Oh, please. The real Jack the Ripper was some guy who lived and died in obscurity, whose name we'll never know. People always come up with some "suspect" based on suspicion and no real evidence

@karljunge

3 ай бұрын

i love all the theories, but yes, down to it, it was someone who did not matter, just like he saw these women he murdered.

@mrmeerkat1096

2 ай бұрын

That's the reality. It's some screwed up low class guy, who I think wanted to be caught. It's probably not some upper class guy like the movies would have you believe. The FBI profile suggests that he is working class and a loner.

@mrmeerkat1096

2 ай бұрын

Defo a normal guy who is messed up! He's not a gentleman serial killer like the movies would have you believe. But him being a nobody isn't entertaining. The people want a suspect who is more the Cape and top hat 🎩 , moving about in the London fog than a boring working class guy.

@jacobjones5269

Ай бұрын

I tend to agree, but what makes Druitt interesting is he fits the profile best.. At least my profile (lol).. So, I think it’s someone who mirrored Druitt’s downward spiral, who as you say is lost to history.. Gotta be at least a dozen dudes like that in the East end at that time..

Serial killers who are Gay don't murder women & Druitt was playing Cricket over a hundred of miles away the next morning after one of the murders. His schedule poses serious problems regarding the probability of Druitt being the ripper.

Ol Jack continues to intrigue us over 100 years later, IMO we will never know with any certainty who hw really was and if any of the known suspects were the ripper. Personally, I like Charles Lechmere for the killings.

@harryanderson7282

3 жыл бұрын

Given the information available on Lechmere, that he was caught red-handed over a victim and was able to bluff his way out of it, I really can't see why anyone else even bothers to make an argument for anyone else at this point.

@malcolmjelani3588

3 жыл бұрын

@@harryanderson7282 DNA. I take my statement back. I think with the DNA evidence they found on the semen stain on one of the victims shawl, I think the case is closed. It wasn't Lechmere, it was who the police suspended all along.

@williamcarter361

3 жыл бұрын

@@harryanderson7282 He wasn’t seen leaning over the victim. That’s that nonsense documentary you watched.

@lyndoncmp5751

2 жыл бұрын

William Carter, A press report citing Paul said Cross was leaning over the body. It wasnt made up by the documentary. However, regardless of the truth, Lechmere WAS seen by someone else lingering and acting suspiciously right near the body of one of the victims at or near the time of death and with nobody else in sight or sound. This is undisputed fact. No other suspect has that against them.

@kevincharlesperkins5879

2 жыл бұрын

I'm hearing Most Notorious is a disinfo/propaganda opperation. Jack the Ripper was, Aaron Kosminski.

Finished reading Jack the Ripper, a New Investigation by Alex Duggan. It is one of the best books I've read about the Ripper in years. He goes through the main suspects, including kosmi, Lechmere and druitt. This book is certainly worth a podcast itself.

i’m still convinced it was charles lechmere and this guy is way off and reaching

@isobelswan

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely.

@markchristian3249

2 жыл бұрын

This Montague druitt theory is so weak. And Charles cross doesn't hold much water either. There was a man named Nathan Kaminsky who was caged in an asylum days after Mary Kelly was slaughtered. He was identified by a witness but the witness would not testify bc nathan was a fellow jew. Who ever this "nathan Kaminsky" was I would really like to see what he looked like.

I always get excited when I see my notification of a new episode.

A pretty illogical theory, with not a jot of evidence or even any real link for Druitt. The Ripper was almost certainly a nondescript local man, not a well to do outsider. Besides Druitt was a tall/tallish slim man and not a stocky man of short to average height which The Ripper seems to have been. The top policeman didn't really have a clue who The Ripper was. They were guessing in the dark. That's why he was never caught.

@annalisette5897

2 жыл бұрын

I agree. I think he was a local guy who drank in the pubs until around closing time and killed on his way home. In my opinion, JtR had to have intimate knowledge of the neighborhood, how to kill and slip away through various rooming houses via backyards. That said, I have a lot of respect for Jonathan Hainsworth's research as I believe he has clarified a chapter of the JtR saga. It is possible that Druitt was a false confessor. Police today work very hard to be able to sort out false confessions. (Interestingly, Following the black Dahlia murder in 1947 Los Angeles, a number of WOMEN tried to falsely confess. False confession is another rabbit hole of psychology that is poorly understood.) Hainsworth is careful to say his work only explains what Victorians were thinking at the time. So far as I know, his work has never described Druitt in the act or murder or escape, nor tried to draw connections between the five victims and Druitt. Some of the most valuable material on JtR is peripheral work that deep dives into segments of the life and times of JtR. In this regard, Hainsworth's book is very valuable. Personally, I think Druitt must have had a severe bi-polar condition with alternating mania and depression. He may well have lost time, especially if he was consuming alcohol. Perhaps he imagined that he was JtR. Could he have picked up enough knowledge through his legal career, that he did know things otherwise not made public? It looks to me that his family did not understand mental illness, an issue still with us today. Their concept was epileptic mania, the ability to commit murder while in a blackout condition. It makes perfect sense that they truly believed Monte was JtR.

@sarahholland2600

Жыл бұрын

The murders stopped when Aaron Kosminsky was commited to an asylum by his family (he was violent , psychotic & they'd become afraid of him) . The lead Detective always believed it was Kosminsky.

@mrmeerkat1096

2 ай бұрын

​@@annalisette5897thats a good theory that he drinks until closing and becomes more violent and kills on his way home, and through shear luck wasn't caught.

@Aroos2011

Ай бұрын

I think it’s significant that there was a very popular production of Jekyll & Hyde at the time. Druit’s family was of the theater going class and almost certainly were aware of it, there was even a theory going around that the lead actor was JTR. The idea that a decent, upper class man could black out and commit terrible crimes was very much in the forefront of people’s minds. It’s not surprising that his family believed this was what was going on with the ripper killings and made the logical but incorrect conclusion.

I think monti had mental health issues but I don't feel he was the ripper. Well to do, upper stata of society

When he killed and mutilated Kelly and he had all the time in the world to do whatever he wanted, unlike on the street. He must have constantly been looking towards that broken window pain and listening for footsteps. How does JTR know someone isn't going to call round to her place? He can't just pretend not to be in, because they could just stand and listen at the broken window or worse still move the curtain across and see in her room. He must have either covered it with something to obscure a person's view or he must have been looking at that broken window constantly. If he is seen in her room, there is no escape for him at all.

The more I listen to Jonathan the more I realize he's no idea what he's talking about.whitechapel for instance, wasn't teeming with cops, only after the double event was an order given for extra police,but it still wasn't much,as soon as the order was given for extra boots on the ground jack went off street and killed Kelly indoors.theres a copy of police orders for Sept October Whitechapel 1888 in a good book I've read.

I don't think we will ever know who Jack was. Personally I think he was a soldier with some anatomical knowledge or maybe an army doctor. Probably from a regiment which had returned from the Sudan after the expedition of 1885. Suffering from severe mental trauma from his experiences of war maybe sent him over the edge. Killings stopped when his regiment went overseas again. I have no evidence just a gut feeling after reading, listening and watching the about the known facts and ignoring theories.

Was Druitt not playing cricket during the murders, or right after them?

I'm not seeing it from this discussion. Their argument has a whole lot of supposition. However, interesting speakers. There is way too much, "We think," and not almost any, "What the evidence shows.".

A well argued theory with a lot of connections that when put forward make sense. I still like Lechmere for it however based on the fact that you have really good close circumstantial evidence and nothing that stops it being him. The coincidences surrounding Lechmere also just seem too much to pass off. However Druitt is in the picture and David Kaminsky, not Kosminski. Although this is very compelling it is based on a lot of conjecture, strong conjecture and well argued but not ideal.

@TiaMargarita

2 жыл бұрын

Kaminsky yes, David no. Nathan. He went by David Cohen, many Jewish immigrants did so because of Victorian London prejudices against Jews, immigrants and the mentally disabled. He was a known public masterbater. He was not named a suspect until 1987 and there is no evidence against him. www.casebook.org/suspects/davidcohen.html

@tuffgong5162

2 жыл бұрын

I have to agree with Onion T... there are too many coincidences within the life and times of Charlie Lechmere to ignore or continue to regard them as coincidence concerning Ripper..

@markchristian3249

2 жыл бұрын

I think the ripper was this "nathan kamisnky" we never get to see. He was identified by a man but never testified bc he was also a jew. I wish I could see a picture of him and my gut might tell me.

@jakehammond12345

2 жыл бұрын

@@markchristian3249 It could well have been Kaminsky

@christianmonturanoii6539

4 ай бұрын

Kosminski us a way better suspect than Kaminski they said Kosminski not Kaminski so why would u go with the alternative thats dumb. Litchmmire is nit that good a suspect that one knucklehead argues his case and everything I give him something baclhe ignores what I say. Somone had to find a body he was normally walking to work at that time so it's not unusual that he wad put and about at that tike.

I lost confidence in their argument with the inaccurate description of Martha Tabram being killed by a gang and found in the street (she wasn't) and consequently questionable and unconvincing throughout. Circumstantial and full of 'projection'. Sorry. Enjoy the channel though.

This is one of your best interviews, Eric (Erik? I've heard your name a hundred times but I'm not sure I've ever seen it in writing.) 20 minutes in, I was thinking this was utter balderdash. Once you've alleged a cover-up, it is easy to fall into the trap of thinking that absence of evidence for your theory is proof of the quality of the cover-up. 40 minutes in, I thought perhaps MJD was a better suspect that I had thought - top 5 rather than top 10 or so. By the end, I looked into getting the book. (The price, though! Is it printed on a victim's skin?) Anyway, great conversation.

If McNaughten was convinced that MD was the killer it makes me wonder why he listed him as one of three of his favourite possible suspects ? There’s far easier ways of stating simple facts without this.

Ever thought about looking at the Hammersmith nude / Jack the stripper murders?

Pretty interesting. I still like Charles Lechmere. One of the innumerable UK documentaries on Jack the Ripper pointed out that, even when the police arrived at the crime scenes in minutes, Jack could disappear into the maze of courts and alleyways in Whitechapel. Conclusion: He was a local boy, or someone who spent a great deal of time there.

@SubRosa33

2 жыл бұрын

It was Kosmindku. They found his blood drops on one of the victims and did a DNA.

@markmiller6402

2 жыл бұрын

Could’ve even been a policeman, you wouldn’t suspect one of them creeping about in dark,foggy alley ways.

@markmiller6402

2 жыл бұрын

@@SubRosa33 . Of all the documentaries I’ve watched, and books I’ve read, I’ve always thought it was him.

I'd love to know how hainsworth knows the letters were hoaxes.whats he basing that statement on.

@isobelswan

2 жыл бұрын

His own ego.

@lizach1510

2 жыл бұрын

There is a widespread acceptance that 'Dear Boss' letters were hoaxes. Conjured up by a journalist named Bulling and his editor Moore to boost newspaper sales - which it did!

@leslierock5005

2 жыл бұрын

@@lizach1510 if dear boss was a hoax,why then did the metropolitan police put posters up around east London asking 'any person recognising the handwriting is requested to communicate with the nearest police station. Why was that Liz?

@lizach1510

2 жыл бұрын

@@leslierock5005 Yes, they did that at the time but discovered within a couple of years that it had been conjured up by a couple of journalists. This is well documented in the soundly researched books on this subject

@leslierock5005

2 жыл бұрын

@@lizach1510 really? The thing is for me,fasmiles of dear boss and the saucy jack post card were put up in posters around east end on the 4 oct.how did this journalist know that one of eddowes ears was cut off.wasnt known to the public when the saucy jack post card was received by the police

I dont think he is a viable suspect. He wasn't documented at any scenes. It is likely he committed suicide due to being outed as gay, losing his job. It is lazy cop work to connect him to the deaths only because they never caught the real killer. And what we know of Lechmere, the cops blew it not even investigating him despite giving a wrong name and caught at the scene of the crime. I also think the surgeon angle is way of target...I am betting those who did autopsies harvested the organs for money and claimed the organs had been taken at the time of the murders...quite impossible in the quick time frames in darkness. Really bad cop work not seeing what was going on.

What was the name of this guy's book again? I'm going to have to add it to my extensive "inspired by most notorious" book shop cart.😂

30 minutes in and I'm at a loss why this guy is suspect, other than maybe sheer desperation. Are there any facts presented in the next hour and fifteen that might deserve attention? Anyone? I am a busy man.

My name is Montague Drewett

I’ve read this book twice, the original and updated edition, and enjoyed it completely. I think their arguments that Monty is the culprit of the main JTR murders, is as strong or stronger than any other argument. Some 135 years later it will be impossible to every completely prove who it was.

Indeed the ‘sexual insanity’ attributed to him was a likely reference to his homosexuality which is likely also linked to his dismissal from the school and fear of public humiliation drove him to suicide. To suggest he had a form of mental illness which has a predilection for murder on philanthropic grounds seems a bit of a reach to me. I also find it inconceivable that had the killer been identified firmly then it would soon have been common knowledge considering the amount of police involved and the media interest in the cases.

Sexually insane would suffice, wouldn't it? Whoever did it, didn't do it to set themselves apart from their uncle

Did Montague kill himself or did someone else fill his pockets full of rocks and pushed him in the river...

His family???? He was a bachelor and both his parents were dead!

Wow, had to shut this off. Johnathan there talks like he’s licking gravy off of his lips. I couldn’t even focus on what he was saying, I was so focused on hoping his slobber noises would stop. I feel so bad for his poor students.

Fascinating and quality interview.

There are no Church of England priests and CofE clergy do not hear confession- is this a bit of artistic speculation?

Lawende gave his discription as this: the man was taller than she was' 'the man had a cloth cap with a peak" ' I have given a description of the man to the police'. That was lawendes discription at the eddowes inquest.it differs with what hainsworth says in this interview.

@juliao1255

2 жыл бұрын

link not found. pls clarify or correct

@leslierock5005

2 жыл бұрын

@@juliao1255 hi Julia, what is it u would like me to clarify or correct,thank you

we dont know everything the police knew at the time..it very possible he was or he wasn't we just dont know..

I don't believe this theory as the motive doesn't stack up!

If Montague was a lawyer where does the skill with a knife come from ? The ability to whip out a uterus or even know where a uterus is located. As usual Eric doesn’t really ask the questions he should.

@DannyLovesJesus

Жыл бұрын

Not that Druitt is my fav suspect, but I believe it is that Druitt’s father was a doctor who would have taught him.

It was Aaron kosminski. Investigators at the time, Robert Anderson and Donald Swanson, named him in their confidential notes.

@lyndoncmp5751

2 жыл бұрын

With not a jot of evidence. They simply thought the ripper must be a foreign madman.

@fatchicken3139

2 жыл бұрын

Wasn't he too far gone mentally?JTR was somebody cunning and practical

@denisegreen5351

2 жыл бұрын

A scapegoat to hide the true culprit

Maybe Frankenstein did, whom was a woman called Mary Shelly. Making monsters from different body parts!

I have just listened to the first three-quarters of an hour of this documentary and it is sufficient to be able to state categorically that Hainsworth has got it wrong! 'Joseph Lawende's description of Catherine Eddowes' last client is a description that perfectly matches photographs of Montague Druitt ... a man with a fair moustache ...' 40:13 '... even though the best witness describes a man who looks just like Druitt ..' 43:08 Take a look at photographs of Druitt! He had dark hair and a dark moustache. That is only one reason for dismissing as ludicrous the claim that he committed the murders. The murderer did indeed reside in Spitalfields and the fact that Druitt lived in Blackheath precludes his being the murderer, a point which the author does not really deal with. The author's comparison of Druitt as the Whitechapel Murderer to Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin of President Kennedy from 42:14 is without foundation. Neither man was a murderer. He ridicules every claim made by serious researchers, including the one that Oswald was working for a US government agency and was framed, as 'ludicrous' based on the 'open and shut evidence' that Oswald murdered Kennedy. Take a look at KENNEDY ASSASSINATION: SIX SHOTS WERE FIRED and THE IMPERSONATION OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD and for a similar false accusation against an innocent person, see AARON KOSMINSKI AND THE WHITECHAPEL MURDERS all of which are on KZread Just one more point: according to Hainsworth, Druitt was 'dressing down' in Mitre Square. He is actually asking you to believe that a man who was a practising barrister and a public school teacher residing in Blackheath, dressed like a sailor to murder prostitutes in East London and was playing cricket just hours after butchering a woman. It doesn't matter whether the accused is Druitt, Sickert or Kosminski - it is always the same kind of nonsense.

@mrmeerkat1096

2 ай бұрын

I don't understand your point. The description of Eddows last client looks like Druitt? Look at a photograph of Druitt and it matches the description of Druitt. Doesn't that help prove his point it was Druitt? Apologies if I've misunderstood your point. As it goes I don't think it was Druitt.

@philipskalla4312

2 ай бұрын

Thank you for your reply and I think you did miss something. I have just reread my original post and realise that I omitted a detail: the description of the man seen by the witness included a fair moustache.

@mrmeerkat1096

Ай бұрын

@@philipskalla4312 I've reread it, i get what your saying. Thanks for replying.

Jonathan is so hell bent on Druitt he doesn't realize most of his points are hearsay and speculative..Druitt is in fact the weakest ripper suspect

@lizach1510

2 жыл бұрын

Might be worth actually reading the book and analyzing the sources yourself rather than just bagging someone's work. This seems to be a forum for ill informed Ripperologists rather than people who are bothering to hold an open mind, read and analyze in a scholarly manner.

Druits father was suppose to have been a doctor

We will never know. Any book on Jack is pure conjecture so making it fiction

@malcolmjelani3588

3 жыл бұрын

We can find out. Although Aaron's semen being found on one of the victims pretty much narrows it down. I think Druitt was one of about 2-3 serial killers wandering around at the time.

@lyndoncmp5751

2 жыл бұрын

The DNA has been discredited and no evidence Eddowes even had such a shawl on her.

@malcolmjelani3588

2 жыл бұрын

@@lyndoncmp5751 discredited? Where? When? I honestly wasn't aware

@lyndoncmp5751

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, the DNA claim failed to be peer reviewed and it all fell apart pretty soon after the claim. Also, in the detailed police list of all the clothing and possessions found with Eddowes, there is no mention of such a shawl.

@isobelswan

2 жыл бұрын

@@malcolmjelani3588 the DNA evidence was discredited

Very interesting. Apparently, the authors did a great deal of research for their book. Well done.

Just another ripper theory that picks and chooses only facts that support their claims while ignoring the verifiable facts that prove Druitt was not Jack. Thankfully , new ripper enthusiasts are researching the facts and finding out how easy it is to discount Druitt, ( and sooooo many more), as being a JTR suspect. Verifying facts is the beginning of the new ripper theories. These folks will still make a lot of 💰.

@stephenbitmead8073

3 жыл бұрын

Hi rather than just making such sweeping dismissive statements of their work, why not say who you think JTR is, and what of their claims are incorrect/weak? I’ve read their book and find the arguments compelling

@TiaMargarita

3 жыл бұрын

@@stephenbitmead8073 James Allen Lechmere aka James Allen Cross. He told the witness who saw him with the body that he had just found it. He lied to the first policeman he saw, "A policeman wants you." instead of "I found a body." There was no other policeman.(until later) He said he was late to work without giving his name and left hurriedly. (He was not questioned). A newspaper interviewed the witness who recounted the events exactly as they happened. Lechmere then attended the inquest to refute the witness's account . He gave the inquest his alias, (Cross), but made the mistake of giving his correct address. This fact was not caught until 2005, when younger JRT enthusiasts began fact checking instead of relying on the same tired opinions from the last 100+ years. He lied on the stand saying that he had never seen any policeman. The policeman who reported their conversation was suspected of lying then and now. The policeman was telling the truth but his reputation never recovered. All murders occurred on his daily route or his route to visit his mother and daughter. Druitt is indeed an old theory despite what these folks say. He was thoroughly cleared at the time, which is verifiably documented and thoroughly scrutinized this century, dismissing him as a suspect. There was a reason for his suicide that these folks conveniently omitted from this interview. Many older ripperologists, (Mostly in the UK), get outright angry when dusty theories are presented as new but it is crucial part of entering the JRT community to examine all theories for oneself. I have been on my JRT journey since 1977 and my first twenty years were spent getting excited, (and believing), every "new" theory. I grew tired once i began researching for myself and found verifiable facts discounting each and every one of them. I realized that these theories used words and phrases such as, "possibly", I think that", "He could have" or "she could have" if you follow the three suspects for the Jill the ripper theories. When Lechmere came along I was stunned because out of over 300 suspects, his name was never mentioned. Records identified him as Cross. I began researching and I couldn't discount Lechmere. In fact, others and I began uncovering other incriminating details though none as compelling as the original 2010 research.. .

@beniteztheconman

3 жыл бұрын

@@TiaMargarita the weakest of all the jack suspects.... just one silly swedish doc maker.

@williamcarter361

3 жыл бұрын

@@TiaMargarita Ridiculous suspect

@isobelswan

2 жыл бұрын

@@TiaMargarita Lechmere can also be linked to the torso murders.

Just looked up his family tree to investigate his mother's illness. His FATHER William was a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons! It was also implied that he had very strong wrists and arms despite being of slender build....I am wondering if he was trying to cure his mother's 'hysteria' (said to be the main reason for women's mental illnesses, their uteri) by taking those of other women?

Kosminski the best suspect but druitt will.always be a good one even with not great evidence how many suspects have good evidence lol

I’ll listen,but full of doubt already..Well within eight minutes..I will listen until the end.. As always Eric has gave us a well presented and interview..New to this channel and I’ve struck gold.!.Thank you for your work🇬🇧🇺🇸✌️ One day when I want to make easy cash..I’ll write a book on Jack the Ripper.!🧐👍 I’m close to where the Druitt family lived and detective Abberline lived after he left the metropolitan police.He was recommended this area of the south coast by Francis Lee’s.The medium with some vague link to the Jack the Ripper case..So the Druitts,Abberline and Lee’s all lived or ended up living in this seaside town… (Edit after listening for thirty minutes)..The evidence given in this interview is flimsy at its best.!..Speculation and bad speculation at that..So Druitt told he’s preacher cousin but told him to keep quiet for ten years.?..Where’s the evidence of this confession and request.!..Druitt and Oxford chums knew the east end because they were asked to help the area…Where’s the evidence Druitt did go there.?!?!?..Also as told,,the Eastend was very dangerous..A gent walking around 2a.m in Dorset Street,would have got mugged..In the 1920’s ‘Gents’, wondering in the daytime we’re mugged and even stripped of their clothes.So in 1888.!..Too many holes in this story,,sorry..

@jakehammond12345

3 жыл бұрын

Gotta agree, its a convincing theory and well argued but there just isn't any substance apart from maybe the connections via friendships. Its very convenient in many places, as you touched on .

@themajesticmagnificent8561

3 жыл бұрын

@@jakehammond12345 Following this case on and off for decades now and please,I’m no expert.Of course we all have our thoughts and theories on this and it’s always good to discuss..But it’s when someone say’s..‘I’ve looked again and found solid evidence’..Then start to via off into ‘This bloke said this to this other vicar bloke and swore to secrecy’..?Also ‘this is something that this bloke would have done,being the person this bloke is’.?.Then,.how do you know,other than your own theories and thoughts.?.Yes think it,talk about it..But when you say ‘This is who and how and why’..Give proof.Not speculations of conversations and assumed actions.! I’m not saying this author/authors is deliberately misleading people.As I do believe he/they have the right to write and say what they wish on this case..If anything and anyone this author/authors should really listen to what the story they tell really sounds like..Then they might see they maybe just misleading themselves.. Thank you for your reply and all the best.!🇬🇧👍

Brilliant work by Hainsworth and Ward-Agius. Highly plausible thesis and very well researched. An important inclusion in the Ripper conversation.

@isobelswan

2 жыл бұрын

😂🤣😂🤣🤣🤣🤣

If I looked at the case I would know for sure who did it. Because I am a genius.

Druit wasnt JTR

I have seldom heard a less substantial case for a Ripper suspect.

@stephenbitmead8073

3 жыл бұрын

Have you read their book? Their arguments seem quite strong to me. I will say that they rely on a number of “circumstantial” or hypothesis to further support their case, but the central core seems sound to me.

O.J. did them.

Thank you for asking about the other suspects. Cracked me up to hear the theory about 'Death by Masturbation'. However, I still don't believe there was a 'Jack the Ripper' other than the media creation/combination of many individual cases.

@brianlogan4243

3 жыл бұрын

Hmm interesting, you think it was 5 different people?

An *awful* lot of reaching here.

I have never heard so much drivel in all my life.... talk about cluching at straws!!! "Deadly bowling skills" definitely means he's the ripper....

@paulschauerman2052

2 жыл бұрын

Yeah, that made me chuckle. The last thing you'd want to discuss with an Australian is Cricket!

@mikepotts2470

Ай бұрын

And an aggressive debater 🙄

No. It was Sir William Gull.

@beniteztheconman

3 жыл бұрын

The 94 year old stroke victim?

@markrymanowski719

3 жыл бұрын

@@beniteztheconman He was 70. He ate grapes on a regular basis. Fit for a man his age..

@beniteztheconman

3 жыл бұрын

@@markrymanowski719 you have convinced me

@markrymanowski719

3 жыл бұрын

@@beniteztheconman There is only one book with the truth. The ripper and the royals. You may find it on ebay. Thanks.

@williamcarter361

3 жыл бұрын

@@markrymanowski719 Gull was actually in Scotland for a few of the murders. That’s an alibi for him. Ludicrous suspect.

Aaron Kosminski was the ripper

@danwelham

3 жыл бұрын

Or jacob levy is equally as strong of a candidate

@oddsavage

3 жыл бұрын

Kosminski is a strong candidate, but if you're basing the oppinion on the DNA evidence, it has been debunked several times. Most recently in 2019 by a team at J. Moore Liverpool U. and the U. Of Leeds in England. I still think he's a strong candidate.

@danwelham

3 жыл бұрын

Still a strong candidate an a worthy one, did you know this new research done on Jacob levy is said that the witness to eddowes murder who was Joseph levy is actually now known as Jacob levy’s cousin if you know allot about the case you know that this was the real witness and wasn’t Swartz who didn’t want to testify