading Phil Sugden's book, I should add! ;)

Thanks again,
Cheers,
Adam.