info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Yorkshire Ripper
27 views
Skip to first unread message
noel ogara
Aug 2, 2001, 6:30:21 PM8/2/01
to
Sky have never made any documentary about the above. Could it be that
they know sutcliffe was not responsible for all the murders he
confessed to?
See www.yorkshireripper.co.uk
they know sutcliffe was not responsible for all the murders he
confessed to?
See www.yorkshireripper.co.uk
Mike Bradley
Aug 2, 2001, 6:41:45 PM8/2/01
to
He didn't comit any murders, he ripped Sky Digital!!!!! ;-)
Daz
Aug 3, 2001, 10:34:35 AM8/3/01
to
noel ogara <noel...@eircom.net> wrote in message
news:d9e28592.01080...@posting.google.com...
> Sky have never made any documentary about the above. Could it be that
> they know sutcliffe was not responsible for all the murders he
> confessed to?
news:d9e28592.01080...@posting.google.com...
> Sky have never made any documentary about the above. Could it be that
> they know sutcliffe was not responsible for all the murders he
> confessed to?
Yep, I can smell it again..................SPAM !!!
Paj
Aug 3, 2001, 5:02:29 PM8/3/01
to
On 2 Aug 2001 15:30:21 -0700, noel...@eircom.net (noel ogara) wrote:
>Sky have never made any documentary about the above. Could it be that
>they know sutcliffe was not responsible for all the murders he
>confessed to?
>See www.crapwebsitehere.co.uk
I love spam that makes a token effort to blend in.
What does this guy do in other groups?
uk.adverts.telecom.mobile:
I bet if the Yorkshire Ripper had owned a mobile phone, he would have
phoned everyone to say he was innocent.
uk.food+drink.chocolate:
Did you know that if you melt a bar of Dairy Milk and throw it onto
gravel it forms the words "Ripper Not Do Nothing Wrong"?
--
Paj sits down and sings about gold.
Serial Killer
Aug 3, 2001, 6:44:18 PM8/3/01
to
With respect, that website is a load of tosh!
Check out my website here:
http://jasonpope.topcities.com/
ciao
Jason
Keith Willshaw
Aug 3, 2001, 7:49:50 PM8/3/01
to
Could it be you are a Spamming Bastard
Keith
special...@gmail.com
Feb 19, 2014, 7:14:34 AM2/19/14
to
===============================================
THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER COVER-UP DEGRADES EVERY RESIDENT OF ENGLAND
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -----
Our failure to confront The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up degrades us.
We can accept practical reality, yes ...... the fact that - the power structures being what they are - nothing is going to be done about The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
But while accepting the reality of that stranglehold of corruption in English society, we could at least salvage a bit of our self-respect by simply stating the truth about The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth in a public place.
The fact that only a few people are willing to do this, and most of them non-English, degrades every resident of England.
===========================
===========================
===========================
THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER COVER-UP and Michael Bilton
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------
Michael Bilton's book, "Wicked Beyond Belief," 2003, is one of the most embarrassing aspects of The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
The mere existence of Michael Bilton's book makes us wince with embarrassment, those of us who know the simple truth about The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
The book is encyclopaedic, stretching to 734 pages.
An awful lot of work went into producing it.
And I do mean awful.
Why would anyone expend all that time and effort to put such a book in circulation?
Money? Yes and no. He got plenty of money for that, but not much of it came from sales of the book.
Glory? No. Very few people have heard of Michael Bilton.
Then why all that hard work, to produce a book which has largely gone unnoticed?
Well, it's standard *ruling group* procedure.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -
When Margaret Thatcher tipped the scales and forced Ronald Gregory into the FAKE PRESS CONFERENCE to launch the Peter Sutcliffe Myth / The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up, a section of the ruling group was terrified of being found out. It was an unprecedented criminal act by elements of the ruling group, a terrible travesty, an obscenity. Margaret Thatcher, via her underlings and the West Yorkshire Police, made a conscious decision to call off the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper, pretending he had been caught. Thus they left The Yorkshire Ripper free to go on killing. So Margaret Thatcher, her associates and the English police are guilty of conspiracy to collude in the random serial murder of the women of England.
There was no turning back. So immediately - in accordance with standard *ruling group* procedure - a permanent *damage limitation operation* was set up and a 'slush fund' was arranged for giving money to some *ruling group stooges* - either new recruits or 'sleepers' - whose job would be to work in their spare time to lend plausibility to The Peter Sutcliffe Myth and to ridicule anyone who pointed at the truth about the Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up. Keith Brannen, with his funny website, is an obvious example. Michael Bilton's book is even more embarrassing than Keith Brannen's website.............
For example the map at the beginning of Bilton's book is titled "Peter Sutcliffe's killing grounds" - the intention being to lodge the subliminal message firmly in the readers' minds from the very start - "Peter Sutcliffe is the Yorkshire Ripper," when Michael Bilton was well aware from his police contacts that Peter Sutcliffe is NOT the Yorkshire Ripper.
Also at the beginning of Bilton's book, Dick Holland is singled out for exceptional praise, culminating in: "I count it a privilege to have known him."
Michael Bilton is not intellectually deficient.
Michael Bilton was well aware that
DICK HOLLAND WAS ABOUT THE MOST CORRUPT POLICEMAN OF 20TH CENTURY ENGLAND, RESPONSIBLE, OR AT LEAST INVOLVED IN - AMONG MANY OTHER CRIMES - THE KNOWINGLY FALSE CONVICTIONS AND SOMETIMES PREMATURE DEATHS OF THE LIKES OF STEPHAN KISZKO, ANTHONY STEEL, JUDITH WARD, AND MANY OTHERS.
So if Michael Bilton goes out of his way to praise Dick Holland, when Michael Bilton was fully aware that Dick Holland was about the most corrupt policeman of 20th century England - then Michael Bilton must be corrupt too and we know what the agenda of his ridiculous book is.
Then at the end of the preface, Michael Bilton makes the following amazing statement:
"I resolutely maintain the view that... there was only one monstrous villain in the Yorkshire Ripper case..."
Why would he go out of his way to say THAT?
Michael Bilton was well aware from his contacts with the police that there were two men committing those murders and that Peter Sutcliffe was the feeble copycat killer.
By publishing that book - with the 'rave reviews' from 'on side' journalists already arranged and paid for (the fake reviews, understandably inserted at the very start of the book, make agonising reading) ....................... ...Michael Bilton was and is part of the ongoing conspiracy to pretend that the Yorkshire Ripper had been caught and to leave him free to go on killing. So Michael Bilton shares the responsibility for several murders of women committed after Peter Sutcliffe's arrest.
[Explanatory note: *ruling group stooges* always suffer from a mental illness which involves effortless compartmentalisation of false axioms, with the resulting delusional thought patterns and neurotic behaviour. It's similar to multiple personality disorder, in which each personality within the one person has no awareness of the other personalities' existence. To be fair to the man, Michael Bilton didn't know what he is doing while writing that book. And in his sick mental compartmentalisation, he will 'mean what he says' if he vehemently denies his indirect responsibility for the killings which took place after Peter Sutcliffe's arrest.]
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----------
I'm not going to waste any more time on Michael Bilton. I don't know how much money he was paid from the *infiltrators' slush fund* for all the work he put into that stupid book.
Michael Bilton and Jim Hobson belong in the same prison cell.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------
THERE WERE TWO KILLERS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
FAKE SMILES AT THE FAKE PRESS CONFERENCE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=3hxVYaqZT24
==========================
==========================
YORKSHIRE RIPPER REALITY
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
============================== ======================
The Peter Sutcliffe Myth always collapses under honest scrutiny.
============================== ======================
============================== ======================
BEFORE HISTORY WAS REWRITTEN
For the most reliable information on the Yorkshire Ripper case,
look to what was written prior to 1981.
Marcella loomed large in the early accounts of this case.
Then when *The Peter Sutcliffe Myth* was being fabricated, Marcella was ignored.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
The media reports and books about the Yorkshire Ripper case that were published before or immediately after the Peter Sutcliffe conviction are the sources to be trusted most.
Notably "Deliver us from Evil" by David Yallop and "The Yorkshire Ripper" by Roger Cross.
(Yallop's book was ready for publication in late 1980, then hastily revised to cash in on Sutcliffe's arrest. Hence Yallop's book has some rough edges, but is still a valuable resource.)
These early books unknowingly let slip some of the contradictions in the Peter Sutcliffe myth.
An obvious example is the 'rogues' gallery,' the police 'mugshots' of suspects.
David Yallop slipped up big time when he included in his book the image of the man seen near the last sighting of Emily Jackson, which is 'as good as a photograph of Billy Tracey.' That image was published repeatedly in newspapers during 1976-77. It is highly distinctive and does not resemble Peter Sutcliffe.
Later books about the Yorkshire Ripper case omitted that image, because they were revisionist, rewriting history - Winston Smith style - to prop up the Peter Sutcliffe myth, which always collapses under scrutiny.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
Roger Cross was chief crime reporter on the Yorkshire Post during those years.
As such, he had close contact with the West Yorkshire Police.
He published his book, "The Yorkshire Ripper" soon after Peter Sutcliffe's trial in 1981.
I believe he was genuine when writing that book, in the sense that he wasn't part of the cover-up, in the same way that Judge Boreham wasn't 'in the loop' either. It was just assumed by the ruling group that such people could safely be expected to sing from the same 'hymn sheet' as Ronald Gregory and Margaret Thatcher.
Roger Cross, although honest in writing his book, couldn't think outside the big brainwash accompanying the launch of the Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANISATION IN ENGLAND, 1974
A point emphasised at the beginning of the book by Roger Cross, largely overlooked by other commentators, is the fact that the Yorkshire Ripper killings commenced at about the same time as Edward Heath's chaotic and undemocratic local government reorganisation, taking effect in 1974 (on 1 April, All Fools' Day), which included the reorganisation of English police forces, amalgamating smaller rural forces with larger city ones. The new, enlarged police forces were usually delineated by the new county boundaries, as in West Yorkshire Police, or West Yorkshire Metropolitan Police to give it its 'new, improved' title.
It was a messy business. The citizens of Wetherby, for example, were highly indignant as their unique, historic, picturesque rural town was 'colonised' inside the new Leeds boundary. The refined, genteel folk of Wetherby - to their horror - woke up to find themselves citizens of Leeds on April Fools' Day, 1974, a bit like the pre-war Czechs who woke up one morning in 1938 to find themselves Germans. It was as bad as that, to be told you've suddenly become a citizen of Leeds. The resentment at the new boundaries, along with some funny new county names which nobody asked for, was repeated in many other parts of England.
It took years for the cops to adjust to the new regime.
The local rivalries and resentments between 'city' and 'county' officers, including loss of promotion prospects for some under the new authority structure, didn't make for efficiency in crime detection.
Into this administrative chaos stepped the Yorkshire Ripper......
...... and....... by an amazing confluence of events...... a henpecked/pussy-whipped emotional cripple named Peter Sutcliffe became active with his clumsy attacks on women at about the same time as the Yorkshire Ripper appeared.
The Yorkshire Ripper and Peter Sutcliffe never had any contact with one another, but became fully aware of one another on account of the Yvonne Pearson 'glitch' in early 1978.
[Yvonne Pearson's corpse lay rotting and undiscovered for about two months in early 1978, during which time the Yorkshire Ripper wrote a letter to the West Yorkshire Police which made no mention of Yvonne Pearson. That was because Yvonne Pearson was one of Peter Sutcliffe's victims. Yvonne Pearson was NOT killed by the Yorkshire Ripper.]
From then on, Peter Sutcliffe and the Yorkshire Ripper seemed to be reacting to one another in a bizarre tit-for-tat game to show which one of them was tougher and could commit the most grisly murder...... ....until finally by the end of 1980 Peter Sutcliffe couldn't take the strain any more and forced his arrest, desperate to get away from Sonia and into lifelong institutional care.
Another factor was that Peter Sutcliffe was due in court in early 1981 for a traffic violation, which might have resulted in his losing his licence to drive, and so lose his job.
But it was not the prospect of losing his job that worried Peter Sutcliffe.
THE PROSPECT OF BEING STUCK AT HOME WITH SONIA ALL DAY WAS TERRIFYING TO HIM, AND THAT WAS A MAJOR FACTOR IN HIS DECISION TO FORCE HIS ARREST AND CONFESS TO ANYTHING TO GET AWAY FROM SONIA.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
DID PETER SUTCLIFFE WANT TO BE ARRESTED?
Yes. He forced the police to arrest him.
And this is another anomaly which is ignored by nearly all other commentators on this case.
Consider what happened.
He crudely taped fake number plates over his real number plates, and the fake plates referred to a different make of vehicle. He knew the West Yorkshire Police didn't want him because he didn't have a Castletown accent, so he drove outside the West Yorkshire jurisdiction. He picked up a prostitute and then drove to a location where police often checked parked vehicles. When, as was to be expected, the police approached the car, he gave a false name: Peter Williams, knowing it would soon be checked. He did everything possible to draw police attention to himself and to arouse suspicion.
He had already been interviewed and eliminated about ten times by the West Yorkshire Police, so he easily could have wriggled out of this one.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ---
Later, no one forced him to confess.
It was voluntary,
dripping with *English politeness*
- an anti-climax:
SUTCLIFFE:
"I think you've been leading up to it."
COP:
"Leading up to what?"
SUTCLIFFE:
"The Yorkshire Ripper. It's me."
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
Peter Sutcliffe couldn't stand the strain any more. He could not face losing his driving licence and losing his job and facing Sonia at home all day. Desperate to get away from Sonia, he forced his arrest to get himself into long-term institutional care.
From then on his only wish was to co-operate with the police so as to get a good deal. That included confessing to anything and reciting the amateurish 'voice from god' script at the trial.
Ronald Gregory and Margaret Thatcher were handed a blank cheque.
And so The Peter Sutcliffe Myth was born.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------
IRISH ANNIE AND OLIVE
According to Roger Cross, who was on intimate terms with the West Yorkshire Police, Anna Rogulskyj had no memory of the attack because she was drunk out of her mind that night (as were several of the other victims) and she was hit from behind with no warning.
Much the same applies to Mrs Olive Smelt. Neither saw their attacker.
How then could Irish Annie and Mrs Smelt usefully be called as witnesses in the Peter Sutcliffe trial, to testify about something of which they had no memory and therefore no knowledge, and thus no useful contribution to make toward establishing Sutcliffe's guilt?
Sutcliffe included these two assaults in his 'confessions.'
So then why bother calling them to testify?
From a legal standpoint it was superfluous and a waste of taxpayers' money, as well as being cruel to the two women.
They were called in to tug at the jury's emotions with their physical presence as women whose lives had been wrecked by Peter Sutcliffe (true in these two cases), to lend more plausibility to the myth that was being constructed.
This reinforces the fact that major court cases are about theatrics more than about truth and justice. They're also about proving you're 'on side' with the ruling group, if you want promotion to the higher ranks. Conversely, I'd say Justice Boreham's career prospects took a dive after he refused to play ball with Mickey Havers during the Sutcliffe affair. As in 'The Emperor's New Suit,' Judge Boreham hadn't been told what he was required to 'see.'
Many scripts were rewritten and many axioms were replaced after Peter Sutcliffe forced his arrest and showed willingness to confess to anything.
But it's all a bit 'airy-fairy.'
It collapses under scrutiny.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
MARCELLA
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
Why was Marcella not pulled into court to testify against Peter Sutcliffe?
Marcella was the most prominent of Peter Sutcliffe's early victims.
[We all love Marcella in Leeds. She had her problems but she is a delightful lady. Everybody loves Marcella.]
They wanted Irish Annie and Olive in court because the agenda was to say Peter Sutcliffe is 'mad,' and thus avoid further discussion.
As *The Peter Sutcliffe Myth* was being fabricated, Mickey Havers wanted nothing to do with Marcella, the most prominent victim of Peter Sutcliffe's early, clumsy attacks (9 May 1976, before Sutcliffe escalated).
There were two reasons why Mickey Havers wanted nothing to do with Marcella:
============================== ============================== =
(1) If they'd brought Marcella into the courtroom, she would have testified that Peter Sutcliffe hit her on the back of her head with a hammer in Roundhay Park .............................. while she was behind a tree urinating ...................... the ultimate cowardly defilement of a woman ................... then he stood over her and masturbated, as Marcella slipped in and out of consciousness, her blood oozing into the ground, and then Peter Sutcliffe wiped his penis with tissues and casually dropped them on the ground beside her.....
So Marcella would have testified that Peter Sutcliffe was 'bad' and not 'mad.'
That was not on Mickey Havers' agenda.
He wanted Peter Sutcliffe to be coached in the 'voice from god' script, to have Peter Sutcliffe declared insane, so as to avoid any detailed scrutiny of the murders.
The construction of The Peter Sutcliffe myth was amateurish, clichéd, schoolboy stuff on the part of Mickey Havers and Dick Holland.
Peter Sutcliffe's so-called 'confessions' make an intelligent reader wince and blush with embarrassment. They were composed by Dick Holland and cronies and read like a ten-year-old schoolboy's essay.
And yet it worked, because English people are so gullible. As in 'The Emperor's New Suit,' people see what they want to see or are expected to see, and they all wanted to see that the Yorkshire Ripper had been caught, so the faculty of critical evaluation was suspended in the entire population as The Peter Sutcliffe Myth was being fabricated.
(2) The tissues with semen which Peter Sutcliffe dropped beside Marcella would have revealed that Peter Sutcliffe's blood group was different to that of the Yorkshire Ripper, which was known to the West Yorkshire Police but had to be concealed in order to construct the myth and to leave the Yorkshire Ripper free to go on killing, for the sake of Mrs Thatcher's glory game with Ron Reagan.
============================== ============================== =
So Mickey Havers wanted nothing to do with Marcella as he fabricated *The Peter Sutcliffe Myth*, and Marcella was excluded from Peter Sutcliffe's trial.
IF PETER SUTCLIFFE WERE THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER, MARCELLA WOULD HAVE BEEN THE 'STAR WITNESS' IN COURT.
But from Mickey Havers' standpoint, Marcella would have been a 'loose cannon' in court - in the sense that Marcella would have told the truth, that Peter Sutcliffe was 'bad' and not 'mad' - and the truth was the last thing Mickey Havers wanted as he constructed *The Peter Sutcliffe Myth* to keep Margaret Thatcher's glory game on the road.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
POOR OLD OLDFIELD revisited
George Oldfield was wrecked by the Peter Sutcliffe Myth and drank himself to death in the few years after he was ordered to put on a fake smile at the fake press conference. He couldn't cope with the burden - the starkness of this demonstration that the police sometimes are the opposite of protectors, the opposite of crime fighters, that in this case the police were accessories to serial murder for having called off the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper, who went on killing, as the newspaper headlines in subsequent years showed. Imagine how Oldfield felt when he read those headlines in the months before he died.
If there is to be some kind of breakthrough, one possibility would be for Oldfield's children, now in middle age, to speak out.
George Oldfield never spoke publicly after the fake press conference.
For that very reason, he almost certainly ranted about the real situation afterwards while drunk and within hearing of his children.
If they were to speak out, they and their families might be 'blacklisted.'
However, at some stage they may wish to set the record straight, to exonerate their father in terms of at least making known his reluctance to go along with the skulduggery and his remorse for what he had been made to do at the fake press conference.
GEORGE IS DELIGHTED AS WELL !
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=3hxVYaqZT24
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
THE FAKE PRESS CONFERENCE and Dick Holland:
When you start to add up all the anomalies in the Yorkshire Ripper case, you quickly 'smell a rat.'
Another obvious anomaly, ignored by nearly all other commentators, is the absence of Dick Holland from the press conference.
Dick Holland was a brash Yorkshireman, a big tough overweight rugby player, who thought nothing about beating confessions out of innocent prisoners to 'balance the books.' Most shamefully, Dick Holland DELIBERATELY WITHHELD EVIDENCE WHICH PROVED STEPHAN KISZKO TO BE INNOCENT, just to 'balance the books,' condemning Stephan Kiszko to about 16 years in jail for a crime he didn't commit and a premature death soon after he was released.
Later Dick Holland was the major architect of The Peter Sutcliffe Myth / The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up.
Why was Dick Holland not at the press conference announcing that The Yorkshire Ripper had been 'caught?' Dick Holland had been largely in command of the investigation in the later years. IF Peter Sutcliffe were the Yorkshire Ripper, Dick Holland would have been pushing and shoving his way in front of the world's TV cameras to claim his five minutes of lifelong fame and glory, the crowning achievement of his life, so that he could show the glorious video footage to all his children and his grandchildren and his mates. Yet Dick Holland was nowhere to be seen at the press conference announcing the supposed 'capture' of the Yorkshire Ripper.
George Oldfield was there. He couldn't get out of it. And his facial expression was saying that his entire world had collapsed and his life had been ruined, which was true. Effectively George Oldfield was ORDERED to smile at the fake press conference. The smiles were patently false and forced at that FAKE press conference.
Dick Holland - the man mainly in charge of the investigation in the later years - somehow managed to wriggle out of the press conference.
Why did almost nobody see the anomalies at the time?
GEORGE IS DELIGHTED AS WELL !
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=3hxVYaqZT24
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
POETIC LICENCE / GLORY LICENCE?
=====
David Yallop's account of the moment when Wilf MacDonald was informed of his daughter's death is a bit weird:
"The following morning, while his wife was out collecting the Sunday newspapers, [Mr MacDonald] heard a knock at the door. Previously he had [made a cup of tea for] Jayne and discovered her absence. Answering the door, he was confronted by a uniformed police officer.
=====
CONSTABLE:
'Are you Jayne MacDonald's father?'
MR MacDONALD:
'Yes, and I'll kill her when she comes in, for staying out all night and not letting us know.'
CONSTABLE:
'You wont have to. Someone's already done that.'"
=====
We hope that is apocryphal, an invention for literary effect on David Yallop's part.
Yet, sadly, an inexperienced bobby might have said just that in 1977.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
There are one or two other paragraphs in David Yallop's book which raise the same question, and damage David Yallop's credibility.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
RON WARREN
Noel O'Gara shamed the Yorkshire Post into publishing this:
http://www.yorkshirepost.co. uk/news/features/one-man-s- obsession-with-real-ripper-1- 2480966
The following paragraph from the Yorkshire Post report has not been sufficiently emphasised:
============================== ========================
"His most significant support on this has come from Ron Warren, a former member of West Riding County Council, now 85. He was deputy chairman of the West Yorkshire Police Authority when Sutcliffe was arrested.
Last week, he told the Yorkshire Post what he told O'Gara 10 years ago:
"There were definitely two murderers involved in the 13" - referring to the killings Sutcliffe was convicted for. It was well-known in the operations room that there had to be two, because of the blood evidence. I don't know how it was all reconciled, but I do believe Sutcliffe was found guilty of more murders than he could possibly have committed. It was a very inefficient inquiry, there were things that were difficult to explain away, and I suppose the police were more interested in getting it all wrapped up than in getting at the whole truth.""
============================== =======================
Damning words from Ron Warren. They should have been given more prominence.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
THE NONSEQUITOR
This aspect of The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up is so embarrassing that almost all other commentators on The Yorkshire Riper Cover-up remain silent or reticent on it.
To call it a nonsequitor is understated.
It was ten times worse than a nonsequitor.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
George Oldfield received letters and a sound recording that clearly came from The Yorkshire Ripper, because they contained details of the killings which were known only to the police and to The Yorkshire Ripper.
And because the letters and the tape contained details of the crimes which only The Yorkshire Ripper and the police could know - George Oldfield concluded that the voice on the tape was the voice of The Yorkshire Ripper.
A total nonsequitor.
And it has gone unchallenged by most people for over thirty years.
AND IT WAS NOT JUST A NONSEQUITOR.
IT WAS TEN TIMES WORSE THAN A NONSEQUITOR........
......... because George Oldfield drew the conclusion which was the OPPOSITE of the conclusion he should have drawn on receiving that tape.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
If a policeman receives a sound recording, referring to serial killings, giving details which only the killer could know - the first and most immediate thought that should spring to the policeman's mind is the following:
HE WOULD NEVER USE HIS OWN VOICE IN THIS WAY. This is NOT the voice of the killer, because the killer would NOT be so stupid as to use his own voice in that way.
Yet, George Oldfield went in the opposite direction and assumed that the voice on the tape was the voice of The Yorkshire Ripper.
It was then stated officially that The Yorkshire Ripper had a Castletown accent.
It was not just a nonsequitor.
It was ten times worse than a nonsequitor.
George Oldfield drew the OPPOSITE conclusion to the one he should have drawn.
No serial killer would have been so stupid as to use his own voice on such a tape.
The obvious conclusion that should have been drawn by George Oldfield was that - although the tape must have been SENT by The Yorkshire Ripper - the voice on the tape was NOT the voice of The Yorkshire Ripper.
Any rational being would have drawn that conclusion.
And yet George Oldfield drew the OPPOSITE conclusion.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
The idea has been advanced that The Yorkshire Ripper and his wife enticed a homeless man into reciting that script onto the tape. The many pauses and restarts on the original recording support the view that The Yorkshire Ripper was dictating the script to a homeless drunk, then pausing the tape, reciting the words, and restarting the tape for the homeless drunk to repeat another sentence.
There are indications that The Yorkshire Ripper [NOT Peter Sutcliffe] was familiar with the homeless hostel scene. Some of the women killed by The Yorkshire Ripper [NOT Peter Sutcliffe] were in the homeless hostel scene. It would have been easy for The Yorkshire Ripper and his wife to pick up a homeless man and to offer him food and drink and shelter and then to play a game with him about talking into a tape recorder, in return for more drink......... or even sex with The Yorkshire Ripper's wife........
.... ....and then bumping him off before they sent the tape to George Oldfield.
THERE IS IN FACT AN OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE UNEXPLAINED DEATH OF A HOMELESS MAN IN THE CASTLETOWN AREA IN 1979.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
Almost all other commentators have refrained from stating the obvious, because George Oldfield's stupidity was so embarrassing......... ...... the fact that when George Oldfield assumed that the voice on the tape was the voice of The Yorkshire Ripper, it was not just a nonsequitor, but was ten times WORSE than a nonsequitor - the OPPOSITE conclusion to the conclusion any logical being would have drawn.
The tape was SENT by The Yorkshire Ripper, yes, as the unique information on the tape showed.
But The Yorkshire Ripper was not such a fool as to put his own voice on that tape.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
WERE THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER KILLINGS COMMITTED BY A COUPLE?
[In the 1970s, a 'couple' meant a male-female couple.]
It was reported that a male-female couple were seen walking near at least two of the crime scenes.
It was never suggested that the male-female couple were the killers. That was unthinkable at the time.
It was only said that the police wished to interview a couple seen walking nearby.
It would have been the ideal cover for The Yorkshire Ripper.
Yes, we'd had Myra Hyndley in the 1960s. Rose West and others surfaced later. But still, in the public consciousness in the late 1970s, it was unthinkable that a woman was colluding in The Yorkshire Ripper killings.
If true, it helps explain why The Yorkshire Ripper was never caught.
As to whether the wife of The Yorkshire Ripper was a submissive slave-girl or was actually in control of events and was the prime mover in the killings.......... that's an interesting debate.......
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
PETER SUTCLIFFE'S BOOK
https://groups.google.com/ forum/?hl=en-GB#!searchin/soc. culture.irish/peter$ 20sutcliffe$20book/soc. culture.irish/vz3qyVS8pVg/ GvYmgfeycwQJ
http://uk.legal.narkive.com/ TDOKxn4I/peter-sutcliffe-says- he-is-not-the-ripper
...............it was reported in the media that Peter Sutcliffe was writing a book and in it he would reveal the names of the women he had really killed and of those he did not kill.
Such a book would have been a worldwide sensation and publishers would have been knocking each other down in the rush to gain the rights to such a book.
There was no follow up to that story in the media.
Then soon afterwards a picture of Peter Sutcliffe was published in which his body was bloated and flabby and his eyes had a zombie-like stare, as if over-medicated with 'chemical cosh' drugs.
Peter Sutcliffe's book - a potential worldwide sensation - never saw the light of day.
------------------------------ ----------------------------
THE OLD BAG IN LONDON
The Peter Sutcliffe Myth is just that. More than anything it was a fabrication to spare Margaret Thatcher's blushes as she danced across the international stage as Lady Britannia, the twentieth century Boudaecia, Xena Warrior Princess, The Queen of Heaven, with her leading man, the other actor, the cheap B-movie gunman and Hollywood police informer during the McCarthyite witch hunts - Ron Reagan.
The major driving force behind the *new script* was simply to remove the danger that some maverick reporter might embarrass The Queen of Heaven on the world stage by bringing up the matter of why the country bumpkins / Keystone Cops of England were unable to catch the Yorkshire Ripper.
That really would have pulled the rug out from under Mrs T's glory show in the 1980s.
And that is why the pressure on Ronald Gregory from the Old Bag in London was so intense.
Some things are important; some are not.
Ronald Gregory would not have walked into that fake press conference without orders from the very top and an assurance that the mainstream media can and will be ordered to stay 'on side' - which they have done for the past thirty years, Winston Smith style.
The Old Bag kept her distance and left no fingerprints, like Don Corleone. But her role in the fabrication of the Peter Sutcliffe Myth / Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up is starting to come out now.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
THE MULTIPLE PRESSURES ON RONALD GREGORY
The pressures on the Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police to end the Yorkshire Ripper affair with a FAKE conviction - those pressures were coming from many directions:
1. The Feminist Movement: the women of Leeds were becoming more and more vociferous and were causing public disorder with their protests;
2. The City Fathers (Leeds City Council) and the Chamber of Commerce had big plans for Leeds in the 1980s. They were intending to promote Leeds as 'the hub of the north,' the Second City of England. There was big money to be made in Leeds in the 1980s, with Margaret Thatcher in power. But first they had to get rid of the bogey man, The Yorkshire Ripper...... at any cost;
3. At that time, people in London generally regarded Yorkshire folk as 'country bumpkins' - only one step removed from the Irish. The West Yorkshire Police were highly conscious of such 'regionalism' and were desperate to be seen to solve this internationally prominent case, and without any help from Scotland Yard.
4. But it was the pressure from Margaret Thatcher, via her underlings, that tipped the scales and forced Ronald Gregory into the fake press conference. Her *glory rating* was sacrosanct to her and she couldn't tolerate a snub from a maverick reporter asking her - in the glare of the world's TV cameras - why the Keystone Cops of England were unable to catch the Yorkshire Ripper.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------------------
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN RATHER NICE IF MARGARET THATCHER HAD HAD THE EMOTIONAL MATURITY TO SIMPLY STATE PUBLICLY WHAT WE ALL KNOW - THAT SOMETIMES IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE POLICE TO CATCH A SERIAL KILLER WHO STRIKES AT RANDOM IN THE DARK AGAINST LONE WOMEN, AND ALSO THE OTHER FACT THAT WE ALL KNOW - THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE IS SERVED BY A FAKE CONVICTION WHICH LEAVES THE REAL KILLER FREE.
BUT THE OLD BAG IN LONDON DID NOT POSSESS THAT LEVEL OF EMOTIONAL MATURITY.
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
The Old Bag is dead, so there is no threat of a libel suit from her or her estate. As far as I know, James Hobson is still alive and living in Harrogate (August 2013). James Hobson is the last surviving member of The Five Stooges who fabricated The Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
[The Five Stooges again are: Ronald Gregory, Dick Holland, George Oldfield, Jim Hobson, Mickey Havers.]
The many honourable citizens of England who are concerned about the horrific implications of the Yorkshire Ripper cover-up, and who as yet remain silent for fear of a libel suit, are waiting patiently for James Hobson to die.
Then the floodgates of TRUTH will open.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
Anyone who makes a serious study of the Yorkshire Ripper case sees the contradictions piling up almost on every page. Only a few of the contradictions are mentioned here. The Peter Sutcliffe Myth swiftly collapses under honest scrutiny.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
However, this is a BIG LIE.
And our illustrious senior investigative writers, such as Melanie Philipps, John Pilger, Duncan Campbell, David Yallop...and their junior imitators such as Peter Tachell ...... are all very brave / angelic / heroic / glorious when exposing SMALL LIES.
But these bums turn around and RUN LIKE HELL, when asked to confront a BIG LIE such as the Yorkshire Ripper cover-up.
Expect such people to crawl out from under the bed after 'The Queen of Heaven' and James Hobson are dead (one down, one to go). Certain internet posts on the subject will be shamelessly plagiarised then, and a lot of money is going to be made from The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth, 'when the coast is clear.'
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
------------------------------ -----------------------------
FOOTNOTE:
I've said that after Jim Hobson is dead, the floodgates of truth will open in this case.
I was never quite sure about that.
English people don't have the spine for it.
It's too embarrassing, on several counts......English people can't take it..... for example, it's obvious that Margaret Thatcher was the prime mover who tipped the scales and forced Ronald Gregory into the fake press conference...
Ronald Gregory would not have gone into that fake press conference without orders from Mrs Thatcher........ conveyed to Ronald Gregory via the submissive, ultra-polite *English gentleman* William Whitelaw and her other underlings..... for the sake of her glory rating...
......but can English people face it?
No.
English people can't take it:
The Queen of Heaven betrayed the women of England by ordering an end to the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper and the creation of The Peter Sutcliffe Myth...... and so both The Queen of Heaven and the English police are accessories to serial murder of women by calling off the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper and fabricating The Peter Sutcliffe Myth, which always collapses under honest scrutiny..............
The English people don't have the spine to face it..... .
------------------------------ ------------------------------
GEORGE IS DELIGHTED AS WELL !
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=3hxVYaqZT24
------------------------------ ------------------------------
We come back to the words of Immanuel Velikovsky, spoken in another context but applicable to The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth:
"Imagination coupled with scepticism and an ability to wonder -
if you possess these, bountiful nature will hand you some of the
secrets out of her inexhaustible store.
The pleasure you will experience in discovering truth will repay you for
your work.
Don't expect other compensation, because it may not come.
Yet, dare."
-Immanuel Velikovsky, 1953
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
==============================
Wilhelm Reich and Ronald Laing were among the few conventionally trained psychologists who recognised that human society is insane and that what mainstream psychology classifies as neurosis or addiction is in fact a healthy response from a sane organism to the stress of being required to live in an insane civilisation while pretending it's not an insane civilisation.
==============================
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=O0-bbSSaNFE&feature=fvw
================
THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER COVER-UP DEGRADES EVERY RESIDENT OF ENGLAND
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -----
Our failure to confront The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up degrades us.
We can accept practical reality, yes ...... the fact that - the power structures being what they are - nothing is going to be done about The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
But while accepting the reality of that stranglehold of corruption in English society, we could at least salvage a bit of our self-respect by simply stating the truth about The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth in a public place.
The fact that only a few people are willing to do this, and most of them non-English, degrades every resident of England.
===========================
===========================
===========================
THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER COVER-UP and Michael Bilton
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------
Michael Bilton's book, "Wicked Beyond Belief," 2003, is one of the most embarrassing aspects of The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
The mere existence of Michael Bilton's book makes us wince with embarrassment, those of us who know the simple truth about The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
The book is encyclopaedic, stretching to 734 pages.
An awful lot of work went into producing it.
And I do mean awful.
Why would anyone expend all that time and effort to put such a book in circulation?
Money? Yes and no. He got plenty of money for that, but not much of it came from sales of the book.
Glory? No. Very few people have heard of Michael Bilton.
Then why all that hard work, to produce a book which has largely gone unnoticed?
Well, it's standard *ruling group* procedure.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -
When Margaret Thatcher tipped the scales and forced Ronald Gregory into the FAKE PRESS CONFERENCE to launch the Peter Sutcliffe Myth / The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up, a section of the ruling group was terrified of being found out. It was an unprecedented criminal act by elements of the ruling group, a terrible travesty, an obscenity. Margaret Thatcher, via her underlings and the West Yorkshire Police, made a conscious decision to call off the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper, pretending he had been caught. Thus they left The Yorkshire Ripper free to go on killing. So Margaret Thatcher, her associates and the English police are guilty of conspiracy to collude in the random serial murder of the women of England.
There was no turning back. So immediately - in accordance with standard *ruling group* procedure - a permanent *damage limitation operation* was set up and a 'slush fund' was arranged for giving money to some *ruling group stooges* - either new recruits or 'sleepers' - whose job would be to work in their spare time to lend plausibility to The Peter Sutcliffe Myth and to ridicule anyone who pointed at the truth about the Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up. Keith Brannen, with his funny website, is an obvious example. Michael Bilton's book is even more embarrassing than Keith Brannen's website.............
For example the map at the beginning of Bilton's book is titled "Peter Sutcliffe's killing grounds" - the intention being to lodge the subliminal message firmly in the readers' minds from the very start - "Peter Sutcliffe is the Yorkshire Ripper," when Michael Bilton was well aware from his police contacts that Peter Sutcliffe is NOT the Yorkshire Ripper.
Also at the beginning of Bilton's book, Dick Holland is singled out for exceptional praise, culminating in: "I count it a privilege to have known him."
Michael Bilton is not intellectually deficient.
Michael Bilton was well aware that
DICK HOLLAND WAS ABOUT THE MOST CORRUPT POLICEMAN OF 20TH CENTURY ENGLAND, RESPONSIBLE, OR AT LEAST INVOLVED IN - AMONG MANY OTHER CRIMES - THE KNOWINGLY FALSE CONVICTIONS AND SOMETIMES PREMATURE DEATHS OF THE LIKES OF STEPHAN KISZKO, ANTHONY STEEL, JUDITH WARD, AND MANY OTHERS.
So if Michael Bilton goes out of his way to praise Dick Holland, when Michael Bilton was fully aware that Dick Holland was about the most corrupt policeman of 20th century England - then Michael Bilton must be corrupt too and we know what the agenda of his ridiculous book is.
Then at the end of the preface, Michael Bilton makes the following amazing statement:
"I resolutely maintain the view that... there was only one monstrous villain in the Yorkshire Ripper case..."
Why would he go out of his way to say THAT?
Michael Bilton was well aware from his contacts with the police that there were two men committing those murders and that Peter Sutcliffe was the feeble copycat killer.
By publishing that book - with the 'rave reviews' from 'on side' journalists already arranged and paid for (the fake reviews, understandably inserted at the very start of the book, make agonising reading) ....................... ...Michael Bilton was and is part of the ongoing conspiracy to pretend that the Yorkshire Ripper had been caught and to leave him free to go on killing. So Michael Bilton shares the responsibility for several murders of women committed after Peter Sutcliffe's arrest.
[Explanatory note: *ruling group stooges* always suffer from a mental illness which involves effortless compartmentalisation of false axioms, with the resulting delusional thought patterns and neurotic behaviour. It's similar to multiple personality disorder, in which each personality within the one person has no awareness of the other personalities' existence. To be fair to the man, Michael Bilton didn't know what he is doing while writing that book. And in his sick mental compartmentalisation, he will 'mean what he says' if he vehemently denies his indirect responsibility for the killings which took place after Peter Sutcliffe's arrest.]
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----------
I'm not going to waste any more time on Michael Bilton. I don't know how much money he was paid from the *infiltrators' slush fund* for all the work he put into that stupid book.
Michael Bilton and Jim Hobson belong in the same prison cell.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------
THERE WERE TWO KILLERS:
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
FAKE SMILES AT THE FAKE PRESS CONFERENCE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=3hxVYaqZT24
==========================
==========================
YORKSHIRE RIPPER REALITY
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
============================== ======================
The Peter Sutcliffe Myth always collapses under honest scrutiny.
============================== ======================
============================== ======================
BEFORE HISTORY WAS REWRITTEN
For the most reliable information on the Yorkshire Ripper case,
look to what was written prior to 1981.
Marcella loomed large in the early accounts of this case.
Then when *The Peter Sutcliffe Myth* was being fabricated, Marcella was ignored.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
The media reports and books about the Yorkshire Ripper case that were published before or immediately after the Peter Sutcliffe conviction are the sources to be trusted most.
Notably "Deliver us from Evil" by David Yallop and "The Yorkshire Ripper" by Roger Cross.
(Yallop's book was ready for publication in late 1980, then hastily revised to cash in on Sutcliffe's arrest. Hence Yallop's book has some rough edges, but is still a valuable resource.)
These early books unknowingly let slip some of the contradictions in the Peter Sutcliffe myth.
An obvious example is the 'rogues' gallery,' the police 'mugshots' of suspects.
David Yallop slipped up big time when he included in his book the image of the man seen near the last sighting of Emily Jackson, which is 'as good as a photograph of Billy Tracey.' That image was published repeatedly in newspapers during 1976-77. It is highly distinctive and does not resemble Peter Sutcliffe.
Later books about the Yorkshire Ripper case omitted that image, because they were revisionist, rewriting history - Winston Smith style - to prop up the Peter Sutcliffe myth, which always collapses under scrutiny.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
Roger Cross was chief crime reporter on the Yorkshire Post during those years.
As such, he had close contact with the West Yorkshire Police.
He published his book, "The Yorkshire Ripper" soon after Peter Sutcliffe's trial in 1981.
I believe he was genuine when writing that book, in the sense that he wasn't part of the cover-up, in the same way that Judge Boreham wasn't 'in the loop' either. It was just assumed by the ruling group that such people could safely be expected to sing from the same 'hymn sheet' as Ronald Gregory and Margaret Thatcher.
Roger Cross, although honest in writing his book, couldn't think outside the big brainwash accompanying the launch of the Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
LOCAL GOVERNMENT REORGANISATION IN ENGLAND, 1974
A point emphasised at the beginning of the book by Roger Cross, largely overlooked by other commentators, is the fact that the Yorkshire Ripper killings commenced at about the same time as Edward Heath's chaotic and undemocratic local government reorganisation, taking effect in 1974 (on 1 April, All Fools' Day), which included the reorganisation of English police forces, amalgamating smaller rural forces with larger city ones. The new, enlarged police forces were usually delineated by the new county boundaries, as in West Yorkshire Police, or West Yorkshire Metropolitan Police to give it its 'new, improved' title.
It was a messy business. The citizens of Wetherby, for example, were highly indignant as their unique, historic, picturesque rural town was 'colonised' inside the new Leeds boundary. The refined, genteel folk of Wetherby - to their horror - woke up to find themselves citizens of Leeds on April Fools' Day, 1974, a bit like the pre-war Czechs who woke up one morning in 1938 to find themselves Germans. It was as bad as that, to be told you've suddenly become a citizen of Leeds. The resentment at the new boundaries, along with some funny new county names which nobody asked for, was repeated in many other parts of England.
It took years for the cops to adjust to the new regime.
The local rivalries and resentments between 'city' and 'county' officers, including loss of promotion prospects for some under the new authority structure, didn't make for efficiency in crime detection.
Into this administrative chaos stepped the Yorkshire Ripper......
...... and....... by an amazing confluence of events...... a henpecked/pussy-whipped emotional cripple named Peter Sutcliffe became active with his clumsy attacks on women at about the same time as the Yorkshire Ripper appeared.
The Yorkshire Ripper and Peter Sutcliffe never had any contact with one another, but became fully aware of one another on account of the Yvonne Pearson 'glitch' in early 1978.
[Yvonne Pearson's corpse lay rotting and undiscovered for about two months in early 1978, during which time the Yorkshire Ripper wrote a letter to the West Yorkshire Police which made no mention of Yvonne Pearson. That was because Yvonne Pearson was one of Peter Sutcliffe's victims. Yvonne Pearson was NOT killed by the Yorkshire Ripper.]
From then on, Peter Sutcliffe and the Yorkshire Ripper seemed to be reacting to one another in a bizarre tit-for-tat game to show which one of them was tougher and could commit the most grisly murder...... ....until finally by the end of 1980 Peter Sutcliffe couldn't take the strain any more and forced his arrest, desperate to get away from Sonia and into lifelong institutional care.
Another factor was that Peter Sutcliffe was due in court in early 1981 for a traffic violation, which might have resulted in his losing his licence to drive, and so lose his job.
But it was not the prospect of losing his job that worried Peter Sutcliffe.
THE PROSPECT OF BEING STUCK AT HOME WITH SONIA ALL DAY WAS TERRIFYING TO HIM, AND THAT WAS A MAJOR FACTOR IN HIS DECISION TO FORCE HIS ARREST AND CONFESS TO ANYTHING TO GET AWAY FROM SONIA.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
DID PETER SUTCLIFFE WANT TO BE ARRESTED?
Yes. He forced the police to arrest him.
And this is another anomaly which is ignored by nearly all other commentators on this case.
Consider what happened.
He crudely taped fake number plates over his real number plates, and the fake plates referred to a different make of vehicle. He knew the West Yorkshire Police didn't want him because he didn't have a Castletown accent, so he drove outside the West Yorkshire jurisdiction. He picked up a prostitute and then drove to a location where police often checked parked vehicles. When, as was to be expected, the police approached the car, he gave a false name: Peter Williams, knowing it would soon be checked. He did everything possible to draw police attention to himself and to arouse suspicion.
He had already been interviewed and eliminated about ten times by the West Yorkshire Police, so he easily could have wriggled out of this one.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ---
Later, no one forced him to confess.
It was voluntary,
dripping with *English politeness*
- an anti-climax:
SUTCLIFFE:
"I think you've been leading up to it."
COP:
"Leading up to what?"
SUTCLIFFE:
"The Yorkshire Ripper. It's me."
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
Peter Sutcliffe couldn't stand the strain any more. He could not face losing his driving licence and losing his job and facing Sonia at home all day. Desperate to get away from Sonia, he forced his arrest to get himself into long-term institutional care.
From then on his only wish was to co-operate with the police so as to get a good deal. That included confessing to anything and reciting the amateurish 'voice from god' script at the trial.
Ronald Gregory and Margaret Thatcher were handed a blank cheque.
And so The Peter Sutcliffe Myth was born.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------
IRISH ANNIE AND OLIVE
According to Roger Cross, who was on intimate terms with the West Yorkshire Police, Anna Rogulskyj had no memory of the attack because she was drunk out of her mind that night (as were several of the other victims) and she was hit from behind with no warning.
Much the same applies to Mrs Olive Smelt. Neither saw their attacker.
How then could Irish Annie and Mrs Smelt usefully be called as witnesses in the Peter Sutcliffe trial, to testify about something of which they had no memory and therefore no knowledge, and thus no useful contribution to make toward establishing Sutcliffe's guilt?
Sutcliffe included these two assaults in his 'confessions.'
So then why bother calling them to testify?
From a legal standpoint it was superfluous and a waste of taxpayers' money, as well as being cruel to the two women.
They were called in to tug at the jury's emotions with their physical presence as women whose lives had been wrecked by Peter Sutcliffe (true in these two cases), to lend more plausibility to the myth that was being constructed.
This reinforces the fact that major court cases are about theatrics more than about truth and justice. They're also about proving you're 'on side' with the ruling group, if you want promotion to the higher ranks. Conversely, I'd say Justice Boreham's career prospects took a dive after he refused to play ball with Mickey Havers during the Sutcliffe affair. As in 'The Emperor's New Suit,' Judge Boreham hadn't been told what he was required to 'see.'
Many scripts were rewritten and many axioms were replaced after Peter Sutcliffe forced his arrest and showed willingness to confess to anything.
But it's all a bit 'airy-fairy.'
It collapses under scrutiny.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
MARCELLA
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
Why was Marcella not pulled into court to testify against Peter Sutcliffe?
Marcella was the most prominent of Peter Sutcliffe's early victims.
[We all love Marcella in Leeds. She had her problems but she is a delightful lady. Everybody loves Marcella.]
They wanted Irish Annie and Olive in court because the agenda was to say Peter Sutcliffe is 'mad,' and thus avoid further discussion.
As *The Peter Sutcliffe Myth* was being fabricated, Mickey Havers wanted nothing to do with Marcella, the most prominent victim of Peter Sutcliffe's early, clumsy attacks (9 May 1976, before Sutcliffe escalated).
There were two reasons why Mickey Havers wanted nothing to do with Marcella:
============================== ============================== =
(1) If they'd brought Marcella into the courtroom, she would have testified that Peter Sutcliffe hit her on the back of her head with a hammer in Roundhay Park .............................. while she was behind a tree urinating ...................... the ultimate cowardly defilement of a woman ................... then he stood over her and masturbated, as Marcella slipped in and out of consciousness, her blood oozing into the ground, and then Peter Sutcliffe wiped his penis with tissues and casually dropped them on the ground beside her.....
So Marcella would have testified that Peter Sutcliffe was 'bad' and not 'mad.'
That was not on Mickey Havers' agenda.
He wanted Peter Sutcliffe to be coached in the 'voice from god' script, to have Peter Sutcliffe declared insane, so as to avoid any detailed scrutiny of the murders.
The construction of The Peter Sutcliffe myth was amateurish, clichéd, schoolboy stuff on the part of Mickey Havers and Dick Holland.
Peter Sutcliffe's so-called 'confessions' make an intelligent reader wince and blush with embarrassment. They were composed by Dick Holland and cronies and read like a ten-year-old schoolboy's essay.
And yet it worked, because English people are so gullible. As in 'The Emperor's New Suit,' people see what they want to see or are expected to see, and they all wanted to see that the Yorkshire Ripper had been caught, so the faculty of critical evaluation was suspended in the entire population as The Peter Sutcliffe Myth was being fabricated.
(2) The tissues with semen which Peter Sutcliffe dropped beside Marcella would have revealed that Peter Sutcliffe's blood group was different to that of the Yorkshire Ripper, which was known to the West Yorkshire Police but had to be concealed in order to construct the myth and to leave the Yorkshire Ripper free to go on killing, for the sake of Mrs Thatcher's glory game with Ron Reagan.
============================== ============================== =
So Mickey Havers wanted nothing to do with Marcella as he fabricated *The Peter Sutcliffe Myth*, and Marcella was excluded from Peter Sutcliffe's trial.
IF PETER SUTCLIFFE WERE THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER, MARCELLA WOULD HAVE BEEN THE 'STAR WITNESS' IN COURT.
But from Mickey Havers' standpoint, Marcella would have been a 'loose cannon' in court - in the sense that Marcella would have told the truth, that Peter Sutcliffe was 'bad' and not 'mad' - and the truth was the last thing Mickey Havers wanted as he constructed *The Peter Sutcliffe Myth* to keep Margaret Thatcher's glory game on the road.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
POOR OLD OLDFIELD revisited
George Oldfield was wrecked by the Peter Sutcliffe Myth and drank himself to death in the few years after he was ordered to put on a fake smile at the fake press conference. He couldn't cope with the burden - the starkness of this demonstration that the police sometimes are the opposite of protectors, the opposite of crime fighters, that in this case the police were accessories to serial murder for having called off the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper, who went on killing, as the newspaper headlines in subsequent years showed. Imagine how Oldfield felt when he read those headlines in the months before he died.
If there is to be some kind of breakthrough, one possibility would be for Oldfield's children, now in middle age, to speak out.
George Oldfield never spoke publicly after the fake press conference.
For that very reason, he almost certainly ranted about the real situation afterwards while drunk and within hearing of his children.
If they were to speak out, they and their families might be 'blacklisted.'
However, at some stage they may wish to set the record straight, to exonerate their father in terms of at least making known his reluctance to go along with the skulduggery and his remorse for what he had been made to do at the fake press conference.
GEORGE IS DELIGHTED AS WELL !
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=3hxVYaqZT24
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
THE FAKE PRESS CONFERENCE and Dick Holland:
When you start to add up all the anomalies in the Yorkshire Ripper case, you quickly 'smell a rat.'
Another obvious anomaly, ignored by nearly all other commentators, is the absence of Dick Holland from the press conference.
Dick Holland was a brash Yorkshireman, a big tough overweight rugby player, who thought nothing about beating confessions out of innocent prisoners to 'balance the books.' Most shamefully, Dick Holland DELIBERATELY WITHHELD EVIDENCE WHICH PROVED STEPHAN KISZKO TO BE INNOCENT, just to 'balance the books,' condemning Stephan Kiszko to about 16 years in jail for a crime he didn't commit and a premature death soon after he was released.
Later Dick Holland was the major architect of The Peter Sutcliffe Myth / The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up.
Why was Dick Holland not at the press conference announcing that The Yorkshire Ripper had been 'caught?' Dick Holland had been largely in command of the investigation in the later years. IF Peter Sutcliffe were the Yorkshire Ripper, Dick Holland would have been pushing and shoving his way in front of the world's TV cameras to claim his five minutes of lifelong fame and glory, the crowning achievement of his life, so that he could show the glorious video footage to all his children and his grandchildren and his mates. Yet Dick Holland was nowhere to be seen at the press conference announcing the supposed 'capture' of the Yorkshire Ripper.
George Oldfield was there. He couldn't get out of it. And his facial expression was saying that his entire world had collapsed and his life had been ruined, which was true. Effectively George Oldfield was ORDERED to smile at the fake press conference. The smiles were patently false and forced at that FAKE press conference.
Dick Holland - the man mainly in charge of the investigation in the later years - somehow managed to wriggle out of the press conference.
Why did almost nobody see the anomalies at the time?
GEORGE IS DELIGHTED AS WELL !
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=3hxVYaqZT24
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
POETIC LICENCE / GLORY LICENCE?
=====
David Yallop's account of the moment when Wilf MacDonald was informed of his daughter's death is a bit weird:
"The following morning, while his wife was out collecting the Sunday newspapers, [Mr MacDonald] heard a knock at the door. Previously he had [made a cup of tea for] Jayne and discovered her absence. Answering the door, he was confronted by a uniformed police officer.
=====
CONSTABLE:
'Are you Jayne MacDonald's father?'
MR MacDONALD:
'Yes, and I'll kill her when she comes in, for staying out all night and not letting us know.'
CONSTABLE:
'You wont have to. Someone's already done that.'"
=====
We hope that is apocryphal, an invention for literary effect on David Yallop's part.
Yet, sadly, an inexperienced bobby might have said just that in 1977.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
There are one or two other paragraphs in David Yallop's book which raise the same question, and damage David Yallop's credibility.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
RON WARREN
Noel O'Gara shamed the Yorkshire Post into publishing this:
http://www.yorkshirepost.co. uk/news/features/one-man-s- obsession-with-real-ripper-1- 2480966
The following paragraph from the Yorkshire Post report has not been sufficiently emphasised:
============================== ========================
"His most significant support on this has come from Ron Warren, a former member of West Riding County Council, now 85. He was deputy chairman of the West Yorkshire Police Authority when Sutcliffe was arrested.
Last week, he told the Yorkshire Post what he told O'Gara 10 years ago:
"There were definitely two murderers involved in the 13" - referring to the killings Sutcliffe was convicted for. It was well-known in the operations room that there had to be two, because of the blood evidence. I don't know how it was all reconciled, but I do believe Sutcliffe was found guilty of more murders than he could possibly have committed. It was a very inefficient inquiry, there were things that were difficult to explain away, and I suppose the police were more interested in getting it all wrapped up than in getting at the whole truth.""
============================== =======================
Damning words from Ron Warren. They should have been given more prominence.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
THE NONSEQUITOR
This aspect of The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up is so embarrassing that almost all other commentators on The Yorkshire Riper Cover-up remain silent or reticent on it.
To call it a nonsequitor is understated.
It was ten times worse than a nonsequitor.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
George Oldfield received letters and a sound recording that clearly came from The Yorkshire Ripper, because they contained details of the killings which were known only to the police and to The Yorkshire Ripper.
And because the letters and the tape contained details of the crimes which only The Yorkshire Ripper and the police could know - George Oldfield concluded that the voice on the tape was the voice of The Yorkshire Ripper.
A total nonsequitor.
And it has gone unchallenged by most people for over thirty years.
AND IT WAS NOT JUST A NONSEQUITOR.
IT WAS TEN TIMES WORSE THAN A NONSEQUITOR........
......... because George Oldfield drew the conclusion which was the OPPOSITE of the conclusion he should have drawn on receiving that tape.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
If a policeman receives a sound recording, referring to serial killings, giving details which only the killer could know - the first and most immediate thought that should spring to the policeman's mind is the following:
HE WOULD NEVER USE HIS OWN VOICE IN THIS WAY. This is NOT the voice of the killer, because the killer would NOT be so stupid as to use his own voice in that way.
Yet, George Oldfield went in the opposite direction and assumed that the voice on the tape was the voice of The Yorkshire Ripper.
It was then stated officially that The Yorkshire Ripper had a Castletown accent.
It was not just a nonsequitor.
It was ten times worse than a nonsequitor.
George Oldfield drew the OPPOSITE conclusion to the one he should have drawn.
No serial killer would have been so stupid as to use his own voice on such a tape.
The obvious conclusion that should have been drawn by George Oldfield was that - although the tape must have been SENT by The Yorkshire Ripper - the voice on the tape was NOT the voice of The Yorkshire Ripper.
Any rational being would have drawn that conclusion.
And yet George Oldfield drew the OPPOSITE conclusion.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
The idea has been advanced that The Yorkshire Ripper and his wife enticed a homeless man into reciting that script onto the tape. The many pauses and restarts on the original recording support the view that The Yorkshire Ripper was dictating the script to a homeless drunk, then pausing the tape, reciting the words, and restarting the tape for the homeless drunk to repeat another sentence.
There are indications that The Yorkshire Ripper [NOT Peter Sutcliffe] was familiar with the homeless hostel scene. Some of the women killed by The Yorkshire Ripper [NOT Peter Sutcliffe] were in the homeless hostel scene. It would have been easy for The Yorkshire Ripper and his wife to pick up a homeless man and to offer him food and drink and shelter and then to play a game with him about talking into a tape recorder, in return for more drink......... or even sex with The Yorkshire Ripper's wife........
.... ....and then bumping him off before they sent the tape to George Oldfield.
THERE IS IN FACT AN OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE UNEXPLAINED DEATH OF A HOMELESS MAN IN THE CASTLETOWN AREA IN 1979.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
Almost all other commentators have refrained from stating the obvious, because George Oldfield's stupidity was so embarrassing......... ...... the fact that when George Oldfield assumed that the voice on the tape was the voice of The Yorkshire Ripper, it was not just a nonsequitor, but was ten times WORSE than a nonsequitor - the OPPOSITE conclusion to the conclusion any logical being would have drawn.
The tape was SENT by The Yorkshire Ripper, yes, as the unique information on the tape showed.
But The Yorkshire Ripper was not such a fool as to put his own voice on that tape.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------
WERE THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER KILLINGS COMMITTED BY A COUPLE?
[In the 1970s, a 'couple' meant a male-female couple.]
It was reported that a male-female couple were seen walking near at least two of the crime scenes.
It was never suggested that the male-female couple were the killers. That was unthinkable at the time.
It was only said that the police wished to interview a couple seen walking nearby.
It would have been the ideal cover for The Yorkshire Ripper.
Yes, we'd had Myra Hyndley in the 1960s. Rose West and others surfaced later. But still, in the public consciousness in the late 1970s, it was unthinkable that a woman was colluding in The Yorkshire Ripper killings.
If true, it helps explain why The Yorkshire Ripper was never caught.
As to whether the wife of The Yorkshire Ripper was a submissive slave-girl or was actually in control of events and was the prime mover in the killings.......... that's an interesting debate.......
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
PETER SUTCLIFFE'S BOOK
https://groups.google.com/ forum/?hl=en-GB#!searchin/soc. culture.irish/peter$ 20sutcliffe$20book/soc. culture.irish/vz3qyVS8pVg/ GvYmgfeycwQJ
http://uk.legal.narkive.com/ TDOKxn4I/peter-sutcliffe-says- he-is-not-the-ripper
...............it was reported in the media that Peter Sutcliffe was writing a book and in it he would reveal the names of the women he had really killed and of those he did not kill.
Such a book would have been a worldwide sensation and publishers would have been knocking each other down in the rush to gain the rights to such a book.
There was no follow up to that story in the media.
Then soon afterwards a picture of Peter Sutcliffe was published in which his body was bloated and flabby and his eyes had a zombie-like stare, as if over-medicated with 'chemical cosh' drugs.
Peter Sutcliffe's book - a potential worldwide sensation - never saw the light of day.
------------------------------ ----------------------------
THE OLD BAG IN LONDON
The Peter Sutcliffe Myth is just that. More than anything it was a fabrication to spare Margaret Thatcher's blushes as she danced across the international stage as Lady Britannia, the twentieth century Boudaecia, Xena Warrior Princess, The Queen of Heaven, with her leading man, the other actor, the cheap B-movie gunman and Hollywood police informer during the McCarthyite witch hunts - Ron Reagan.
The major driving force behind the *new script* was simply to remove the danger that some maverick reporter might embarrass The Queen of Heaven on the world stage by bringing up the matter of why the country bumpkins / Keystone Cops of England were unable to catch the Yorkshire Ripper.
That really would have pulled the rug out from under Mrs T's glory show in the 1980s.
And that is why the pressure on Ronald Gregory from the Old Bag in London was so intense.
Some things are important; some are not.
Ronald Gregory would not have walked into that fake press conference without orders from the very top and an assurance that the mainstream media can and will be ordered to stay 'on side' - which they have done for the past thirty years, Winston Smith style.
The Old Bag kept her distance and left no fingerprints, like Don Corleone. But her role in the fabrication of the Peter Sutcliffe Myth / Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up is starting to come out now.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
THE MULTIPLE PRESSURES ON RONALD GREGORY
The pressures on the Chief Constable of the West Yorkshire Police to end the Yorkshire Ripper affair with a FAKE conviction - those pressures were coming from many directions:
1. The Feminist Movement: the women of Leeds were becoming more and more vociferous and were causing public disorder with their protests;
2. The City Fathers (Leeds City Council) and the Chamber of Commerce had big plans for Leeds in the 1980s. They were intending to promote Leeds as 'the hub of the north,' the Second City of England. There was big money to be made in Leeds in the 1980s, with Margaret Thatcher in power. But first they had to get rid of the bogey man, The Yorkshire Ripper...... at any cost;
3. At that time, people in London generally regarded Yorkshire folk as 'country bumpkins' - only one step removed from the Irish. The West Yorkshire Police were highly conscious of such 'regionalism' and were desperate to be seen to solve this internationally prominent case, and without any help from Scotland Yard.
4. But it was the pressure from Margaret Thatcher, via her underlings, that tipped the scales and forced Ronald Gregory into the fake press conference. Her *glory rating* was sacrosanct to her and she couldn't tolerate a snub from a maverick reporter asking her - in the glare of the world's TV cameras - why the Keystone Cops of England were unable to catch the Yorkshire Ripper.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------------------
IT WOULD HAVE BEEN RATHER NICE IF MARGARET THATCHER HAD HAD THE EMOTIONAL MATURITY TO SIMPLY STATE PUBLICLY WHAT WE ALL KNOW - THAT SOMETIMES IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE POLICE TO CATCH A SERIAL KILLER WHO STRIKES AT RANDOM IN THE DARK AGAINST LONE WOMEN, AND ALSO THE OTHER FACT THAT WE ALL KNOW - THAT NO USEFUL PURPOSE IS SERVED BY A FAKE CONVICTION WHICH LEAVES THE REAL KILLER FREE.
BUT THE OLD BAG IN LONDON DID NOT POSSESS THAT LEVEL OF EMOTIONAL MATURITY.
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
The Old Bag is dead, so there is no threat of a libel suit from her or her estate. As far as I know, James Hobson is still alive and living in Harrogate (August 2013). James Hobson is the last surviving member of The Five Stooges who fabricated The Peter Sutcliffe Myth.
[The Five Stooges again are: Ronald Gregory, Dick Holland, George Oldfield, Jim Hobson, Mickey Havers.]
The many honourable citizens of England who are concerned about the horrific implications of the Yorkshire Ripper cover-up, and who as yet remain silent for fear of a libel suit, are waiting patiently for James Hobson to die.
Then the floodgates of TRUTH will open.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
Anyone who makes a serious study of the Yorkshire Ripper case sees the contradictions piling up almost on every page. Only a few of the contradictions are mentioned here. The Peter Sutcliffe Myth swiftly collapses under honest scrutiny.
------------------------------ ------------------------------ --------------------
However, this is a BIG LIE.
And our illustrious senior investigative writers, such as Melanie Philipps, John Pilger, Duncan Campbell, David Yallop...and their junior imitators such as Peter Tachell ...... are all very brave / angelic / heroic / glorious when exposing SMALL LIES.
But these bums turn around and RUN LIKE HELL, when asked to confront a BIG LIE such as the Yorkshire Ripper cover-up.
Expect such people to crawl out from under the bed after 'The Queen of Heaven' and James Hobson are dead (one down, one to go). Certain internet posts on the subject will be shamelessly plagiarised then, and a lot of money is going to be made from The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth, 'when the coast is clear.'
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
------------------------------ -----------------------------
FOOTNOTE:
I've said that after Jim Hobson is dead, the floodgates of truth will open in this case.
I was never quite sure about that.
English people don't have the spine for it.
It's too embarrassing, on several counts......English people can't take it..... for example, it's obvious that Margaret Thatcher was the prime mover who tipped the scales and forced Ronald Gregory into the fake press conference...
Ronald Gregory would not have gone into that fake press conference without orders from Mrs Thatcher........ conveyed to Ronald Gregory via the submissive, ultra-polite *English gentleman* William Whitelaw and her other underlings..... for the sake of her glory rating...
......but can English people face it?
No.
English people can't take it:
The Queen of Heaven betrayed the women of England by ordering an end to the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper and the creation of The Peter Sutcliffe Myth...... and so both The Queen of Heaven and the English police are accessories to serial murder of women by calling off the hunt for the Yorkshire Ripper and fabricating The Peter Sutcliffe Myth, which always collapses under honest scrutiny..............
The English people don't have the spine to face it..... .
------------------------------ ------------------------------
GEORGE IS DELIGHTED AS WELL !
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=3hxVYaqZT24
------------------------------ ------------------------------
We come back to the words of Immanuel Velikovsky, spoken in another context but applicable to The Yorkshire Ripper Cover-up / The Peter Sutcliffe Myth:
"Imagination coupled with scepticism and an ability to wonder -
if you possess these, bountiful nature will hand you some of the
secrets out of her inexhaustible store.
The pleasure you will experience in discovering truth will repay you for
your work.
Don't expect other compensation, because it may not come.
Yet, dare."
-Immanuel Velikovsky, 1953
------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hkSaYJg9gMU
==============================
Wilhelm Reich and Ronald Laing were among the few conventionally trained psychologists who recognised that human society is insane and that what mainstream psychology classifies as neurosis or addiction is in fact a healthy response from a sane organism to the stress of being required to live in an insane civilisation while pretending it's not an insane civilisation.
==============================
http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=O0-bbSSaNFE&feature=fvw
================
0 new messages