Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by RockySullivan 59 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by RockySullivan 1 hour and 2 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by jerryd 1 hour and 17 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Abby Normal 1 hour and 23 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by jerryd 1 hour and 29 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Abby Normal 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (60 posts)
Non-Fiction: Scholes of the Yard: The Casebook of a Scotland Yard Detective 1888 to 1924 - (3 posts)
Martha Tabram: Probibility of Martha Tabram Being a JtR Victim - (1 posts)
Scene of the Crimes: Bucks Row Project - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Letters and Communications > Goulston Street Graffito

View Poll Results: Did Jack write the GSG?
YES 75 38.66%
NO 119 61.34%
Voters: 194. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #2191  
Old 09-26-2017, 04:14 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 8,634
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
I still remain unconvinced the killer wrote the GSG.

That does not mean I rule it out, just that I see no overwhelming evidence for it.
That's pretty much my position, too, Steve.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2192  
Old 09-26-2017, 04:15 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Elamarna:

That is not so,the Nichols killer was in all probability disturbed, however recent assessments of her wounds suggest very strongly she was ready to have organs removed, even Christer and I agree on that.

I will make a rare remark here, Steve. We actually do not agree that the structure of the wounds tells us that she was made ready to have any organs removed. I can see where you are coming from, but I have a different view. What you and I agreed about, if I remember correctly, was that it seems feasible that the killer had a mindset to cut away the abdominal wall in flaps, just as was performed on Chapman, Kelly and Jackson.
Of course, if the abdominal wall is removed, it will allow free access to the abdominal cavity, but as you may remember, I think that a cut from pubes to breastbone is quite enough to allow for such a thing too.
Whether the killer had the intention to procure any of Nichols´organs or not is something I prefer to leave an open question. If the underlying ground of inspiration is what I think it is, then there was certainly no need to do so - the removal of the abdominal wall in panes would (in my scenario) not simply be a means to get to the organs but instead part of - and possibly all of - the intended damage to the abdomen.

As I said, I can see how you reached the conclusion that we agree, but you reached it on flawed grounds, which is why I feel I need to point that out. It may well be that the killers sole intention was to cut the abdominal wall away from Nichols.

Carry on.
Steve would appear to not know how to recognise flaws with regards to evidence in these murders. Now if you had mentioned the word sources he would have been as happy as Larry.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2193  
Old 09-26-2017, 04:20 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Steve would appear to not know how to recognise flaws with regards to evidence in these murders. Now if you had mentioned the word sources he would have been as happy as Larry.

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
I have no problem with anything Christer put in that post, I may not agree with his view but I realise he truly believes Lechmere was the killer.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2194  
Old 09-26-2017, 04:45 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
I have no problem with anything Christer put in that post, I may not agree with his view but I realise he truly believes Lechmere was the killer.

Steve
Steve
I think you have proved many times on here that you dont agree with what anyone says, but I accept that you are fully entitled to your personal opinions, even if they are without foundation

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2195  
Old 09-26-2017, 05:27 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Steve
I think you have proved many times on here that you dont agree with what anyone says, but I accept that you are fully entitled to your personal opinions, even if they are without foundation

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Looking in the mirror are we Trevor?

I agree with most. Those I have disagreeded with on a regular basis are :

Pierre because he gives no details, but I am now prepared to wait.

Christer on the issue of Lechmere and the torso"s,but not on other issues

And you because you offer no evidence or even the promise of such unlike Pierre.


My views are normally backed by the sources, and thus have foundation, unlike those which appear from out of the ether so to speak.

For someone who said I will make no further comments what is this?

The response really are so very weak and amount to no more than insulting those who disagree with you. Carry on I can do this all day.

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2196  
Old 09-26-2017, 06:43 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Ok , no issue with that and thank you Christer for the clarification, i was not meaning to misrepresent you.
It seems that he could have taken organs if not disturbed if he wanted. Would you accept that?
We both think he was disturbed I hope, be he Lechmere or a n other.
If not disturbed it is anyone's guess what would have occurred.

Thank you again.

Steve
Yes, if he had wanted to take organs, and if he was not disturbed, he could undoubtedly have done so.

And yes, we both think he was disturbed.

It seems you believe - as most people probably do - that he WOULD have taken organs if he had not been disturbed. That is where we differ. I think that his agenda was one where many different elements could be equally significant to him, meaning that I do not think that organ procuring was his ultimate goal, what he always strived for. Keep in mind that he did not carry away any of the many organs, some of them quite small and easily hidden, that he took out of from Kellys body, with the possible exception of the heart. It resembles robbing a bank and leaving the money behind. And if a bankrobber consistently does such a thing, then the reason must be that he did not come to take the money away from the bank, only to rob it.

It is a logic that will certainly be unappealing to most of us, but it is nevertheless the only deduction possible.

This is my personal take on things. I cannot prove it. I therefore agree that it is anybodys guess what would have happened if the killer was not disturbed in Bucks Row.

Last edited by Fisherman : 09-26-2017 at 06:50 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2197  
Old 09-26-2017, 07:01 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Yes, if he had wanted to take organs, and if he was not disturbed, he could undoubtedly have done so.

And yes, we both think he was disturbed.

It seems you believe - as most people probably do - that he WOULD have taken organs if he had not been disturbed. That is where we differ. I think that his agenda was one where many different elements could be equally significant to him, meaning that I do not think that organ procuring was his ultimate goal, what he always strived for. Keep in mind that he did not carry away any of the many organs, some of them quite small and easily hidden, that he took out of from Kellys body, with the possible exception of the heart. It resembles robbing a bank and leaving the money behind. And if a bankrobber consistently does such a thing, then the reason must be that he did not come to take the money away from the bank, only to rob it.

It is a logic that will certainly be unappealing to most of us, but it is nevertheless the only deduction possible.

This is my personal take on things. I cannot prove it. I therefore agree that it is anybodys guess what would have happened if the killer was not disturbed in Bucks Row.
Neither am I convinced that taking organs was his prime objective.


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2198  
Old 09-26-2017, 07:01 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 8,634
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Neither am I convinced that taking organs was his prime objective.


Steve
I've spun off a new thread on this on the Nichols board.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2199  
Old 09-26-2017, 07:13 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
Looking in the mirror are we Trevor?

I agree with most. Those I have disagreeded with on a regular basis are :

Pierre because he gives no details, but I am now prepared to wait.

Christer on the issue of Lechmere and the torso"s,but not on other issues

And you because you offer no evidence or even the promise of such unlike Pierre.


My views are normally backed by the sources, and thus have foundation, unlike those which appear from out of the ether so to speak.

For someone who said I will make no further comments what is this?

The response really are so very weak and amount to no more than insulting those who disagree with you. Carry on I can do this all day.

Steve
Yes I am sure you can do it all day, it seems you have naff all else to do other than sit with your finger on the casebook forum button. You need to get out more ! Sitting in front of the screen for too long is obviously clouding your ability to apply sensible reasoning to posts, and you have clearly become addicted to sources, perhaps you should try Heinz they have a wide variety

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #2200  
Old 09-26-2017, 07:36 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,656
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Yes I am sure you can do it all day, it seems you have naff all else to do other than sit with your finger on the casebook forum button. You need to get out more ! Sitting in front of the screen for too long is obviously clouding your ability to apply sensible reasoning to posts, and you have clearly become addicted to sources, perhaps you should try Heinz they have a wide variety

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Once again, just insults.

How truly astonishingly predictable.

Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.