Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

5 Q With : Iselio De Lisi

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    That's what I thought he meant myself. But that taken with everything else he said doesn't make a lot of sense. And I think I have understood him correctly.
    Rob Clack

    I'm sure Izzy is a big boy and can answer for himself, but the reply to the second question which has attracted attention seems to be the only reply that's not a typical, ordinary opinion..
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact [email protected]

    Comment


    • #17
      Okay, so my input is worthless and the time I spent researching and writing my Exonerating Kidney article was an absolute waste of time.

      Yours truly,

      Tom Wescott

      Comment


      • #18
        I'm sure he can Howard, what I am getting at is:

        I do not think there was a "Jack the Ripper", Whitechapel has always been the scene of brutal crimes. The newspapers of the time are full of murders. The invention of newspapers "Jack the Ripper", has certainly led to the creation of some emulators.

        Whitechapel has always been the scene of brutal crimes? The newspapers of the time are full of murders?


        No murder was solved. It seems clear that the authorities are concerned only because the population was revolting. But actually it is not the will to stop the phenomenon. I think they thought something like, "Let them kill each other." Symptomatic of this is Anderson, the newly appointed head of Scotland Yard, he goes on vacation in Switzerland for a month.


        This comes across as a bit naive and from someone who doesn't really know anything about what actually happened at the time and doesn't know the period very well. That might come across as a bit harsh, but that's the way I am reading it.

        Rob

        Comment


        • #19
          Tom:
          Who said what was worthless ?

          Rob:
          Fair enough...that's how you read it.
          To Join JTR Forums :
          Contact [email protected]

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Rob Clack View Post
            This comes across as a bit naive and from someone who doesn't really know anything about what actually happened at the time and doesn't know the period very well. That might come across as a bit harsh, but that's the way I am reading it.
            Rob
            I'm with Rob pertaining to answer #2.
            The same about Nemo referring to the so-called "Let them eat cake"-French approach, which is completely inaccurate historically, as it's well documented that Marie-Antoinette NEVER uttered that alleged quote.

            I'll say something that might appear harsh here, but the main reason I'm seeing in obstructing Ripperology from some day becoming publically accepted as a research field is the too frequent disinterest to get acquainted with research results before issuing opinions. Try that approach in any academic field, and you'll be ridiculed and thrown out the door. Instantly.

            Apart from this, I'm very happy that Ripperology is reaching Italy.


            Pertaining to answer #5, there is no evidence whatsoever that Micheal Kidney was "jealous".
            The idea of Kidney as a suspect is not contemporary to the crimes and has originated with A.P. Wolf in 1993, without any solid research. With the general neglect of Berner Street until very recently, the idea of Kidney as an abuser, pimp, and possible killer has been more or less perpetrated in the subsequent lit after 1993.

            What have been used against Kidney to perpetrate the myth of "jealous BF" is Inspector Reid's question to Kidney at the Stride inquest pertaining to a "padlock on the door". Kidney's testimony clearly states that while he owned the main padlock, Stride had her means of coming in and out unrestrained by borrowing a key from the landlord, or most plausibly, by having made a duplicate for herself. There is no evidence whatsoever of Kidney having locked Stride in at their living quarters, and no evidence whatsoever of him being particularly "jealous". Evidence speaks for their fights and frequent separations being simply related to alcoholism on both sides.
            Best regards,
            Maria

            Comment


            • #21
              1. How long have you been interested in the London murders ?

              I have been aware of Jack the Ripper as long as I remember. I started looking into the case beyond "Top hat and cape" about 10 years ago.


              2. Do you believe the crimes were actually solved and that the police did not want to make a big thing out of it by never telling the public it was solved ?

              It's possible, but probably like today many people claiming many suspects. I don't think anything was solved definitively then, now and probably never will be.


              3. What is your favorite part of the study of these murders ?

              Finding out details about obscure people who would have been lost to history otherwise. The Victorians were fascinating people.


              4. If you were in charge of the police in 1888, would you have done anything different ?

              I think it is problematic to judge history with today's values. Maybe more scenes of crime photographs? But that is with the knowledge it would be good to have them now.


              5. Are there any suspects that you feel are interesting ?

              Most of the named suspects are interesting. I think that is probably why they are suspects. I don't think any of the named suspects are the murderer. I find Druit and Tumblety interesting, but I don't think either were the killer.

              Comment

              Working...
              X