Nakabasa namo about aning Jack the Ripper nga si Jose Rizal daw?

[luisxcore]

---

dugay nmn ni nga issue, pataka lng pud cla ug pasangil, haha daghan kaayu ilang ge dudahan

[mj.pocholo]

sa ako lang either tinoud or dli tinoud rizal rjud mka tubag ani...

[Inta]

kanus-a kaha mogawas ang CCTV footage ani...basin nakuhaan nig camera

[kokoytoyi]

From Yahoo answers oh..

Well, this Theory is one I class as being a 'Weak' one. The theory (based on information I have read previously) is highly inconsistent with the other suspects and the 'Ripper' killings.
Firstly, if Jose Rizal was in fact the ‘Ripper’, then we would have to completely dismiss Annie Chapman as a victim, would be improper as she is classified as one of the ‘iron-clad’, definite Ripper victims. Since he couldn’t have committed Chapman’s murder, I am obliged to completely dismiss him as a suspect.
Another inconsistency is that, being Pilipino, it would be highly unlikely that his complexion wouldn’t have been noted by the witnesses. It is also fair to say that the descriptions of the ‘Ripper’, from the witnesses nearly all state that the suspect was fair to pale complexion, had a large bushy black/brown moustache and aged anywhere from 30 to 50, most likely 35 – 40. Jose Rizal doesn’t match any of these. Height is another factor, if Jose Rizal was considered short for a man, the average height that’s considered short for any male is about 5’2” or under. Anything above 6’0” is considered tall, Jack the Ripper measured at about medium height and build, with many accounts stating him as 5’5”, 5’6”, 5’7”, 5’8” and even 5’11”. Again, this doesn’t match up. Another thing stated in testimonies is that a fair amount mentioned him as being English.

Now for the psychological side of the theory. Jose Rizal was brought up in a wealthy family, without abuse and lived a good, cheerful life. This type of life continued on throughout his adult years. Someone of this background has no reason to perform these remarkable murders. Rizal was never found as mental in any way and the ‘Ripper’ murder were NOT done from a healthy mind and required a great deal of sadism and misogyny.
Also, if this man only died in 1896, if he was indeed the Ripper, he wouldn’t have stopped, especially considering the escalation in violence with each murder.

So, Rizal does not fit the bill as the Ripper, either physical or psychological. No motive, no reason, NOT Jack the Ripper…

[mio]

Ingon akong Lola.

[marcus2015]

burit mana TS oi...

[edoy]

basin si Jack Palpak to si jack the ripper ....

[woodpusher]

That's false accusation. No, Rizal is not Jack the Ripper. If he is, he should have fought the conquerors using the sword instead of pen so he can have a chance to rip the lower part of their abdomens as what the Ripper did to his victims. Though Rizal is an expert swordsman, he chose to fight with the pen. The contents of his novels ripped the hearts of the Filipinos especially our heroes to fight for independence.

[struggler]

hoax ra siguro ni

[-]chong<3]

kung mao na, di na mao..