No announcement yet.

5 Questions With Mike Raney

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 5 Questions With Mike Raney

    Thanks once more for stepping up to the plate here, Mike. Its much appreciated...

    1. Do you consider the identification of a suspect in the presence of Sir Robert Anderson a major modern dividing line between Ripperologists, i.e., in that one either agrees that whomever the Ripper was,was identified.... or that one does not put much credence into the entire affair?

    1. Absolutely. I believe that this is one of the most divisive issues of the case. There are definitley 2 camps, the "believers" and the "it makes no difference" folks. I'm one of the "it makes no difference" folks. I will grant that an identification of someone who might have been seen with a victim shortly before their death. could have been made. I cannot however, accept that this is proof positive that the identified suspect was Jack the Ripper. Therefore, I believe that Jack remains as yet unknown. I will go further and say that if one believes that the identification was made, and, it was Jack, why would we still be studying the case?

    2. What specific aspect of the case...not including the history of an individual under suspicion...intrigues you the most at this present time....since we usually bounce from one thing to another at some point?

    2. For me, currently, its identifying who was actually a victim of Jack the Ripper. Using a victimology format I am trying to identify who could actually be a JTR victim, starting of course with the C5, but also looking at other possible victims such as Martha Tabram/Turner and going all the way through to Rose Mylett. So far, I have linked only Mary Ann Nicholls, Annie Chapman and Catherine Eddowes. That is not to say that I have ruled anyone else out, only that I find enough commonalities in my search so far to include them as victims of JTR.

    3. What happened to the Ripper after his murderous skein your view? Did he die,get incarcerated,move or simply stop? You can give the two most likely scenarios if one doesn't suffice.

    3. I do not believe for a moment that he just stopped. Serial killers have been known to take "cooling off" periods, but they almost always start killing again. I believe that Jack moved to another area of the world. I believe he killed again and I think one day someone will come across the information that leads us to killings that can be identified as being by the same hand. He may have used a slightly different MO in these new killings, but I'm sure it would be a similar class of women, probably in an area of the world that would not necessarily care or investigate these types of crimes.

    4. Would you have been in favor of giving the Ripper the death penalty...or life in prison,lets say...sewing aprons with bread and water( and Philadelphia tap water,at that ) ?

    4. I would be in favor of giving Jack the death penalty, I believe things happend to him in his life that made him the killer he was, but that does not excuse his actions. While I believe he may have had a warped vision of the world, I do not believe that he was insane when he committed these heinous crimes. If he was insane and not capable of knowing right from wrong, he would have been caught. He wasn't. He left little trace evidence in his wake. He knew what he was doing and he knew what to do to avoid detection. These are prime examples of death penalty crimes.

    5. Have you ever read any of Gavin Bromley's work in Ripperologist Magazine? If so,please offer your opinions. If not, then is there an aspect of the case that you would like to see explained in detail such as the work Gavin has provided in the past ?

    5. I will not comment on Gavin Bromley's work, or anyone elses for that matter. I think that anyone that goes to the trouble to do really detailed work like that should be given the credit for the work, even if you don't agree with the conclusion. I would love to see a really detailed depiction of each of the medical personal. What kinds of backgrounds did they come from that they could form such individual opinions that were completely opposite from one another after looking at the same body. I won't get specific here because I have never studied the medical personal. It's just that we have one Doctor say Jack had some medical training, another Doctor saying he possibly had the training of a butcher (meat cutter) and a third Doctor saying that Jack had no specialized knowledge at all. We have at least five respected medical professionals that gave opinions on Jack based on what was done to the bodies. There were issues that they agreed on, but they all had strong seperate opinions as well. I'd really like to know, which of these to give the most credence to based on the actual experience they each had.
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact [email protected]