The Jack the Ripper Timeline by Peter Foreman
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- The Jack the Ripper Timeline by Peter Foreman
On this episode of Ripper Wednesday I will respond to the book "Jack the Ripper" by Peter Foreman. Let's pay specific attention to the timeline that has been established.
Anyone can download this show for free on Spotify under the names: "Black Box True Crime" and "Black Box Podcast."
You can support this channel at buymeacoffee.c... .
Anyone can write the show at blackboxonlineradio@aol.com .
You can download this show for free on Spotify:
open.spotify.com/episode/2ZnWy57UXaAa4lbDZ0tVvh?si=ZGM3pI_TRkiYSVhaf9T7TA
⬛
That's trippy about the color of the sky bc of the fires and the murder.
I wonder if these folks had a access to clean water? Drinking alcohol may have been the only thing they could drink. Pretty much guaranteed alcoholism in that case. I know its been said they did not bath much so I am assuming clean proper drinking water was not accessible.
I enjoy your Jack the Ripper videos, especially where you’re discussing the timeline of the murders. Keep up the great work Ned, I hope you’re doing well, please take care and have a great day!
😊
🫶🏼🤍🤍🤗🙏🏼
Polly Nichols WAS mutilated but not to the extent of the others.
Disturbed during the event l think
That's why he covered her torso wound down to the waist, so the approaching Paul wouldn't see. Blood against skin is visible in minimal light.
@@tonysmith3556 That's speculation.
@@Jay-tk7ib then who else covered her and more importantly WHY ? because he knew he had been seen, by Paul. The only other explanation would be Lechmere disturbed the killer but saw no-one and surely would have said something if he was the disturberer
@@tonysmith3556 If covering a dead body means guilt of murder, then we have a lot more killers out there than we thought. It's this sort of thing that shows this theory to be ridiculous. Covering a dead body to keep viewers from gawking is a standard practice. It's a sign of respect for the dead. Lechmere would have known that the wounds would be found out anyway, so how would he have helped himself by covering the body? Lechmere could have disturbed the real killer, just as you believe Robert Paul did. The killer could have sneaked away or hidden in the shadows until Lechmere and Paul left. Come on, Lechmere was walking to work that morning and had no time to plan a murder.
I think it’s very unlikely that the Ripper dropped the apron under the writing IF he had it to stanch a bloody wound. If that was the case he needed it. By the way, old reports say there was excrement on it. So maybe he needed something but didn’t want to use the apron rag. Has there ever been any documentation about what happened to the piece of cloth? I mean other than the recent supposition by the Scandinavian guy?
A woman may have spotted the rag somewhere, picked it up but then discarded it when she realized it was dirty. Hard to figure this one.
I believe the writing was already there and the rag was chucked to his left as he fled. I do not understand why anyone is not convinced that JTR was Lechmere? I invite the community to answer "why not him ?"
I don't think he was cut, he was wiping blood and mess from his hands, maybe cleaning off the kidney he took from eddowes ?? Before pocketing it ?
@@tonysmith3556 I have given multiple reasons why Lechmere was not JTR, but if you want one simple answer, the theory doesn't stand up to common sense. If you want further answers, there's no good evidence for Lechmere, only speculations that make no sense.
He was there when she was killed and this is not speculation. I don't get you mate
@@tonysmith3556 You don't get me because I don't accept speculation as fact. Yes, Lechmere was in the area and came upon the crime scene, as did Robert Paul. Why don't we make Robert Paul the killer, or maybe the two were in it together? I mean as long as we're speculating...