Crimewatch, BBC1, 9pm, Monday 29 June, includes a retelling of the
John Humble story.
The Gregg v. O'Gara libel case is newsworthy and relevant, but what
are the chances of it being mentioned tonight?
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.local.nw-england/browse_thread/thread/3b96cf35588f43e7/a41c11d7694ea2db?hl=en&q=john+humble&lnk=ol&

There is some difficulty with the links to information about the John
Humble fiasco, because the juryless "judgment" in Gregg v. O'Gara has
been used to intimidate ISPs into removing some pages.
When I opened this one, the images were not displayed, so it's not
possible to compare the handwriting and grammar, etc.
http://87.248.115.134/uk.f240.mail.yahoo.com/ya/securedownload?clean=0&fid=Inbox&mid=1_387532_AFxy%2BFcAABymSkigNQw%2FwEpV%2Bt4&pid=2&tnef=&prefFilename=johnhumble.htm&cred=YI43UYVhESkP9j6s8tkbCmSRzXiKUeCcdkN1OUB0stDSHtaxUgpalf6klUKN5tsiLpTioR_8_DAssBk4lavDMx98djpQbfExr6jRn_.p1g3q&ts=1246275159&partner=ymail&sig=8U0KCynYiimCFf2ixW8UJw--

The following remains a useful source:
http://groups.google.com/group/uk.local.nw-england/msg/a41c11d7694ea2db?hl=en&&q=john蛩鮕

THE REAL YORKSHIRE RIPPER STORY

The Great Hoaxer stitch-up of John Humble.

BACKGROUND TO THE HUMBLE ARREST

It is a matter of record that I have written a book entitled 'The Real
Yorkshire Ripper' in 1982 and it has as its central theme the alarming
claim that the police offered copycat killer Peter Sutcliffe no trial
and ten years in a mental home in exchange for his confessions to all
the Yorkshire Ripper’s murders. More alarmingly it also claims that
they knew that Sutcliffe was not responsible for most of the murders
which he was convicted of and that there is an elaborate police cover
up of the facts to this day.
My claims are based on a conviction that a former employee of mine, an
Irishman named Billy Tracey was responsible for most of the Ripper
murders and he also sent the police three letters and a taped message
mimicking a Geordie accent to divert the police hunt to Sunderland.
These claims are also based on evidence that the police knew that
there were two killers involved in the Ripper murders, namely the
Ripper himself and a copycat killer who had committed a few of the
murders.
When Peter Sutcliffe, a man well known to them was arrested in
Sheffield, the police were under such intense media pressure that they
wrapped up the case with his confessions alone and let the real Ripper
get away.
The police entered into a plea bargain deal with him which effectively
meant that he had no trial.

Sutcliffe was that copycat killer and the real Ripper, Billy Tracey is
still a free man. Sutcliffe had been eliminated 12 times because he is
O blood group and because his wife convinced the police he was with
her at crucial times of real Ripper murders. She was certain he was
not the Ripper for those reasons and perhaps that explains why she
stood by him..

Judge Boreham who presided over his committal hearing in the Old
Bailey refused to accept the plea that Sutcliffe was mad without
corroboration for the crimes and he ordered a trial of his sanity. The
subsequent jury trial of his sanity found that Sutcliffe, who had
confessed to being the Ripper was not mad and he was immediately
sentenced to 30 years on his confessions alone.
Before Sutcliffe’s arrest the police were certain that the author of
three letters and a tape recording sent to them from Sunderland by a
man signing himself ‘Jack the Ripper’ were in fact from the Ripper and
massive resources were deployed to unmask that man by identifying the
handwriting or the voice.
After Sutcliffe's conviction the police moved into a cover up mode and
the goal posts were changed. The letter writer dubbed ‘Wearside Jack’
was declared to be a hoaxer and the copycat killer was never mentioned
again.




We are now witnessing an audacious stitch up of a vulnerable man, John
Humble, for a very serious crime with media connivance to assist
corrupt policemen to convict him through the courts. Humble is an
alcoholic living in a council house on very small means with his
brother and sister. He is to be the patsy for the West Yorkshire
police to cover up their own crimes and failings.
His local newspaper the Sunderland Echo was the driving force behind
this drama.
For several years news editor and also author of the book 'Wearside
Jack', Patrick Lavelle, has conducted a campaign to unmask the alleged
Yorkshire Ripper "hoaxer" naming several persons both to the police
and in his book and repeatedly asking his readers to give him the
names of any suspect they knew, all the while promoting his book
"Wearside Jack".

Over a period of 6 years it has been nothing short of a witch hunt
because there was no hoax and the book was based on a police lie.



On 19th October 2005 Lavelle wrote in the Echo
" The information I gave police included the name of a 49-year-old man
from Sunderland, and the allegations that were made against him by two
local women.
The man arrested yesterday is 49 and from Sunderland, but there is
nothing to say it is the same man.
Whether it is the same man or not really doesn't matter. What does
matter is that one of the biggest criminal mysteries in Sunderland may
about to be resolved.
If it is resolved it may have something to do with advances in
forensic science. But, in my view, is has more to do with the people
of Sunderland, who always laughed at the claims there was a serial
killer in our midst.
It is these people who have never forgotten, who provided the
information that led to this new inquiry, and this arrest.
In the next few days many people, among them authors and media
professionals, will jump on the bandwagon, claiming they helped police
catch the prime suspect for the Ripper Hoax.
Please don't doubt for one minute, this renewed inquiry happened for
one reason only - the campaign by the Sunderland Echo on behalf of its
readers.
If it had not been for Echo readers, the case of Wearside Jack would
have been unresolved.
Now, however, there is a chance that the shadow of the Ripper, which
has hung over Sunderland for two-and-a-half decades, may soon be
lifted."

Lavelle's book is a quest to identify the Wearside "hoaxer" and this
has been his passion for several years during which time he has been
in constant touch with the police and wrote many prominent newspaper
articles about various developments and police enquiries into his
allegations. A search of the archive of the Sunderland Echo will
reveal the full extent of it.


There is a police cover up.

This story is largely about police corruption or covering up their
mistakes by further convictions to fool the public.
Detective Chief Superintendant Dick Holland, the corrupt cop who had
earlier framed the innocent Stefan Kiszko for murder, brokered a deal
with Sutcliffe whereby they offered him no trial and ten years in a
mental hospital in exchange for his confessions to all the murders of
the Ripper as well as his own crimes. Sutcliffe accepted the deal and
he had no trial other than a test of madness. Sutcliffe's solicitor
Kerry MacGill, who was the other broker to this infamous deal is now a
crown court judge in Leeds.

MacGill acted as solicitor for Dick Holland when Holland later faced
corruption charges for the Kiszko stitch-up and the charges were
dropped inexplicably. Kiszko died shortly after his release from
prison.



George Oldfield, the policeman in charge of the Ripper hunt confirmed
that there were two killers involved in the Ripper frame to the Sunday
Times in November 1980 shortly before Sutcliffe's arrest.


Quote from Sunday Times

"Oldfield conceded to us that no fewer than five of the attacks, 3
killings, 2 assaults, fell into a 'grey area' where the balance of
probability that they were the Ripper's work was 'much weaker.' If he
put his hands up to these killings then it would not surprise us',
Oldfield said. 'But equally, if we were only able to charge him with
10 murders and not the 13 we would not mind.' Oldfield's sentiment,
after almost 5 years on the Ripper trail, is understandable. But it
carries a sinister implication: if all the 17 attacks were not by the
same person then there is not one Ripper but at least two. Clearly
though, most of the attacks were committed by one person. "The
Ripper". "


Oldfield was certain that the Ripper had written him three letters and
sent him a taped cassette message for very good reasons. The letters
were posted in Sunderland. The Ripper spoke with a flat Geordie accent
and this put the finger of suspicion on every man who spoke with a
Geordie accent. From then on all men from the North East became Ripper
suspects. The police interviewed thousands of Geordies and the first
thing they did was examine their teeth to see if there was a prominent
gap in the top front row or dentures in that area. If a suspect had no
gap or dentures he was eliminated immediately. If he had any gap in
the top row of teeth he was asked to provide a blood sample. If his
blood was anything other than the rare B blood he was then eliminated.
This was because the Ripper had bitten two victims. Saliva recovered
on the bites showed the killer was the rare one in sixteen B secretor
blood group. The bites showed he had a large gap in the top front of
his teeth.
The Ripper was clearly taunting Oldfield.
Suspects were never told about the clues that the police had to the
Ripper's identity other than that he was a Geordie.
So it can be seen that it was not just being a Geordie that brought
suspicion on men from the North East. They were looking for a very
distinctive and rare Geordie. One with a large gap in his top front
teeth and B secretor blood group.



Evidence that links the letter writer to the murders and reasons why
the Ripper letters and tape were not a hoax.


These vital points of evidence support the defense that John Humble
could not be the author of the letters and tape. Rather they support
the police contention up to the arrest of Peter Sutcliffe, that the
author was the Ripper.


1. In 1975 Joan Mary Harrison was kicked to death in a Preston garage
three weeks after the murder of the first Ripper victim Wilma McCann
in Leeds. Both were robbed and sexually assaulted. Semen in Joan
Harrison's body and saliva on a bite on her breast showed that her
killer was the rare 1 in 16 "B secretor" blood group. The same rare
semen was found on prostitute Wilma McCann. Joan apparently had
consensual sex with him because semen was found in her vagina. After
that sexual bout he turned on her and killed her. He then removed one
leg, first from her trousers, then from her tights and pants and then
buggered her leaving semen in the anus. Then he replaced her leg in
the trousers only and pushed her boots tightly between her thighs
before draping her coat over her lifeless body.


2. Joan Harrison's killer tauntingly left his signature, a deep
deliberate bite on her left breast. Her killer had a large gap
equivalent to two teeth missing between his top front teeth. The
police thus had unambiguous and impressive clues which could be used
as solid evidence in court if the killer was ever caught. Rare blood
and distinctive teeth marks.


3. With such impressive clues, 6000 Preston suspects were asked to
spit into small glass jars as a ploy so that the police could observe
their teeth as they spat. They were told that saliva samples were
wanted but the easily identifiable killer was not found in this
massive trawl.


4. After a gap of just over a year, Irene Richardson, the third
acknowledged Yorkshire Ripper victim had one leg removed from her
tights and pants. Her shoes were laid out along her thighs and her
coat draped over her body. Neither of these two victims was a
soliciting prostitute but rather they were poor and vulnerable. The
police didn't reveal if Irene had been sexually assaulted. Irene was
in the Ripper frame from the start and despite the similarities, the
police did not link the Preston murder to the Ripper enquiry until
much later.


5. Misses McCann, Jackson, Richardson, Atkinson, McDonald and Rytka
were firmly linked as Ripper victims. After the McDonald murder in
Leeds, A.C.C. George Oldfield who lived in Huddersfield took overall
command of the Ripper investigation. The Ripper chose Oldfield's home
town for his next murder of prostitute Helen Rytka in January 1978 and
Oldfield appealed for information from the public in trying to trace
him. The Ripper had a close call when he found himself unable to get
away from the timber yard in which he had just sexually assaulted and
murdered Helen Rytka and where he had redressed and set up the victim
but then had to change his plan, hide the body and dump his tools.


6. In March 1978 the police received two letters from a man who
claimed to be the Ripper. According to some newspaper reports there
were suggestions that seven murders should be attributed to the Ripper
at that time. The informant, who claimed to be the Ripper stated, "up
to 8 now, you say 7 but remember Preston '75". The West Yorkshire
police had linked the above six murders as definite Ripper victims at
the time but some newspapers speculated wrongly that prostitute Jean
Jordan who was murdered in Manchester was a Ripper victim, the seventh
victim that the writer/Ripper referred to. The writer/Ripper was
including a copycat killer's murder in Manchester in his toll of
victims to divert the police to that copycat, and in order to convince
them that he did it he promised another murder 'in Manchester again'
this time of an 'older' victim. The contents of these letters was not
published for more than a year later and nobody knew about them at
that time only the police and the writer/ Ripper. He also stated in
the letter that he had a 'close call' in Huddersfield, something that
no hoaxer could possibly have known of. The reason for the writer/
Ripper to send the letters was simply to convince the police that he
had also killed Jean Jordan and thereby rope into the Ripper frame the
deranged copycat killer that the writer/Ripper alone knew existed and
whom we now know to be Peter Sutcliffe.


7. One month later the Ripper struck as promised in his letter in
Manchester and his victim was an older prostitute Vera Millward, the
oldest victim to date. Within two weeks of that the West Yorkshire
police included Jean Jordan as a Ripper victim but unbeknown to them
they had roped her killer, Peter Sutcliffe, into the Ripper frame and
he would be eliminated 12 times after this, because he was O blood
group.


8. Three months later the police announced that the Preston murder and
the murder in Bradford of Yvonne Pearson, thought to be a copycat
killing and four assaults were added to the Ripper frame. The police
never revealed the exact injuries found on the Ripper's victims in
Yorkshire but clearly if his blood group had been other than B
secretor the Preston murder would not have been added to the frame.


9. Six months later the writer/Ripper sent a third letter to the
police. This letter bore saliva on the gummed label which enabled
forensic tests to confirm that the sender was the rare B secretor
blood group. This eureka discovery combined with the information the
letters contained made the police certain that the writer was indeed
the Ripper. He chided them saying 'I wasn't kidding last time I wrote
saying that the whore would be older this time and maybe I'd strike in
Manchester for a change, you should have took heed'. He also stated
'funny, the lady mentioned something about being in the same
hospital'. Mrs Millward had been to that hospital and she had only one
lung, so they reasoned, how could a hoaxer know that? The writer also
promised to 'get back on the job'.


10. Less than two weeks later the Ripper fulfilled that promise and
struck this time in Halifax because Oldfield had just included
Sutcliffe's Halifax attack on Mrs Smelt as a Ripper attack. He
murdered respectable office clerk Josephine Whittaker and bit her
deeply on the left breast. The teeth marks were identical to those on
Joan Harrison in Preston and yielded the B blood group saliva. Her
shoe was stuffed between her thighs and her body covered with her
jacket. In common with other victims she had been stabbed repeatedly
within the vagina without leaving wounds on the surface of the body.


11. In desperation the police published extracts of his handwriting in
the hope of someone recognizing it, to no avail. Then on the 18th June
1979 the police received a cassette tape posted in Sunderland from the
same author. On 26th June they held a press conference and released
extracts of the taped Geordie accent. They were by then certain that
they came from the Ripper. On the tape the flat Geordie accent taunted
Oldfield and promised another murder in September or October. It also
confirmed the count of 11 as correct. That included the Preston murder
and two copycat killings which Oldfield admitted were in a grey area.
Peter Sutcliffe's confessions corroborate with the facts on these
killings only. On 1st September the writer/Ripper fulfilled his
promise on the tape with the murder of Barbara Leach, a university
student who was murdered within a few hundred yards of Ripper HQ in
Bradford.


12. The police had the vital evidence of the Ripper's B blood group
but that was of limited use because they didnt have criminals blood
groups on record then.. They also knew he had a large gap in his top
front teeth but this was not known to the public until late1980. It
was their magic bullet clue and they kept it strictly confidential. In
fact they were very angry when it was revealed in a magazine the New
Statesman in 1980. The Sunderland connections could easily have been
faked but the teeth and blood evidence were immutable. The writer/
Ripper had convinced them that he had killed Joan Harrison and forced
them to include that murder in the Ripper count. They also gave him
the benefit of the doubt when he said he did the Jordan murder. They
believed the contents of his messages, because a hoaxer couldn't have
known the sequence of events, but their big mistake was in believing
that he was a real Geordie and concentrating the hunt in the North
East without recognizing that he may have been a cunning criminal
trying to divert them and therein lies the hoax if any.


13. The connection between the Harrison murder and many of the Ripper
murders is rock solid. Sutcliffe is O blood group and doesn't have a
large gap in the top front of his teeth, and even though he would have
confessed to it, he could not have killed Joan Harrison, which is the
reason why the Lancashire police wouldn't charge him with it.


14. It must be emphasized that the police did not reveal the full
contents of the letters and tape. For example Michael Bilton's book
Wicked Beyond Belief contained a photo of the third letter and it
revealed that the writer stated 'the same hospital' when he was
referring to Mrs Millward. This fact was never before published and
had been edited out of all releases by the police. The other two
letters and the Geordie tape were edited by police and never released
in full.


Conclusions


If John Humble is not B secretor blood group he could not have done it
because it is acknowledged that the author of the letters had B blood
which was extracted from the saliva on the envelope label or stamps.

It must be presumed that Humble has the rare B secretor blood group
but I can find no evidence of the police stating this clearly. If he
is that rare blood group then he would be getting much more attention
from the Lancashire police who have an unsolved murder on their books.

Because Gregg made so much hay out ot the alleged and unrepeatable DNA
connection between Humble and the letters, it should be relatively
easy to compare Humble's DNA with the DNA on the semen and saliva left
on the body of Joan Harrison who was murdered in Preston. It has not
been reported if the Lancashire constabulary ever made that comparison
but I suspect they did and eliminated Humble.

To clarify the meaning of unrepeatable let me explain that the
scientist in the TV documentary stated that the DNA sample from the
letter was so minute that the experiment to compare the DNA on the
letter with Humble's DNA couldn never be repeated because the sample
was all used up. I wouldnt call that reliable evidence by any stretch
of the imagination and it would almost certainly not be acceptable to
any court.

To conclude, it is abundantly clear that the author of those three
letters and the Geordie tape recording had intimate knowledge of the
Ripper murders and the evidence shows that the police were absolutely
correct in believing that they were from the Ripper.



Lets look at it from another point of view.


If Humble wrote the letters in March 1978, how could he have known
that there was an unsolved murder in Preston in 1975 which had strong
links with the current series of murders in Yorkshire which were then
national news? The blood group of the Preston killer was not revealed
by the police. The teeth marks also were a closely guarded secret of
the police. There were several other unsolved murders in Preston so
how could any hoaxer know the connecting evidence between the Harrison
murder and the Ripper murders that was to be revealed, unless he had
intimate knowledge of both, unless he was the killer?
How could John Humble have known that the Ripper had a close call in
the timber yard in Huddersfield? Only the police knew that and they
never admitted it to date, but the evidence shows it to be a fact.
How could John Humble have predicted that the next Ripper victim would
be an older person and in Manchester?
These events happened soon after the letters promised them.
How could Humble have known that Mrs Millward had been in that same
hospital?
How could Humble have predicted that the Ripper would murder and bite
his next victim Josephine Whittaker identically as he had done to Joan
Harrison in Preston and less than a fortnight after he sent his third
letter predicting it? Clearly had the teeth pattern not been identical
and the blood group not the same, the Preston murder would not have
remained in the Ripper frame after that confirming event. That is to
say, if they had wrongly included Harrison as a Ripper victim based on
the first two letters, then the bite on Josephine Whittaker's breast
absolutely confirmed that the letter writer was the Ripper and he was
also the killer of Joan Harrison as the police firmly held, until
Sutcliffe's arrest.
How could any hoaxer have manipulated the toll of victims as has
happened?
How could a hoaxer, extracts of whose letters were published in the
belief that they were genuine, have upped the ante by sending a taped
voice message to those same police in the knowledge that the police
were now taking his letters very seriously indeed?
The murder of Barbara Leach on 1st September was a direct result of
the message sent by the Ripper who promised another murder in
'September or October'
If Humble was the hoaxer how could this ordinary man summon up such
menace and taunting material that reeks of hatred and contempt for the
police and George Oldfield in particular. The letters and tape could
not be regarded as joking or misleading in any normal sense of the
word hoax. They were the words of a very evil and cunning criminal who
was controlling events. They were no hoax and the police knew it.
Finally how could the cream of the British police agree that the
letters came from the Ripper and they insisted they were not a hoax,
despite much criticism by people not in possession of the full facts,
until they were left with no option only to say they were a hoax,
after they accepted the confessions of Peter Sutcliffe because there
was no way they could pin it on Sutcliffe, whose voice and writing was
distinctive and whose work records in Clark's Transport recorded that
he was elsewhere at the times the letters were posted.
The police may now try to suggest that breakthroughs in DNA profiling
enabled them to prove it was Humble. This highly suspect evidence
cannot be challenged and we have to take their word for it. As any
policeman will tell you, DNA evidence can be very easily contaminated
and cannot be independently challenged because they hold the letters
and tape recording from the Ripper/ hoaxer. The letters, if they are
still available, have been handled so much and if any DNA evidence was
to be credible, it should have been done before Humble was
interrogated. A bent cop can plant a rib of a suspect's hair or even a
flake of his skin or a speck of his handshake on anything in order to
incriminate him. After their stitch up of Sutcliffe, Kiszko and Judith
Ward, to name but a few, the West Yorkshire police dont have the
credibility for that.
Their word is not good enough. Their credibility has gone because
Sutcliffe himself is clearly not responsible for all the murders he
has been convicted of. In any case the police stated recently that
they had lost the original letters and tape. Also the Lancashire
police reported some years back that they had lost the forensic
evidence relating to the Joan Harrison murder. This is just more
evidence of police cover up by hiding the evidence as they did with
the underclothes Sutcliffe was wearing at the time of his arrest and
which has only recently been revealed by book writer Michael Bilton, a
friend and confidante of Dick Holland.

If they had hard evidence against humble, why did they have to hold
this vulnerable alcoholic without drink under interrogation for two
days while they worked on him to get a confession? Also why did none
of his acquaintances recognize his accent back in 1979 or 1980 when
every man in that area was a serious suspect? It is true that all who
know him, relatives and acquaintances cant believe it is his voice.
Humble's confessions are worthless when held up to the light.

A timetable was set down for the progress of the case with a plea and
directions hearing at Leeds Crown Court scheduled for January 9 and a
provisional trial dated for the week of February 20.

Humble duly appeared in Leeds crown court on the 9th January and
pleaded not guilty to four charges of sending the three letters and
the tape from Sunderland. A trial date was set for 20th March and the
defence said they would need about three weeks to make their defence.
Humble's lawyers told the judge an application for bail will be made
in chambers soon and there was a complaint that the police came to him
in prison and did teeth inspections without his consent. This was most
likely the Lancashire police who would be obliged to see him to
ascertain if he was involved in the murder of Joan Harrison in Preston
in 1975.

It may be gathered from the fact that they didnt charge him with the
Preston murder that his teeth didnt match the teeth of the killer of
Joan Harrison. The police rarely comment and the public are always
left with the impression that he was involved.

On 23rd February Humble's lawyer admitted that he wrote the letters
and sent the tape to the police but he denies intent to pervert the
course of justice.

There followed a barrage of publicity orchestrated by Chris Gregg.
They released a photo of Humble (above) to the press. Significantly
his mouth was firmly closed and his teeth hidden. A stage managed tape
recording of Humble reading the ‘I’m Jack’ tape in his Geordie accent
was released to TV stations. Uncharacteristically for police a lot of
other information about Humble such as his criminal record and suicide
attempt was released by them to blacken his character further. They
made much of the allegation that he had an unusual interest in Jack
the Ripper books.

It was all very convincing and the newspapers had a field day with it
but lets look behind the scenes for a moment.


If Humble really was the letter writer the police could easily prove
it beyond any doubt and if they really had DNA from the letters they
would most certainly have charged Humble in open court and produced
their evidence before a jury and they would seek the maximum possible
sentence for him. DNA evidence is a fairly new science and has many
weaknesses, but there are other more easily understood and verifiable
points of solid evidence that could have been brought to bear. The one
in a billion chance that they found Humble is a likely story indeed
after 30 years trying. It is simply a lie.
They were silent on his blood group presumably because Humble is not B
secretor blood, traces of which was found on the envelope of the third
letter.
They were silent about his teeth pattern or gaps in his teeth
presumably because his teeth don’t match the set that murdered Joan
Harrison in Preston.
Detective Superintendent Graham Gardner of Lancashire police stated
there was nothing to suggest he was involved.
If he were really the author they would also have produced several
letters sent by him in his handwriting to compare with the letters
sent to the police. They would have had handwriting expert witnesses
to testify against Humble as to his spelling and grammar. If he
cooperated in order to get mitigation he could have written the
letters again in front of the jury to prove it. Equally he could have
replicated the ‘I’m Jack’ voice before a jury but this wasn’t possible
because Humble was not the author. He may not even be able to write
his name for all we know, much less spell the words.
They would have had voice recognition experts to prove that the ‘I’m
Jack’ tape was Humble’s voice. With such telling evidence readily
available, a confession from a vulnerable drunk is counter productive
and questionable.
If he really were the hoaxer the police would be able to prove it
beyond a shadow of a doubt. As it was they had to coerce confessions
out of this patsy and offer him a lenient sentence in order to secure
his cooperation and get him to tell his family and the world through
staged video taping that he was the hoaxer.
Because of his confessions, his free legal aid team believed the
police about the DNA evidence without question and advised him to take
the 3 year option and cooperate. But there was another reason that the
public were not told about.
He was offered the prospect of freedom after 3 years spent in a
Jeffrey Archer style open prison and he had already served six months.
Early parole would be recommended by the police because he was not
violent or dangerous and had cooperated with them. The sentence handed
down was effectively five years with remission taken into account.
This was more than he had bargained for but par for the course in
police broken promises. If John Humble was really responsible for such
an elaborate hoax leading to three murders he would have gotten a much
sterner sentence on conviction. Even his own family stated that he
should get sixty years or never be released because he told them he
did it. This was part of his deal with manipulator Chris Gregg and
explains why the family were upset that he would be coming back to
them sooner than they expected.
Initially, family members are on record that they couldn’t believe it
was his voice and of course nobody recognized his voice back in 1979
when everyone was under suspicion. It was easy to believe he was the
hoaxer when they wanted to believe it to be rid of him.

Police also released details of two phone calls that came into the
incident room in both Bradford and Northumbria within a week of the
murder of Barbara Leach in Bradford. They claimed that a man phoned in
to both stations in a frenzy and claimed that the letters were a hoax.
The calls were recorded by police manning the phones. Now Chris Gregg
says that this was John Humble who was repentant and attempted to warn
police that the letters were a hoax.
However in the Independant newspaper the reporter had taken the
trouble to delve further into it and found that the police forensic
laboratory had eliminated this voice as being the ‘I’m Jack’ author
shortly after it was made. This means that that person could not have
been John Humble and the police laboratory eliminated him then.
This information in fact undermines the case against John Humble based
on police evidence that Chris Gregg appears to have overlooked in
fabricating the confession and conviction of Humble.



Chris Gregg

Chris Gregg contaminating police evidence on video utube


NEW EVIDENCE ABOUT JOHN HUMBLE NOT MADE PUBLIC

It has since become clearer how Chris Gregg managed to get the full
cooperation of John Humble.

Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Gregg has perverted policing
methods, perverted the system of justice, brought shame on the West
Yorkshire police force and the police in general and now has cast
serious doubt over the credibility of DNA evidence in any future
criminal prosecution by his actions in framing John Humble as the
Ripper hoaxer.
I say this because Humble was knowingly framed by Gregg and much play
was made of alleged DNA both on a BBC TV documentary and in the media
but no evidence was produced in court, because Humble had cooperated
with Chris Gregg and was prepared to take the rap and be branded as
the hoaxer.
Humble had been blackmailed by Gregg into admitting he was the hoaxer
because Gregg agreed to overlook a potentially much more serious
charge of attempted murder of his brother, Harry.
Chris Gregg, the smooth talking career cop who had recently been
installed as high profile head of a new department in the police force
known as the Homicide and Major Enquiry Team, was a detective who
longed to solve the greatest mystery that had dogged the West
Yorkshire police force for more than two decades.

Humble fitted Patrick Lavelle’s profile of the hoaxer, aged 49, a
Geordie with a history of being a police hater who had once kicked a
policeman and served time in prison. Now Lavelle was told that Humble
had stabbed his brother Harry in a violent rage with a kitchen knife
three times and the family were too afraid to report him to the police
because he was such an unpredictable nutter and he had become a raving
alcoholic prone to violent rages who should be locked up in a mental
home.


Armed with this information or intelligence as the police refer to it,
Gregg determined to solve the hoaxer mystery once and for all. He
studied Humble’s background and criminal record and met the family to
confirm the stabbing and violent rages. He saw that the family would
not support John and would be delighted if he was locked up
forevermore. This led him to progress the matter and presented him
with the oppertunity to solve the Ripper hoaxer case in his way. His
enquiries revealed that Humble had an interest in Jack the Ripper and
once had a library book about that case. They also revealed that
Humble had no support from his former wife and step child and had
attempted suicide in 1979. Here was a down and out living on state
benefits,who had no support in the world. A man who could be coerced
into admitting to the less serious charge offered to him as an option
and keeping his family from giving evidence against him.
In a media spotlight in a tent outside Humble’s council home, Gregg
interrogated the drunken Humble for two days until he signed a
confession to say he was the hoaxer and then he was arrested and held
in custody since. Gregg then procured his DNA evidence referred to
above and a scientist acting in good faith confirmed it was Humble's.
The publication of her findings although they could never be
replicated convinced everyone that Humble was the man. Gregg obviously
contaminated whatever he gave the science laboratory with Humble's
DNA, an act which is criminal in the extreme and was designed to
coerce Humble into confessing that he wrote the letters.
He had been vilified as the hoaxer by the Sunderland Echo from the
time of his arrest and then by the national media and the public were
convinced he was guilty before he even faced a court to plead. Gregg
was hailed as a true detective who was breaking new grounds in
detection, using new technology on old evidence but he had resorted to
the oldest bent cop trick in the book known as blackmail to agree a
plea bargain deal so that no trial would ensue, allegedly to save
court time and money not to mention his compassion in sparing the
victim the ordeal of the court.
Humble was advised by his lawyers, Shires Wainwright of Wakefield and
David Taylor his counsel that his best option was to cooperate and
plead to being the hoaxer and he would be out in three or four years
as against taking his chances of facing the extra charges of attempted
murder of his brother along with the charge of being the hoaxer
supported by his confessions and the procured DNA evidence that
couldn’t be verified. Their role was confined to pleas for mitigation
after that.
He was led into Leeds court on 20th March 2006 in handcuffs and gave a
response to his name and pleaded guilty to all the charges.There was
no trial, judge Norman Jones failing miserably in his duty to all
accused men by rubber stamping the blackmailed deal and the sentence
was pronounced the next day.
He was sentenced to eight years in prison which means five with
remission and he was promised parole would come early and he would
serve in a Geoffrey Archer style open prison because he was convicted
on the non violent charge and his madness and violence would not be
revealed by the police.
For that he agreed that he wrote the letters and he cooperated with a
recording by repeating the words of the Ripper in his Geordie accent
for Chris Gregg’s camera. It was all very convincing but entirely
stage managed by Gregg who basked in the glory of capturing the
infamous hoaxer knowing he had framed a criminal for a crime he didnt
commit.

I flew to Leeds the next day and entered the court at 11.0am. I was
stopped by two policemen and asked my name. Then they whispered into
their mics and soon three more arrived. There was a bevy of cameras
outside the court waiting to hear the sentence imposed on Humble who
had caved in, in the days before and confessed. They asked me what I
had come for and I said I came to make sure that Humble got a fair
trial.
With that they ordered me out of the court house and I objected and
said this was Britain, not Saudi Arabia or Nigeria but I had to leave
or be forced out.
Outside the court the media were waiting to interview a police
spokesman. I told them Humble was framed and the DNA was planted.
I displayed a placard outside the court door as per the photo.
Superintendant Chris Gregg began an interview and I stood behind him
showing the placard. I shouted "Chris Gregg You have framed an
innocent man." Then the other police grabbed me and dragged me up the
street away
from the press and held me there until it was over. And they said the
Birmingham 6 could never happen again.
Humble had no trial. There was no jury and no evidence. He had been
offered a choice. Freedom after 3 or 4 years in an open prison if he
cooperated or life if he pleaded not guilty. The man was blackmailed
into confessing and his free legal team advised him to take the easy
option.

Chris Gregg has now provided an additional shield to the Real
Yorkshire Ripper, Billy Tracey because he has put it on record
officially that the Ripper's letters were sent not by the Ripper but
by John Humble in his efforts to protect his former corrupt colleagues
who allowed the Real Ripper to get away.

Now the West Yorkshire police have framed a lunatic copycat killer,
Peter Sutcliffe who is locked up as the Ripper and a down and out
alcoholic nutter John Humble framed as the hoaxer while the real
Ripper Billy Tracey, the man who committed most of the murders and
sent the letters and tape to the police to divert them, is still a
free man and living in the UK right now.

The public have been well and truly misled and manipulated by a small
group of corrupt policemen supported by the established media who only
report the findings of the courts and whatever passes through them.

On the 3rd May I received a letter from John Humble. His handwriting
betrays his lies and proves that he didnt write the allegedly hoax
letters.

It is abundantly apparent why Chris Gregg didnt want Humble's letters
to appear before a jury as nobody would believe he wrote the three
letters to George Oldfield if they looked at his handwriting, the
style of an uneducated person who can barely spell and write.

I reproduce them here.

...what a foremost American scientist has to say about low copy number
DNA on utube

video on utube  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbIdo6uJA5A

==========================

The following text is helpful:


THE REAL YORKSHIRE RIPPER STORY

The Great Hoaxer stitch-up of John Humble.

BACKGROUND TO THE HUMBLE ARREST

It is a matter of record that I have written a book entitled 'The Real
Yorkshire Ripper' in 1982 and it has as its central theme the alarming
claim that the police offered copycat killer Peter Sutcliffe no trial
and ten years in a mental home in exchange for his confessions to all
the Yorkshire Ripper’s murders. More alarmingly it also claims that
they knew that Sutcliffe was not responsible for most of the murders
which he was convicted of and that there is an elaborate police cover
up of the facts to this day.
My claims are based on a conviction that a former employee of mine, an
Irishman named Billy Tracey was responsible for most of the Ripper
murders and he also sent the police three letters and a taped message
mimicking a Geordie accent to divert the police hunt to Sunderland.
These claims are also based on evidence that the police knew that
there were two killers involved in the Ripper murders, namely the
Ripper himself and a copycat killer who had committed a few of the
murders.
When Peter Sutcliffe, a man well known to them was arrested in
Sheffield, the police were under such intense media pressure that they
wrapped up the case with his confessions alone and let the real Ripper
get away.
The police entered into a plea bargain deal with him which effectively
meant that he had no trial.

Sutcliffe was that copycat killer and the real Ripper, Billy Tracey is
still a free man. Sutcliffe had been eliminated 12 times because he is
O blood group and because his wife convinced the police he was with
her at crucial times of real Ripper murders. She was certain he was
not the Ripper for those reasons and perhaps that explains why she
stood by him..

Judge Boreham who presided over his committal hearing in the Old
Bailey refused to accept the plea that Sutcliffe was mad without
corroboration for the crimes and he ordered a trial of his sanity. The
subsequent jury trial of his sanity found that Sutcliffe, who had
confessed to being the Ripper was not mad and he was immediately
sentenced to 30 years on his confessions alone.
Before Sutcliffe’s arrest the police were certain that the author of
three letters and a tape recording sent to them from Sunderland by a
man signing himself ‘Jack the Ripper’ were in fact from the Ripper and
massive resources were deployed to unmask that man by identifying the
handwriting or the voice.
After Sutcliffe's conviction the police moved into a cover up mode and
the goal posts were changed. The letter writer dubbed ‘Wearside Jack’
was declared to be a hoaxer and the copycat killer was never mentioned
again.

We are now witnessing an audacious stitch up of a vulnerable man, John
Humble, for a very serious crime with media connivance to assist
corrupt policemen to convict him through the courts. Humble is an
alcoholic living in a council house on very small means with his
brother and sister. He is to be the patsy for the West Yorkshire
police to cover up their own crimes and failings.
His local newspaper the Sunderland Echo was the driving force behind
this drama.
For several years news editor and also author of the book 'Wearside
Jack', Patrick Lavelle, has conducted a campaign to unmask the alleged
Yorkshire Ripper "hoaxer" naming several persons both to the police
and in his book and repeatedly asking his readers to give him the
names of any suspect they knew, all the while promoting his book
"Wearside Jack".

Over a period of 6 years it has been nothing short of a witch hunt
because there was no hoax and the book was based on a police lie.

On 19th October 2005 Lavelle wrote in the Echo
" The information I gave police included the name of a 49-year-old man
from Sunderland, and the allegations that were made against him by two
local women.
The man arrested yesterday is 49 and from Sunderland, but there is
nothing to say it is the same man.
Whether it is the same man or not really doesn't matter. What does
matter is that one of the biggest criminal mysteries in Sunderland may
about to be resolved.
If it is resolved it may have something to do with advances in
forensic science. But, in my view, is has more to do with the people
of Sunderland, who always laughed at the claims there was a serial
killer in our midst.
It is these people who have never forgotten, who provided the
information that led to this new inquiry, and this arrest.
In the next few days many people, among them authors and media
professionals, will jump on the bandwagon, claiming they helped police
catch the prime suspect for the Ripper Hoax.
Please don't doubt for one minute, this renewed inquiry happened for
one reason only - the campaign by the Sunderland Echo on behalf of its
readers.
If it had not been for Echo readers, the case of Wearside Jack would
have been unresolved.
Now, however, there is a chance that the shadow of the Ripper, which
has hung over Sunderland for two-and-a-half decades, may soon be
lifted."

Lavelle's book is a quest to identify the Wearside "hoaxer" and this
has been his passion for several years during which time he has been
in constant touch with the police and wrote many prominent newspaper
articles about various developments and police enquiries into his
allegations. A search of the archive of the Sunderland Echo will
reveal the full extent of it.


There is a police cover up.

This story is largely about police corruption or covering up their
mistakes by further convictions to fool the public.
Detective Chief Superintendant Dick Holland, the corrupt cop who had
earlier framed the innocent Stefan Kiszko for murder, brokered a deal
with Sutcliffe whereby they offered him no trial and ten years in a
mental hospital in exchange for his confessions to all the murders of
the Ripper as well as his own crimes. Sutcliffe accepted the deal and
he had no trial other than a test of madness. Sutcliffe's solicitor
Kerry MacGill, who was the other broker to this infamous deal is now a
crown court judge in Leeds.

MacGill acted as solicitor for Dick Holland when Holland later faced
corruption charges for the Kiszko stitch-up and the charges were
dropped inexplicably. Kiszko died shortly after his release from
prison.



George Oldfield, the policeman in charge of the Ripper hunt confirmed
that there were two killers involved in the Ripper frame to the Sunday
Times in November 1980 shortly before Sutcliffe's arrest.


Quote from Sunday Times

"Oldfield conceded to us that no fewer than five of the attacks, 3
killings, 2 assaults, fell into a 'grey area' where the balance of
probability that they were the Ripper's work was 'much weaker.' If he
put his hands up to these killings then it would not surprise us',
Oldfield said. 'But equally, if we were only able to charge him with
10 murders and not the 13 we would not mind.' Oldfield's sentiment,
after almost 5 years on the Ripper trail, is understandable. But it
carries a sinister implication: if all the 17 attacks were not by the
same person then there is not one Ripper but at least two. Clearly
though, most of the attacks were committed by one person. "The
Ripper". "


Oldfield was certain that the Ripper had written him three letters and
sent him a taped cassette message for very good reasons. The letters
were posted in Sunderland. The Ripper spoke with a flat Geordie accent
and this put the finger of suspicion on every man who spoke with a
Geordie accent. From then on all men from the North East became Ripper
suspects. The police interviewed thousands of Geordies and the first
thing they did was examine their teeth to see if there was a prominent
gap in the top front row or dentures in that area. If a suspect had no
gap or dentures he was eliminated immediately. If he had any gap in
the top row of teeth he was asked to provide a blood sample. If his
blood was anything other than the rare B blood he was then eliminated.
This was because the Ripper had bitten two victims. Saliva recovered
on the bites showed the killer was the rare one in sixteen B secretor
blood group. The bites showed he had a large gap in the top front of
his teeth.
The Ripper was clearly taunting Oldfield.
Suspects were never told about the clues that the police had to the
Ripper's identity other than that he was a Geordie.
So it can be seen that it was not just being a Geordie that brought
suspicion on men from the North East. They were looking for a very
distinctive and rare Geordie. One with a large gap in his top front
teeth and B secretor blood group.



Evidence that links the letter writer to the murders and reasons why
the Ripper letters and tape were not a hoax.


These vital points of evidence support the defense that John Humble
could not be the author of the letters and tape. Rather they support
the police contention up to the arrest of Peter Sutcliffe, that the
author was the Ripper.


1. In 1975 Joan Mary Harrison was kicked to death in a Preston garage
three weeks after the murder of the first Ripper victim Wilma McCann
in Leeds. Both were robbed and sexually assaulted. Semen in Joan
Harrison's body and saliva on a bite on her breast showed that her
killer was the rare 1 in 16 "B secretor" blood group. The same rare
semen was found on prostitute Wilma McCann. Joan apparently had
consensual sex with him because semen was found in her vagina. After
that sexual bout he turned on her and killed her. He then removed one
leg, first from her trousers, then from her tights and pants and then
buggered her leaving semen in the anus. Then he replaced her leg in
the trousers only and pushed her boots tightly between her thighs
before draping her coat over her lifeless body.


2. Joan Harrison's killer tauntingly left his signature, a deep
deliberate bite on her left breast. Her killer had a large gap
equivalent to two teeth missing between his top front teeth. The
police thus had unambiguous and impressive clues which could be used
as solid evidence in court if the killer was ever caught. Rare blood
and distinctive teeth marks.


3. With such impressive clues, 6000 Preston suspects were asked to
spit into small glass jars as a ploy so that the police could observe
their teeth as they spat. They were told that saliva samples were
wanted but the easily identifiable killer was not found in this
massive trawl.


4. After a gap of just over a year, Irene Richardson, the third
acknowledged Yorkshire Ripper victim had one leg removed from her
tights and pants. Her shoes were laid out along her thighs and her
coat draped over her body. Neither of these two victims was a
soliciting prostitute but rather they were poor and vulnerable. The
police didn't reveal if Irene had been sexually assaulted. Irene was
in the Ripper frame from the start and despite the similarities, the
police did not link the Preston murder to the Ripper enquiry until
much later.


5. Misses McCann, Jackson, Richardson, Atkinson, McDonald and Rytka
were firmly linked as Ripper victims. After the McDonald murder in
Leeds, A.C.C. George Oldfield who lived in Huddersfield took overall
command of the Ripper investigation. The Ripper chose Oldfield's home
town for his next murder of prostitute Helen Rytka in January 1978 and
Oldfield appealed for information from the public in trying to trace
him. The Ripper had a close call when he found himself unable to get
away from the timber yard in which he had just sexually assaulted and
murdered Helen Rytka and where he had redressed and set up the victim
but then had to change his plan, hide the body and dump his tools.


6. In March 1978 the police received two letters from a man who
claimed to be the Ripper. According to some newspaper reports there
were suggestions that seven murders should be attributed to the Ripper
at that time. The informant, who claimed to be the Ripper stated, "up
to 8 now, you say 7 but remember Preston '75". The West Yorkshire
police had linked the above six murders as definite Ripper victims at
the time but some newspapers speculated wrongly that prostitute Jean
Jordan who was murdered in Manchester was a Ripper victim, the seventh
victim that the writer/Ripper referred to. The writer/Ripper was
including a copycat killer's murder in Manchester in his toll of
victims to divert the police to that copycat, and in order to convince
them that he did it he promised another murder 'in Manchester again'
this time of an 'older' victim. The contents of these letters was not
published for more than a year later and nobody knew about them at
that time only the police and the writer/ Ripper. He also stated in
the letter that he had a 'close call' in Huddersfield, something that
no hoaxer could possibly have known of. The reason for the writer/
Ripper to send the letters was simply to convince the police that he
had also killed Jean Jordan and thereby rope into the Ripper frame the
deranged copycat killer that the writer/Ripper alone knew existed and
whom we now know to be Peter Sutcliffe.


7. One month later the Ripper struck as promised in his letter in
Manchester and his victim was an older prostitute Vera Millward, the
oldest victim to date. Within two weeks of that the West Yorkshire
police included Jean Jordan as a Ripper victim but unbeknown to them
they had roped her killer, Peter Sutcliffe, into the Ripper frame and
he would be eliminated 12 times after this, because he was O blood
group.


8. Three months later the police announced that the Preston murder and
the murder in Bradford of Yvonne Pearson, thought to be a copycat
killing and four assaults were added to the Ripper frame. The police
never revealed the exact injuries found on the Ripper's victims in
Yorkshire but clearly if his blood group had been other than B
secretor the Preston murder would not have been added to the frame.


9. Six months later the writer/Ripper sent a third letter to the
police. This letter bore saliva on the gummed label which enabled
forensic tests to confirm that the sender was the rare B secretor
blood group. This eureka discovery combined with the information the
letters contained made the police certain that the writer was indeed
the Ripper. He chided them saying 'I wasn't kidding last time I wrote
saying that the whore would be older this time and maybe I'd strike in
Manchester for a change, you should have took heed'. He also stated
'funny, the lady mentioned something about being in the same
hospital'. Mrs Millward had been to that hospital and she had only one
lung, so they reasoned, how could a hoaxer know that? The writer also
promised to 'get back on the job'.


10. Less than two weeks later the Ripper fulfilled that promise and
struck this time in Halifax because Oldfield had just included
Sutcliffe's Halifax attack on Mrs Smelt as a Ripper attack. He
murdered respectable office clerk Josephine Whittaker and bit her
deeply on the left breast. The teeth marks were identical to those on
Joan Harrison in Preston and yielded the B blood group saliva. Her
shoe was stuffed between her thighs and her body covered with her
jacket. In common with other victims she had been stabbed repeatedly
within the vagina without leaving wounds on the surface of the body.


11. In desperation the police published extracts of his handwriting in
the hope of someone recognizing it, to no avail. Then on the 18th June
1979 the police received a cassette tape posted in Sunderland from the
same author. On 26th June they held a press conference and released
extracts of the taped Geordie accent. They were by then certain that
they came from the Ripper. On the tape the flat Geordie accent taunted
Oldfield and promised another murder in September or October. It also
confirmed the count of 11 as correct. That included the Preston murder
and two copycat killings which Oldfield admitted were in a grey area.
Peter Sutcliffe's confessions corroborate with the facts on these
killings only. On 1st September the writer/Ripper fulfilled his
promise on the tape with the murder of Barbara Leach, a university
student who was murdered within a few hundred yards of Ripper HQ in
Bradford.


12. The police had the vital evidence of the Ripper's B blood group
but that was of limited use because they didnt have criminals blood
groups on record then.. They also knew he had a large gap in his top
front teeth but this was not known to the public until late1980. It
was their magic bullet clue and they kept it strictly confidential. In
fact they were very angry when it was revealed in a magazine the New
Statesman in 1980. The Sunderland connections could easily have been
faked but the teeth and blood evidence were immutable. The writer/
Ripper had convinced them that he had killed Joan Harrison and forced
them to include that murder in the Ripper count. They also gave him
the benefit of the doubt when he said he did the Jordan murder. They
believed the contents of his messages, because a hoaxer couldn't have
known the sequence of events, but their big mistake was in believing
that he was a real Geordie and concentrating the hunt in the North
East without recognizing that he may have been a cunning criminal
trying to divert them and therein lies the hoax if any.


13. The connection between the Harrison murder and many of the Ripper
murders is rock solid. Sutcliffe is O blood group and doesn't have a
large gap in the top front of his teeth, and even though he would have
confessed to it, he could not have killed Joan Harrison, which is the
reason why the Lancashire police wouldn't charge him with it.


14. It must be emphasized that the police did not reveal the full
contents of the letters and tape. For example Michael Bilton's book
Wicked Beyond Belief contained a photo of the third letter and it
revealed that the writer stated 'the same hospital' when he was
referring to Mrs Millward. This fact was never before published and
had been edited out of all releases by the police. The other two
letters and the Geordie tape were edited by police and never released
in full.


Conclusions


If John Humble is not B secretor blood group he could not have done it
because it is acknowledged that the author of the letters had B blood
which was extracted from the saliva on the envelope label or stamps.

It must be presumed that Humble has the rare B secretor blood group
but I can find no evidence of the police stating this clearly. If he
is that rare blood group then he would be getting much more attention
from the Lancashire police who have an unsolved murder on their books.

Because Gregg made so much hay out ot the alleged and unrepeatable DNA
connection between Humble and the letters, it should be relatively
easy to compare Humble's DNA with the DNA on the semen and saliva left
on the body of Joan Harrison who was murdered in Preston. It has not
been reported if the Lancashire constabulary ever made that comparison
but I suspect they did and eliminated Humble.

To clarify the meaning of unrepeatable let me explain that the
scientist in the TV documentary stated that the DNA sample from the
letter was so minute that the experiment to compare the DNA on the
letter with Humble's DNA couldn never be repeated because the sample
was all used up. I wouldnt call that reliable evidence by any stretch
of the imagination and it would almost certainly not be acceptable to
any court.

To conclude, it is abundantly clear that the author of those three
letters and the Geordie tape recording had intimate knowledge of the
Ripper murders and the evidence shows that the police were absolutely
correct in believing that they were from the Ripper.



Lets look at it from another point of view.


If Humble wrote the letters in March 1978, how could he have known
that there was an unsolved murder in Preston in 1975 which had strong
links with the current series of murders in Yorkshire which were then
national news? The blood group of the Preston killer was not revealed
by the police. The teeth marks also were a closely guarded secret of
the police. There were several other unsolved murders in Preston so
how could any hoaxer know the connecting evidence between the Harrison
murder and the Ripper murders that was to be revealed, unless he had
intimate knowledge of both, unless he was the killer?
How could John Humble have known that the Ripper had a close call in
the timber yard in Huddersfield? Only the police knew that and they
never admitted it to date, but the evidence shows it to be a fact.
How could John Humble have predicted that the next Ripper victim would
be an older person and in Manchester?
These events happened soon after the letters promised them.
How could Humble have known that Mrs Millward had been in that same
hospital?
How could Humble have predicted that the Ripper would murder and bite
his next victim Josephine Whittaker identically as he had done to Joan
Harrison in Preston and less than a fortnight after he sent his third
letter predicting it? Clearly had the teeth pattern not been identical
and the blood group not the same, the Preston murder would not have
remained in the Ripper frame after that confirming event. That is to
say, if they had wrongly included Harrison as a Ripper victim based on
the first two letters, then the bite on Josephine Whittaker's breast
absolutely confirmed that the letter writer was the Ripper and he was
also the killer of Joan Harrison as the police firmly held, until
Sutcliffe's arrest.
How could any hoaxer have manipulated the toll of victims as has
happened?
How could a hoaxer, extracts of whose letters were published in the
belief that they were genuine, have upped the ante by sending a taped
voice message to those same police in the knowledge that the police
were now taking his letters very seriously indeed?
The murder of Barbara Leach on 1st September was a direct result of
the message sent by the Ripper who promised another murder in
'September or October'
If Humble was the hoaxer how could this ordinary man summon up such
menace and taunting material that reeks of hatred and contempt for the
police and George Oldfield in particular. The letters and tape could
not be regarded as joking or misleading in any normal sense of the
word hoax. They were the words of a very evil and cunning criminal who
was controlling events. They were no hoax and the police knew it.
Finally how could the cream of the British police agree that the
letters came from the Ripper and they insisted they were not a hoax,
despite much criticism by people not in possession of the full facts,
until they were left with no option only to say they were a hoax,
after they accepted the confessions of Peter Sutcliffe because there
was no way they could pin it on Sutcliffe, whose voice and writing was
distinctive and whose work records in Clark's Transport recorded that
he was elsewhere at the times the letters were posted.
The police may now try to suggest that breakthroughs in DNA profiling
enabled them to prove it was Humble. This highly suspect evidence
cannot be challenged and we have to take their word for it. As any
policeman will tell you, DNA evidence can be very easily contaminated
and cannot be independently challenged because they hold the letters
and tape recording from the Ripper/ hoaxer. The letters, if they are
still available, have been handled so much and if any DNA evidence was
to be credible, it should have been done before Humble was
interrogated. A bent cop can plant a rib of a suspect's hair or even a
flake of his skin or a speck of his handshake on anything in order to
incriminate him. After their stitch up of Sutcliffe, Kiszko and Judith
Ward, to name but a few, the West Yorkshire police dont have the
credibility for that.
Their word is not good enough. Their credibility has gone because
Sutcliffe himself is clearly not responsible for all the murders he
has been convicted of. In any case the police stated recently that
they had lost the original letters and tape. Also the Lancashire
police reported some years back that they had lost the forensic
evidence relating to the Joan Harrison murder. This is just more
evidence of police cover up by hiding the evidence as they did with
the underclothes Sutcliffe was wearing at the time of his arrest and
which has only recently been revealed by book writer Michael Bilton, a
friend and confidante of Dick Holland.

If they had hard evidence against humble, why did they have to hold
this vulnerable alcoholic without drink under interrogation for two
days while they worked on him to get a confession? Also why did none
of his acquaintances recognize his accent back in 1979 or 1980 when
every man in that area was a serious suspect? It is true that all who
know him, relatives and acquaintances cant believe it is his voice.
Humble's confessions are worthless when held up to the light.

A timetable was set down for the progress of the case with a plea and
directions hearing at Leeds Crown Court scheduled for January 9 and a
provisional trial dated for the week of February 20.

Humble duly appeared in Leeds crown court on the 9th January and
pleaded not guilty to four charges of sending the three letters and
the tape from Sunderland. A trial date was set for 20th March and the
defence said they would need about three weeks to make their defence.
Humble's lawyers told the judge an application for bail will be made
in chambers soon and there was a complaint that the police came to him
in prison and did teeth inspections without his consent. This was most
likely the Lancashire police who would be obliged to see him to
ascertain if he was involved in the murder of Joan Harrison in Preston
in 1975.

It may be gathered from the fact that they didnt charge him with the
Preston murder that his teeth didnt match the teeth of the killer of
Joan Harrison. The police rarely comment and the public are always
left with the impression that he was involved.

On 23rd February Humble's lawyer admitted that he wrote the letters
and sent the tape to the police but he denies intent to pervert the
course of justice.

There followed a barrage of publicity orchestrated by Chris Gregg.
They released a photo of Humble (above) to the press. Significantly
his mouth was firmly closed and his teeth hidden. A stage managed tape
recording of Humble reading the ‘I’m Jack’ tape in his Geordie accent
was released to TV stations. Uncharacteristically for police a lot of
other information about Humble such as his criminal record and suicide
attempt was released by them to blacken his character further. They
made much of the allegation that he had an unusual interest in Jack
the Ripper books.

It was all very convincing and the newspapers had a field day with it
but lets look behind the scenes for a moment.


If Humble really was the letter writer the police could easily prove
it beyond any doubt and if they really had DNA from the letters they
would most certainly have charged Humble in open court and produced
their evidence before a jury and they would seek the maximum possible
sentence for him. DNA evidence is a fairly new science and has many
weaknesses, but there are other more easily understood and verifiable
points of solid evidence that could have been brought to bear. The one
in a billion chance that they found Humble is a likely story indeed
after 30 years trying. It is simply a lie.
They were silent on his blood group presumably because Humble is not B
secretor blood, traces of which was found on the envelope of the third
letter.
They were silent about his teeth pattern or gaps in his teeth
presumably because his teeth don’t match the set that murdered Joan
Harrison in Preston.
Detective Superintendent Graham Gardner of Lancashire police stated
there was nothing to suggest he was involved.
If he were really the author they would also have produced several
letters sent by him in his handwriting to compare with the letters
sent to the police. They would have had handwriting expert witnesses
to testify against Humble as to his spelling and grammar. If he
cooperated in order to get mitigation he could have written the
letters again in front of the jury to prove it. Equally he could have
replicated the ‘I’m Jack’ voice before a jury but this wasn’t possible
because Humble was not the author. He may not even be able to write
his name for all we know, much less spell the words.
They would have had voice recognition experts to prove that the ‘I’m
Jack’ tape was Humble’s voice. With such telling evidence readily
available, a confession from a vulnerable drunk is counter productive
and questionable.
If he really were the hoaxer the police would be able to prove it
beyond a shadow of a doubt. As it was they had to coerce confessions
out of this patsy and offer him a lenient sentence in order to secure
his cooperation and get him to tell his family and the world through
staged video taping that he was the hoaxer.
Because of his confessions, his free legal aid team believed the
police about the DNA evidence without question and advised him to take
the 3 year option and cooperate. But there was another reason that the
public were not told about.
He was offered the prospect of freedom after 3 years spent in a
Jeffrey Archer style open prison and he had already served six months.
Early parole would be recommended by the police because he was not
violent or dangerous and had cooperated with them. The sentence handed
down was effectively five years with remission taken into account.
This was more than he had bargained for but par for the course in
police broken promises. If John Humble was really responsible for such
an elaborate hoax leading to three murders he would have gotten a much
sterner sentence on conviction. Even his own family stated that he
should get sixty years or never be released because he told them he
did it. This was part of his deal with manipulator Chris Gregg and
explains why the family were upset that he would be coming back to
them sooner than they expected.
Initially, family members are on record that they couldn’t believe it
was his voice and of course nobody recognized his voice back in 1979
when everyone was under suspicion. It was easy to believe he was the
hoaxer when they wanted to believe it to be rid of him.

Police also released details of two phone calls that came into the
incident room in both Bradford and Northumbria within a week of the
murder of Barbara Leach in Bradford. They claimed that a man phoned in
to both stations in a frenzy and claimed that the letters were a hoax.
The calls were recorded by police manning the phones. Now Chris Gregg
says that this was John Humble who was repentant and attempted to warn
police that the letters were a hoax.
However in the Independant newspaper the reporter had taken the
trouble to delve further into it and found that the police forensic
laboratory had eliminated this voice as being the ‘I’m Jack’ author
shortly after it was made. This means that that person could not have
been John Humble and the police laboratory eliminated him then.
This information in fact undermines the case against John Humble based
on police evidence that Chris Gregg appears to have overlooked in
fabricating the confession and conviction of Humble.

=========================================================

Chris Gregg


Chris Gregg contaminating police evidence on video utube


NEW EVIDENCE ABOUT JOHN HUMBLE NOT MADE PUBLIC

It has since become clearer how Chris Gregg managed to get the full
cooperation of John Humble.

Detective Chief Superintendent Chris Gregg has perverted policing
methods, perverted the system of justice, brought shame on the West
Yorkshire police force and the police in general and now has cast
serious doubt over the credibility of DNA evidence in any future
criminal prosecution by his actions in framing John Humble as the
Ripper hoaxer.
I say this because Humble was knowingly framed by Gregg and much play
was made of alleged DNA both on a BBC TV documentary and in the media
but no evidence was produced in court, because Humble had cooperated
with Chris Gregg and was prepared to take the rap and be branded as
the hoaxer.
Humble had been blackmailed by Gregg into admitting he was the hoaxer
because Gregg agreed to overlook a potentially much more serious
charge of attempted murder of his brother, Harry.
Chris Gregg, the smooth talking career cop who had recently been
installed as high profile head of a new department in the police force
known as the Homicide and Major Enquiry Team, was a detective who
longed to solve the greatest mystery that had dogged the West
Yorkshire police force for more than two decades.

Humble fitted Patrick Lavelle’s profile of the hoaxer, aged 49, a
Geordie with a history of being a police hater who had once kicked a
policeman and served time in prison. Now Lavelle was told that Humble
had stabbed his brother Harry in a violent rage with a kitchen knife
three times and the family were too afraid to report him to the police
because he was such an unpredictable nutter and he had become a raving
alcoholic prone to violent rages who should be locked up in a mental
home.


Armed with this information or intelligence as the police refer to it,
Gregg determined to solve the hoaxer mystery once and for all. He
studied Humble’s background and criminal record and met the family to
confirm the stabbing and violent rages. He saw that the family would
not support John and would be delighted if he was locked up
forevermore. This led him to progress the matter and presented him
with the oppertunity to solve the Ripper hoaxer case in his way. His
enquiries revealed that Humble had an interest in Jack the Ripper and
once had a library book about that case. They also revealed that
Humble had no support from his former wife and step child and had
attempted suicide in 1979. Here was a down and out living on state
benefits,who had no support in the world. A man who could be coerced
into admitting to the less serious charge offered to him as an option
and keeping his family from giving evidence against him.
In a media spotlight in a tent outside Humble’s council home, Gregg
interrogated the drunken Humble for two days until he signed a
confession to say he was the hoaxer and then he was arrested and held
in custody since. Gregg then procured his DNA evidence referred to
above and a scientist acting in good faith confirmed it was Humble's.
The publication of her findings although they could never be
replicated convinced everyone that Humble was the man. Gregg obviously
contaminated whatever he gave the science laboratory with Humble's
DNA, an act which is criminal in the extreme and was designed to
coerce Humble into confessing that he wrote the letters.
He had been vilified as the hoaxer by the Sunderland Echo from the
time of his arrest and then by the national media and the public were
convinced he was guilty before he even faced a court to plead. Gregg
was hailed as a true detective who was breaking new grounds in
detection, using new technology on old evidence but he had resorted to
the oldest bent cop trick in the book known as blackmail to agree a
plea bargain deal so that no trial would ensue, allegedly to save
court time and money not to mention his compassion in sparing the
victim the ordeal of the court.
Humble was advised by his lawyers, Shires Wainwright of Wakefield and
David Taylor his counsel that his best option was to cooperate and
plead to being the hoaxer and he would be out in three or four years
as against taking his chances of facing the extra charges of attempted
murder of his brother along with the charge of being the hoaxer
supported by his confessions and the procured DNA evidence that
couldn’t be verified. Their role was confined to pleas for mitigation
after that.
He was led into Leeds court on 20th March 2006 in handcuffs and gave a
response to his name and pleaded guilty to all the charges.There was
no trial, judge Norman Jones failing miserably in his duty to all
accused men by rubber stamping the blackmailed deal and the sentence
was pronounced the next day.
He was sentenced to eight years in prison which means five with
remission and he was promised parole would come early and he would
serve in a Geoffrey Archer style open prison because he was convicted
on the non violent charge and his madness and violence would not be
revealed by the police.
For that he agreed that he wrote the letters and he cooperated with a
recording by repeating the words of the Ripper in his Geordie accent
for Chris Gregg’s camera. It was all very convincing but entirely
stage managed by Gregg who basked in the glory of capturing the
infamous hoaxer knowing he had framed a criminal for a crime he didnt
commit.

I flew to Leeds the next day and entered the court at 11.0am. I was
stopped by two policemen and asked my name. Then they whispered into
their mics and soon three more arrived. There was a bevy of cameras
outside the court waiting to hear the sentence imposed on Humble who
had caved in, in the days before and confessed. They asked me what I
had come for and I said I came to make sure that Humble got a fair
trial.
With that they ordered me out of the court house and I objected and
said this was Britain, not Saudi Arabia or Nigeria but I had to leave
or be forced out.
Outside the court the media were waiting to interview a police
spokesman. I told them Humble was framed and the DNA was planted.
I displayed a placard outside the court door as per the photo.
Superintendant Chris Gregg began an interview and I stood behind him
showing the placard. I shouted "Chris Gregg You have framed an
innocent man." Then the other police grabbed me and dragged me up the
street away
from the press and held me there until it was over. And they said the
Birmingham 6 could never happen again.
Humble had no trial. There was no jury and no evidence. He had been
offered a choice. Freedom after 3 or 4 years in an open prison if he
cooperated or life if he pleaded not guilty. The man was blackmailed
into confessing and his free legal team advised him to take the easy
option.


Chris Gregg has now provided an additional shield to the Real
Yorkshire Ripper, Billy Tracey because he has put it on record
officially that the Ripper's letters were sent not by the Ripper but
by John Humble in his efforts to protect his former corrupt colleagues
who allowed the Real Ripper to get away.

Now the West Yorkshire police have framed a lunatic copycat killer,
Peter Sutcliffe who is locked up as the Ripper and a down and out
alcoholic nutter John Humble framed as the hoaxer while the real
Ripper Billy Tracey, the man who committed most of the murders and
sent the letters and tape to the police to divert them, is still a
free man and living in the UK right now.

The public have been well and truly misled and manipulated by a small
group of corrupt policemen supported by the established media who only
report the findings of the courts and whatever passes through them.

On the 3rd May I received a letter from John Humble. His handwriting
betrays his lies and proves that he didnt write the allegedly hoax
letters.

It is abundantly apparent why Chris Gregg didnt want Humble's letters
to appear before a jury as nobody would believe he wrote the three
letters to George Oldfield if they looked at his handwriting, the
style of an uneducated person who can barely spell and write.
http://www.yorkshireripper.co.uk/

JOHN HUMBLE RIDES AGAIN:

johnhumble.htm (60KB), Humbles letter from Armley1.jpg (174KB),
letter3.jpg (338KB), T and A report of hearing 1 feb o8.jpg (227KB),
Humbles letter from Armley2.jpg (109KB)

THOUGHTS ON THE RIPPER-HUMBLE CASE:
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.local.geordie/browse_thread/thread/9f8caec2f0f627f/a6229fb27d832cb4?hl=en&q=thoughts+on+the+ripper+humble+case

WICKED BEYOND BELIEF / MICHAEL BILTON / JOHN HUMBLE / CHRIS GREGG

To refer to the Yorkshire Ripper investigation as "a shambles" is the
understatement of all time.

By 1980, George Oldfield was drinking heavily and close to a heart
attack. The West Yorkshire Police were under increasing pressure from
Margaret Thatcher and William Whitelaw to close the case, by fair
means or foul, to end the international scandal whereby the English
police were an international laughing stock, "Keystone Cops," unable
to catch the Yorkshire Ripper.

Things were coming to a head, one way or another.

The Yorkshire Ripper was "playing" the police, and was beyond their
reach.

By contrast, the emotionally crippled, henpecked idiot Peter
Sutcliffe
had had enough, enough of working his arse off at a tough job for no
return, enough of being tormented by his frigid wife Sonia, enough of
his unfulfilling wanking sessions over the dying women he managed to
creep up on, enough of failing to compete with the toughness and
cunning of the REAL Yorkshire Ripper whom Peter Sutcliffe was trying
to emulate.

When Peter Sutcliffe forced the cops to arrest him in January 1981,
the result was inevitable. The pressure from Margaret Thatcher and
William Whitelaw was irresistable. Close the case. Pretend that Peter
Sutcliffe is the Yorkshire Ripper. Gloss over the subsequent killings
by the Yorkshire Ripper in the years after 1981, and just hope to
keep
the whole thing under wraps.


But the investigation had been so chaotic and shambolic that there
would be some loose ends to "tie up."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following is extracted from "WICKED BEYOND BELIEF" by Michael
Bilton, Harper-Collins, pages 374-375, published 2003:
===========
"The other only major outstanding feature of the Yorkshire Ripper
investigation remains the identity of the man with the Geordie accent
who sent George Oldfield the infamous letters and tape..............
In 1999, during the production of the ITV documentary 'MANHUNT: The
Search for the Yorkshire Ripper,' a request was made by the
production
team to West Yorkshire Police for facilities to film a DNA test being
made on the envelopes the letters and tape came in. It would have
been
a way of showing the great changes the police had made in the
detection of crime. The intention was to see if the DNA matched any
of
the profiles held in the then fledgling national DNA database. If it
did not, then DNA from the envelopes - from the gum on theflap, or
from the stamp the sender would have licked - could be registered on
the database of crime scene profiles. If the person who sent the
tapes
was arrested for a reportable crime in the future, then the police
could identify him. Forensic scientists had already shown he was a
blood group B secretor. A DNA analysis from traces of saliva could
have nailed him and brought him to book, charged with attempting to
pervert the course of justice. It was not to be. Several months after
the initial inquiry, the somewhat embarrassed response came back:
'Sorry, we've lost the envelopes and there is no reasonable hope of
us
finding them.' The hoaxer has never been traced and probably never
will be." -Michael Bilton, 2003.
===========
Very interesting.


So then, where did Chris Gregg find the "tiny scrap of paper" from
the
letter sent to Oldfield in 1979, which he used to convict John
Humble,
when the West Yorkshire Police has stated officially that all such
evidence had been destroyed?


John Humble was covicted on the basis of his confession. The evidence
against him was never scrutinised.


If you want to see it, you'll see it.
------------------------------------------------
THE KILLINGS HAVE NOT STOPPED.
YOU DON'T STOP THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER FROM KILLING WOMEN IN ENGLAND BY
PRETENDING THAT PETER SUTCLIFFE IS THE YORKSHRE RIPPER.
THE KILLINGS DID NOT STOP IN 1981.
THE KILLINGS WILL NEVER STOP UNTIL THE YORKSHIRE RIPPER IS CAUGHT.


http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00409/SNN2719A_280_409721a...


http://www.yorkshireripper.co.uk/hyper/024.htm


http://www.yorkshireripper.com/bilton.htm


http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.legal/browse_thread/thread/324fdd...


http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dddp6bt4_84d6t56wg4


===========================================================================

On Wed, 5 Aug 2009 at 17:05:43, Special Care 
 wrote in uk.legal :

>WICKED BEYOND BELIEF / MICHAEL BILTON / JOHN HUMBLE / CHRIS GREGG
>
>To refer to the Yorkshire Ripper investigation as "a shambles" is the
>understatement of all time.
>
>By 1980, George Oldfield was drinking heavily and close to a heart
>attack. The West Yorkshire Police were under increasing pressure from
>Margaret Thatcher and William Whitelaw to close the case, by fair
>means or foul, to end the international scandal whereby the English
>police were an international laughing stock, "Keystone Cops," unable
>to catch the Yorkshire Ripper.
>
>Things were coming to a head, one way or another.
>
>The Yorkshire Ripper was "playing" the police, and was beyond their
>reach.
>
>By contrast, the emotionally crippled, henpecked idiot Peter
>Sutcliffe
>had had enough, enough of working his arse off at a tough job for no
>return, enough of being tormented by his frigid wife Sonia, enough of
>his unfulfilling wanking sessions over the dying women he managed to
>creep up on, enough of failing to compete with the toughness and
>cunning of the REAL Yorkshire Ripper whom Peter Sutcliffe was trying
>to emulate.
>
>When Peter Sutcliffe forced the cops to arrest him in January 1981,
>the result was inevitable. The pressure from Margaret Thatcher and
>William Whitelaw was irresistable. Close the case. Pretend that Peter
>Sutcliffe is the Yorkshire Ripper. Gloss over the subsequent killings
>by the Yorkshire Ripper in the years after 1981, and just hope to
>keep
>the whole thing under wraps.
>
LOL!

The Ripper murders stopped as soon as Sutcliffe was arrested. If he 
wasn't the Yorkshire Ripper, they *wouldn't* have stopped, because 
serial killers simply *DO NOT* stop until they are caught!

-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

Paul Hyett <pah@invalid.invalid> posted
>
>The Ripper murders stopped as soon as Sutcliffe was arrested. If he 
>wasn't the Yorkshire Ripper, they *wouldn't* have stopped,

But the fact that they did stop doesn't imply that Sutcliffe was the 
Ripper. There could have been any number of other reasons why they 
stopped.

> because serial killers simply *DO NOT* stop until they are caught!

False. The original Jack the Ripper stopped, although he wasn't caught.

Please don't reply with stuff like "Ah but maybe he died" or "Ah but 
maybe he was imprisoned for another offence" or "Ah but maybe he changed 
his modus operandi". Because if you are allowed to use conjectures like 
that in the Whitechapel case, then you can also use them in the 
Yorkshire case, and thus show that somebody other than Sutcliffe could 
have been the Yorkshire Ripper, but stopped killing for other reasons 
around the same time that Sutcliffe was arrested.

There are lots of good reasons to believe Sutcliffe was the Ripper. 
Yours isn't one of them.

-- 
Les
Conspiracy theory: A suspicion that officials sometimes mislead the public in
order to protect their own interests.

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 at 08:29:37, Big Les Wade  wrote in 
uk.legal :

>Paul Hyett <pah@invalid.invalid> posted
>>
>>The Ripper murders stopped as soon as Sutcliffe was arrested. If he 
>>wasn't the Yorkshire Ripper, they *wouldn't* have stopped,
>
>But the fact that they did stop doesn't imply that Sutcliffe was the 
>Ripper. There could have been any number of other reasons why they 
>stopped.

Care to put any theories on the table, then?
>
>> because serial killers simply *DO NOT* stop until they are caught!
>
>False. The original Jack the Ripper stopped, although he wasn't caught.
>
OK, you got me there, although I should point out it wasn't quite the 
same situation because, unlike the Yorkshire Ripper case, no-one was 
brought to trial.
-- 
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

Paul Hyett <pah@invalid.invalid> posted
>On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 at 08:29:37, Big Les Wade  wrote in 
>uk.legal :
>
>>Paul Hyett <pah@invalid.invalid> posted
>>>
>>>The Ripper murders stopped as soon as Sutcliffe was arrested. If he 
>>>wasn't the Yorkshire Ripper, they *wouldn't* have stopped,
>>
>>But the fact that they did stop doesn't imply that Sutcliffe was the 
>>Ripper. There could have been any number of other reasons why they 
>>stopped.
>
>Care to put any theories on the table, then?

There are lots. The simplest is that the real Ripper was neutralised - 
natural death, suicide, jailed for unrelated offences,  prescribed more 
effective medication, caged in an asylum, emigrated  - at the same time 
that Sutcliffe was arrested. Yes it'd be a coincidence, but coincidences 
happen all the time.

Other theories would be that the arrest of Sutcliffe panicked the real 
Ripper into changing his MO or going quiet for a while. Once you 
recognise that serial killers *do* sometimes stop before being captured, 
any number of explanations are possible.

-- 
Les
Conspiracy theory: A suspicion that officials sometimes mislead the public in
order to protect their own interests.

On Aug 7, 5:50 pm, Paul Hyett <p...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 at 08:29:37, Big Les Wade  wrote in
> uk.legal :
>
> >Paul Hyett <p...@invalid.invalid> posted
>
> >>The Ripper murders stopped as soon as Sutcliffe was arrested. If he
> >>wasn't the Yorkshire Ripper, they *wouldn't* have stopped,
>
================================

If you want to discuss this subject, it would be useful to view the
links supplied, especially the ones below.

After Peter Sutcliffe's arrest in 1981, such murders were simply
headlined "new ripper" / "imitation ripper at large?" and similar.

Earlier, during 1978-80, the police and the media were frequently
stating that there were not one but two men committing that series of
killings.

Somehow there was a collective weariness and national embarrassment in
Yorkshire and London, which led to this mental compartmentalisation
setting in after 1980, whereby the *two rippers* statements of 1978-80
were deemed non-existent, although the newpaper archives testify to
the fact that the police were hunting not one but two men for those
killings during 1978-80.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------The interview with Ron Warren is decisive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkSaYJg9gMU
---------------------------------------------------------------------------The "new ripper" killings after Sutcliffe's arrest:
http://www.yorkshireripper.co.uk/hyper/024.htm

Return of the Ripper:
http://www.yorkshireripper.co.uk/hyper/win-007.htm

This is not John Humble's voice:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22DUclUZiX4&feature=related

The Fake Press Conference / The Fake Smiles:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIBVMVu2GdE&feature=related

John Humble DNA Farce:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbIdo6uJA5A&feature=related

FAKE ACCENTS:

Having been born in Ireland, all my life I have been both irritated
and entertained by American actors putting on fake Irish accents.
The actors in question may practice for months, but Irish-born people
instantly recognise the accents as false and forced.

On that basis I have some store of experience to draw on when I listen
to the "I'M JACK" recording of 1979.

Having spent my life taking in interest in spotting false and forced
Irish accents, I am in a position to detect that the man speaking the
"I'M JACK" recording is faking that Castletown accent.

Would anyone from the Castletown area like to comment?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22DUclUZiX4&NR=1

On Aug 8, 2:00 am, Old Jinglebollocks
 wrote:
> FAKE ACCENTS:
>
> Having been born in Ireland, all my life I have been both irritated
> and entertained by American actors putting on fake Irish accents.
> The actors in question may practice for months, but Irish-born people
> instantly recognise the accents as false and forced.
>
> On that basis I have some store of experience to draw on when I listen
> to the "I'M JACK" recording of 1979.
>
> Having spent my life taking in interest in spotting false and forced
> Irish accents, I am in a position to detect that the man speaking the
> "I'M JACK" recording is faking that Castletown accent.
>
> Would anyone from the Castletown area like to comment?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22DUclUZiX4&NR=1

---------------

It's difficult to express this as a "science" in modern terms.

What it comes down to is that after a lifetime of hearing American
actors FAKING Irish accents, and taking an interest in it, I just KNOW
the sound and the 'feel' of a FORCED, FALSE vowel or consonant.

That man who recited the "I'M JACK" recording was FAKING a Castletown
accent.