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:
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by rjpalmer 11 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by harry 24 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by Herlock Sholmes 43 minutes ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by c.d. 1 hour and 20 minutes ago.
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - by OneRound 1 hour and 24 minutes ago.
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - by c.d. 2 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (27 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (18 posts)
General Letters or Communications: Two authentic comms from the Ripper? - (17 posts)
Maybrick, James: Too Sensible & Competent - (4 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (2 posts)
Bury, W.H.: Mock trial for Bury Feb 3 - (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 > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #3151  
Old 04-16-2018, 05:08 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16,261
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Sorry, Fish, but I don't follow all your posts. Life's too short, my nerves and blood pressure are too bad, and I find that your tone sometimes makes it feel like my head's exploding. I wouldn't want people to think that I'm ducking your questions - it's simply that I deliberately don't read every post you make. To answer your questions in this specific instance:

In the smallish geographical area that was South West London, I'd agree that there's a good possibility that the same perpetrator(s) was responsible. However, Pinchin Street was in the smallish geographical area of Whitechapel, quite far removed from Chelsea/Battersea, both in social and geographical terms. On that basis alone, never mind other factors, I'd say that it was more likely that the Pinchin Street case involved a different perpetrator(s).
"Never mind other factors"? I think that we MUST mind other factors, namely the character of the deed.
As I have already said, there is a more or less equal distance between St Pancras lock and Whitehall, and Pinchin Street and St Pancras lock.
So going on the geographical factor only, we must regard the Rainham deed as a separate one, with a different killer, going by your criteria.
Or are you saying that the killer would avoid the East for socioeconomic reasons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
Firstly, experts are not infallible, and even the best of them - as Hebbert assuredly was - are only offering opinions, and opinions are not facts. Secondly, there are only so many ways in which one can joint a piece of meat.
Nobody is saying that Hebbert was infallible. All I say is that he was less likely to be fallible on these matters than just about any other man on earth at the time.
And that is per se quite enough to respect his word as being in all probability correct. Unless you can point to where he got it wrong and why - and since you never saw the wounds like he did, that will simply not happen.
We both know that the factors you speak of - the absense of a saw and the attached arms and the location in the East, were not something that bothered Hebbert in the least.
So why do yo disagree with him on no added knowledge at all? Why do you make another interpretation than he did? How can you dismiss his knowledge and insights on the technical matters? On what grounds do you do such a thing - and claim it to be objective to boot?

One can joint a piece of meat in many, many ways. That is the sole reason that Hebbert says that it was the same man. If all cut meat joints gave away the same thing, Hebbert would not have been able to give that verdict. And that is not about "opinions" only - he relied on what he had carefully examined, taking in all the details there were.
His is a view based on facts and available information - it is instead your dismissal of him that is based on opinion only. Maybe we can agree on that?

It is all good and well to say that we have a hunch about something. And hunches are allowed to flie in the face of expert knowledge and statements.

What we may never do is to disregard the experts, loosely say that "they MAY have been wrong" (without giving any example at all about WHAT the experts would have gotten wrong and WHY) - and then call it "objectivity".

It is the exact opssosite of objectivity. It is subjectivity, based on gut feeling and not on the case facts.

Sorry, but there you are.

Regardless of your blood pressure problems and nerve ditto - things that I hope will clear up and go away! - I would ask of you to follow my posts closely, not least since you have taken the liberty to publically call me skewed and somebody who deliberatley misleads and twists the facts.
Saying such things and following them up with a lofty admittance that you don´t read my posts is not a tolerable thing.

I hope you can appreciate that.

Last edited by Fisherman : 04-16-2018 at 05:14 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3152  
Old 04-16-2018, 05:26 AM
Harry D Harry D is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2,136
Default

FYI, I would consider Mary Ann Austin's murder in 1901 a "one-off". Who knows, the Ripper may have struck again twelve years later but due to the time-lapse and the lack of murders that proceeded it, there's a strong chance it was an isolated incident. In contrast, because murders like Tabram, Mylett, Coles etc. happened during the Ripper spate, it's impossible to chalk them off as 'one-offs' purely on account of mo/sig.
__________________
Hail to the king, baby!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3153  
Old 04-16-2018, 05:29 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,906
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
No, Abby.

When we allow the fact that the Pinchin Street torso had her arms intact to tell us that she was killed by another man, then is objectivity.
When we say that the 1874 torso had a leg attached, then it is subjectivity and insignificant.

Surely you can see that?

And when we allow the fact that the Pinchin Street torso was dumped out in the east to tell us that she was killed by another man, then it´s onjectivity.

When we the note that parts of the Rainham torso were dumped as far from Whitehall as Pinchin Street is distanced therefrom, it´s instead subjectivity and over generalization.

The worst thing about all of this is that it seems that Gareth does not even understand what he is doing.
Yes it seems his vehement pre conceived objection to the possibility that torsoman and the ripper might have been the same man is starting to cloud his judgement.
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3154  
Old 04-16-2018, 05:35 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
FYI, I would consider Mary Ann Austin's murder in 1901 a "one-off". Who knows, the Ripper may have struck again twelve years later but due to the time-lapse and the lack of murders that proceeded it, there's a strong chance it was an isolated incident. In contrast, because murders like Tabram, Mylett, Coles etc. happened during the Ripper spate, it's impossible to chalk them off as 'one-offs' purely on account of mo/sig.
I don't see the MO as a sufficiently strong diagnostic criterion; street-walkers have always been easy targets for violence, and knives were very commonly carried. In the specific cases I cited, I don't see that there's enough of the Ripper's signature in evidence to attribute the victims' deaths to him.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3155  
Old 04-16-2018, 05:37 AM
Debra A Debra A is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Yorkshire England
Posts: 3,043
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
... and I find their assumption that a surgeon or anatomist could not have done such a good job because they are not cutting as regularly as a hunter or butcher quite bizarre.[/i]"

www.trevormarriott.co.uk
Just a quick one to say that what Hebbert actually mentioned in regard to doctors was that doctors weren't continually cutting through joints to remove limbs (they used other methods for limb removal) in their profession whereas butchers, hunters etc. were, so would likely be more skilled and efficient
__________________
,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸, Debs ,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3156  
Old 04-16-2018, 05:56 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,593
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerryd View Post
1879 Kate Webster dismemberment of Julia Thomas.

"I determined to do away with the body as best I could. I chopped the head from the body with the assistance of a razor which I used to cut through the flesh afterwards. I also used the meat saw and the carving knife to cut the body up with. I prepared the copper with water to boil the body to prevent identity; and as soon as I had succeeded in cutting it up I placed it in the copper and boiled it. I opened the stomach with the carving knife, and burned up as much of the parts as I could."
Thanks Jerry. What do you make of the sentance I've highlighted?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3157  
Old 04-16-2018, 06:11 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,906
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
Thanks Jerry. What do you make of the sentance I've highlighted?
HI JR
apparently she was cutting the body up into smaller parts to boil and burn to "do away with as best i could".
__________________
"Is all that we see or seem
but a dream within a dream?"

-Edgar Allan Poe


"...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

-Frederick G. Abberline
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3158  
Old 04-16-2018, 06:39 AM
jerryd jerryd is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,080
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
Thanks Jerry. What do you make of the sentance I've highlighted?
Hi Joshua,

Not sure, yet. I'll have to think about that one, Joshua.

Are you implying it was part of the procedure in cutting up a body?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3159  
Old 04-16-2018, 07:10 AM
Harry D Harry D is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 2,136
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
I don't see the MO as a sufficiently strong diagnostic criterion; street-walkers have always been easy targets for violence, and knives were very commonly carried. In the specific cases I cited, I don't see that there's enough of the Ripper's signature in evidence to attribute the victims' deaths to him.
And that's fair enough, but knowing that serial killers can deviate and murder on a whim, I prefer to take the irritatingly agnostic view.
__________________
Hail to the king, baby!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #3160  
Old 04-16-2018, 08:30 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
And that's fair enough, but knowing that serial killers can deviate and murder on a whim, I prefer to take the irritatingly agnostic view.
I guess that makes me an atheist, then, Harry
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
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 05:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.