Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The GSG - Did Jack write it? POLL

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Batman View Post
    That would require a conviction.

    The alternative is a coincidence.

    An important difference between the two suspects is that all resources and the lead investigators worked on the Schwartz lead while they divide on Hutchinson, with Abberline taking charge of it while Swanson and Cox report on stakeouts and house to house searches.

    It is simply more likely than not that someone seen assaulting someone who dies soon after is responsible. In this case the person who was assaulted is dead which doesn't make it a common assault.
    I think you missed my point here, Batman. If the B.S. man left the scene immediately after Schwartz fled without any further harm done to Liz he would only be guilty of pushing a woman to the ground and nothing else. So to kill her to cover up that simple assault by committing a hanging offense makes no sense. Especially after having been seen by Schwartz.

    c.d.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
      Hello (again) CD. Thanks.

      "I always have to respond that she was not a $500 a night Vegas call girl."

      Indeed. But surely her floral arrangement says something?

      Cheers.
      LC
      Hardly a mink coat or a ring. It might have been given to her by an aspiring suitor and therefore had nothing to do with the cost of her services.

      c.d.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by c.d. View Post
        I think you missed my point here, Batman. If the B.S. man left the scene immediately after Schwartz fled without any further harm done to Liz he would only be guilty of pushing a woman to the ground and nothing else. So to kill her to cover up that simple assault by committing a hanging offense makes no sense. Especially after having been seen by Schwartz.

        c.d.
        People got mobbed and nearly lynched for less at that time.

        He would also be a JtR suspect given they where looking for someone behaving like him.

        If he was JtR then he would want to avoid that, especially if he was already interviewed at another earlier time.

        She can ID him.

        Could have ID him, but not anymore. She is dead.

        I think your argument CD is more appropriate for the conspiracy theory. Why murder a prostitute during the ripper murders for soliciting outside a club?

        JtR was seen by people other than Schwartz. He isn't very stealthy at all, but maybe his getaways are.
        Bona fide canonical and then some.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
          The severing of the carotid artery occurred in Dutfields yard not in the street.

          The street incident is a separate incident from the yard incident.

          There is no evidence to show that the two incidents were connected because the actual time of death cannot be accurately determined.

          www.trevormarriott.co.uk
          I don't have a problem with this skepticism, the problem is though your entire books thesis drops your own line of criticism and you make connections that aren't just a few feet between an assault and the assaulted persons body found, but across thousands of miles of Atlantic ocean for your suspect. You even connect him to the person being seen just like BSman but in even less suspicious circumstances.

          You can't have your cake and not eat it.
          Bona fide canonical and then some.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Batman View Post
            I don't have a problem with this skepticism, the problem is though your entire books thesis drops your own line of criticism and you make connections that aren't just a few feet between an assault and the assaulted persons body found, but across thousands of miles of Atlantic ocean for your suspect. You even connect him to the person being seen just like BSman but in even less suspicious circumstances.

            You can't have your cake and not eat it.
            Its not skepticism its fact, and accepting facts seem to be a bit short on your menu

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
              Its not skepticism its fact, and accepting facts seem to be a bit short on your menu

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk
              Trevor you cant even demonstrate Carl Feigenbaum was in Whitechapel.

              This is what I mean. Your are skeptical of Schwartz but then claim Brown was strangled and then mutilated in the East River Hotel by a man who was listed in the hotel’s register as C. Kniclo and who was actually Feigenbaum.

              You are using different standards here on cb compared to your book.
              Bona fide canonical and then some.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                Trevor you cant even demonstrate Carl Feigenbaum was in Whitechapel.

                This is what I mean. Your are skeptical of Schwartz but then claim Brown was strangled and then mutilated in the East River Hotel by a man who was listed in the hotel’s register as C. Kniclo and who was actually Feigenbaum.

                You are using different standards here on cb compared to your book.
                This thread is not about Feigenbaum.

                Getting back to this thread which has also gone way off track. Just because a person was present at a crime scene it doesn't mean they were involved in the crime.

                Comment


                • Well your signature always points to him so I don't see how you can say your position on him is absent here.

                  Overarching theories are normal, that incorporate several lines of investigations. Hence why SKs get linked. Impossible to avoid, especially on the topic on the whitechapel murders.
                  Bona fide canonical and then some.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                    Just because a person was present at a crime scene it doesn't mean they were involved in the crime.

                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                    Sure. Schwartz was present and isn't held responsible for her death. It was more than likely the person assaulting her before she died.

                    Schwartz's account perfectly matches her shoulder and chest bruising.
                    Bona fide canonical and then some.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                      Sure. Schwartz was present and isn't held responsible for her death. It was more than likely the person assaulting her before she died.

                      Schwartz's account perfectly matches her shoulder and chest bruising.
                      If that is the case that points to a non ripper murder, which is what I and many others have suggested all this time.

                      Would the Ripper draw attention to himself in a public street?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                        If that is the case that points to a non ripper murder, which is what I and many others have suggested all this time.

                        Would the Ripper draw attention to himself in a public street?

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        We have lots of witness testimony seeing the victims with someone or even hearing them being assaulted, so yes, he even attacked during a double beat of mitre sq.

                        Its in escape that he is stealthy, not attacks.

                        I see no reason given why you discounted Stride at all.
                        Bona fide canonical and then some.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                          We have lots of witness testimony seeing the victims with someone or even hearing them being assaulted, so yes, he even attacked during a double beat of mitre sq.

                          Its in escape that he is stealthy, not attacks.

                          I see no reason given why you discounted Stride at all.
                          I could give you five !

                          Comment


                          • favours

                            Hello CD. Thanks.

                            "It might have been given to her by an aspiring suitor and therefore had nothing to do with the cost of her services."

                            Very well. But I have difficulty with that kind of behaviour amongst the British. Surely--if Liz was a prostitute--one need not "make up to her" with favours? (But in France, this was not uncommon, especially with the better classes.)

                            Cheers.
                            LC

                            Comment


                            • willpower

                              Hello Batman.

                              "You can't have your cake and not eat it."

                              Sure you can. It takes willpower. (heh-heh)

                              Cheers.
                              LC

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                                I could give you five !
                                CB could give you Strides inquest conclusions which say she was linked to the murderer of Nichols and Chapman by the way her wounds where inflicted.
                                Bona fide canonical and then some.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X