Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: naturalman1975
I've read a lot of the Ripper books and I can see no reason why they shouldn't release any and all information they have. The murders occurred over 120 years ago! First off, if they're worried about releasing information that they botched an investigation— well, we already know you didn't catch and prosecute a suspect! We know Scotland Yard wasn't what it is today in 1888, and modern crime scene investigation was hardly in existence. If it was any prominent individual, who cares, THEY ARE LONG DEAD!

Personally, I think it was probably an unknown local that blended in with the community and knew the alleys and backstreets and that's why he wasn't caught. Profilers tend to agree with this, that he was male, late 20’s, of Jewish decent, maybe a butcher or other type of skilled laborer that worked with knives and was definitely a sociopath. I do think it's interesting that the files in question cover 1888-1912, and wonder if 1912 could be a clue— did a probable suspect die in 1912? And yet the article mentions 4 new suspects, so were they even sure? I don't think it as the Duke of Clarence, but say he's mentioned in the report because his name was brought up because he was described as peculiar, ‘slow’, and possibly having died of syphilis. Doesn't make him a murderer but is may be considered embarrassing, but who really cares at this point?

I have my own suspect list but won't go in to all that now. I didn't mean to offend anyone that is Jewish; just saying that when the FBI profiler’s came up with their ideal suspect, based on what evidence there was and a possible eyewitness account, he was a poor Jewish immigrant to
Whitechapel.

57 posted on 05/15/2011 10:52:29 PM PDT by MacMattico
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: MacMattico
“Profilers tend to agree with this, that he was male, late 20’s, of Jewish decent, maybe a butcher or other type of skilled laborer that worked with knives and was definitely a sociopath.”

That might be correct, but I wouldn't take anything a “profiler” says to mean much because profiling is a pseudoscience. They like to go into detail and be very vocal on the minority of cases they are found to be correct about, but forget to mention all the cases they were completely wrong about.

How long did we hear from profilers about how serial killers never stopped killing and therefor the suspects in cold cases had either died, moved, or been imprisoned for another crime. Then they catch the green river killer and BTK killers who lived and worked in the exact same places they had when they were killing, and they had both stopped killing at the point of their capture.

The DC sniper case is another example of bad profiling. That was suppose to be a single white male in his 30’s who must have some type of military/sniper training because of the supposed "skill" it would it take to make those shots. And of course this person would have nothing to do with Islam.

I kind of went into a rant here, but there are a lot of profilers out there who seem very egotistical about their successes who don't even mention their many failures. When you look deeper into it you find out what a joke it is.

78 posted on 05/16/2011 8:09:59 PM PDT by ThermoNuclearWarrior (Illegal immigration is a bigger security threat to our nation than any terrorist group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson