> >> > >> What I meant to say is: The self-styled Jack the Ripper may be innocent, > >> but nowadays, the title refers to the real murderer. > > > >There was no self-styled Jack the Ripper, that title was a newspaper > >invention. Someone killed half a dozen prostitutes in East London in a > >messy fashion in the 1890s but we will never know now who the culprit was. > > > The National Archives have a letter (letters ?) purporting to be from > him but just signed "Jack". as likely to be a newspaper reporter cranking up interest, or some joker who though it was funny - like the man who pretended to be the Yorkshire Ripper more recently. anyway, - unless you are Doug in Australia - come along and hear John's reinvestigation. I am as much in the dark as you are EVE Author of The McLaughlin Guides for Family Historians Secretary, Bucks Genealogical Society