Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arthur Conan Doyle JTR?

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

  • Howard Brown
    replied
    Mike:

    The software has a glitch which I can't rectify at this time. Sorry for the inconvenience.

    I agree. I can't believe they give the notion any credence.

    We recently experienced the back wind of an academic who co-authored a book claiming he had uncovered a previously unknown suspect whose candidacy was surmised on his being a knacker. Not only wasn't he a knacker, but his background has been known of for one and one half decades.

    We have experienced a clown presenting one of the victims as a fledgling song writer, but not knowing whether she could even spell. She also invented a school of thought that the victims didn't prostitute themselves.

    We had an attorney-cum-author presenting the wife of Wales most famous physician as the Ripper.

    Looking forward for more from the academics, ain't you ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael Banks
    replied
    Hi Howard,

    I don’t know why the quotation marks came out as question marks?

    Maybe it’s the spirit of Doyle.
    Last edited by Michael Banks; October 31, 2020, 06:29 PM. Reason: Changed question marks for quotation marks

    Leave a comment:


  • Michael Banks
    replied
    Originally posted by Howard Brown View Post
    Predating the Friedmans' theory concerning Conan Doyle-as-Ripper by several years.

    I completely forgot about this thread and the belief that the thread starter had about Doyle being Jack The Ripper

    *****************************

    The Friedman book :






    https://www.amazon.com/Strange-Case-...4170729&sr=8-1
    Ok I?ll admit that I?m biased and a huge Holmes/Doyle fan. I did buy this book when it came out though and it was as I expected. Yet another ?well he was vertical at the time of the murders? book. Completely baseless of course. But then everyone knew that. Sadly Doyle was far too trusting of mediums but there?s not a shadow of doubt that he absolutely believed in life after death so I don?t know what kind of welcome he?d have been expecting in the hereafter if he?d have been Jack.

    The sad thing for me is that I find it impossible to believe that the authors could believe this nonsense either.

    Leave a comment:


  • Howard Brown
    replied
    Predating the Friedmans' theory concerning Conan Doyle-as-Ripper by several years.

    I completely forgot about this thread and the belief that the thread starter had about Doyle being Jack The Ripper

    *****************************

    The Friedman book :






    https://www.amazon.com/Strange-Case-...4170729&sr=8-1

    Leave a comment:


  • Adam Went
    replied
    Hi Elaine,

    I think you'll find that if you look hard enough, just about anyone who lived in 1888 could be found to have some sort of connection to London and potentially even the Ripper case. With people like Doyle it is much easier because they were already public figures by 1888.

    Cheers,
    Adam.

    Leave a comment:


  • Robert Linford
    replied
    Glad he wasn't Arthur Conan the Barbarian.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elaine
    replied
    Originally posted by Adam Went View Post
    Hi Elaine,

    I know you're new and all but surely you don't give this idea any glimmer of a possibility?

    I think you'll find that Doyle was very busy around 1888, having begun writing his Holmes stories a couple of years prior to that.

    Furthermore, he lived until 1930, so it would strike me as somewhat odd that he would randomly decide to brutally kill 5 women in 1888 and then carry on his merry way for the next 42 years, writing more Holmes stories periodically during that time.

    However it would be ironic if somebody who had been knighted turned out to be JTR...

    Cheers,
    Adam.
    Hi Adam,
    I'm not new to the JTR case, only new on this forum.
    As to Doyle and the Ripper, my research drew up a blank. There was no connection that I could find when I researched it. I only stated some elements I found on Doyle that are interesting and peculiar. Nothing more and nothing less. I like to research all claims and find out for myself if they are supported with facts or not, and hence my research into Doyle connected with the Ripper. But as stated, there was no connection that I found.
    Regards
    Elaine

    Leave a comment:


  • Adam Went
    replied
    Hi Elaine,

    I know you're new and all but surely you don't give this idea any glimmer of a possibility?

    I think you'll find that Doyle was very busy around 1888, having begun writing his Holmes stories a couple of years prior to that.

    Furthermore, he lived until 1930, so it would strike me as somewhat odd that he would randomly decide to brutally kill 5 women in 1888 and then carry on his merry way for the next 42 years, writing more Holmes stories periodically during that time.

    However it would be ironic if somebody who had been knighted turned out to be JTR...

    Cheers,
    Adam.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elaine
    replied
    1894 interview on JTR with Doyle

    Milwaukee Sentinel, June 10, 1894.


    newspaper-clipping.jpg


    The first person speaking is the reporter who interviewed Doyle. From my past research in Doyle/Ripper.

    Leave a comment:


  • Elaine
    replied
    Doyle kicked 1888 into oblivion

    A peculiar fact is noticed on the time events of Doyle’s life at “The Chronicles of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle” Website: There is no mention of Doyle’s whereabouts in 1888, the time of the Ripper murders.


    http://www.siracd.com/life_events.shtml


    Even more peculiar is that no mention of this year is set on paper in Doyle’s autobiography. It is as though Doyle kicked 1888 into oblivion.

    Further evidence however that Doyle was involved in the occult by 1888 comes from an online book review Website where it states Doyle’s “early novel, The Mystery of Cloomber,” published in 1888, was about “a retired general finds himself under assault by Indian magic.”


    http://kirjasto.sci.fi/acdoyle.htm


    Leave a comment:


  • Elaine
    replied
    Licensed to Kill

    doyle-graduation.jpg

    In 1881, Doyle was awarded the titles of Bachelor of Medicine (MB) and Master of Surgery (CM) from the University of Edinburgh. On this occasion, he drew a humorous sketch of himself receiving his diploma, with the caption: “Licensed to Kill.” Singular to say the least.




    Leave a comment:


  • admin tim
    replied
    http://probaway.wordpress.com/2009/1...r-conan-doyle/


    This has got to be the most bizarre theory yet but according to one man Jack the Ripper was none other than Arthur Conan Doyle himself, the creator of Sherlock Holmes.

    "The real life Sherlock Holmes was also Jack the Ripper. It has been shown by Charles Scamahorn that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle left clues to prove that he was Jack the Ripper. Doyle was the author of the original Sherlock Holmes detective stories but he also wanted credit for being the serial killer known as Jack the Ripper."

    ALSO see http://www.prlog.org/10459119-sherlo...he-ripper.html

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Kearney A.K.A. NEMO
    replied
    Hi Jon

    I'm sure Houdini at least wanted to believe

    He went to mediums to try and contact his dead mother, but found most to be fraudulent, dedicating much of his life thereafter to exposing the mediums

    I think his search was for a real medium, which he never found

    Conan Doyle organised a seance to contact Houdini's mom for him, and was able to give him a long document written to him by his mother via a medium and automatic writing

    However, the writing was in English, which his mother didn't speak, and also, she never mentioned her birthday, which unbeknown to Conan Doyle, was on the same day as the seance

    Conan Doyle explained this away when questioned by Houdini but Houdini didn't really believe him

    Houdini kept his hopes up after his death, he promised to contact his wife if it was at all possible, but it never happened

    Leave a comment:


  • SirRobertAnderson
    replied
    Originally posted by The Red Dahlia View Post

    No all my money for years has been put on James Maybrick being JTR because of the diary of course.
    But have had to come to conclusion that sadly yes they are a forgery, albeit an extroidinary forgery!
    We keep the Maybrick discussions in quarantine, for the good of all.

    Apply for the key thereon.

    For the record, I do believe Maybrick was the Ripper. But as the sole Maybrickian on the site, I firmly suggest discussion in the appropriate threads.

    Leave a comment:


  • Adam Went
    replied
    This is one part of the JTR case that I really don't like - the amount of innocent, in many cases perfectly decent and constructive members of Victorian society who constantly have their names dragged through the mud as one of, if not the most infamous serial killer of all time, long after they are alive and able to defend themselves. It must be horrible for any living descendants that happen to read something like this.

    No, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle was not Jack the Ripper. Why not? Because he's Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
    Why don't we blame Houdini for the murders as well - could explain the rapid escapes of JTR from the murder sites, after all! It must be him wot dunnit!

    Cheers,
    Adam.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X