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: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - by jerryd 34 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - by Michael W Richards 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - by Michael W Richards 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: And This Is Factual! - by DirectorDave 5 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - by Busy Beaver 6 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - by Herlock Sholmes 7 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: JtR was Law Enforcement Hypothesis - (8 posts)
Maybrick, James: Diary Handwriting - (7 posts)
Maybrick, James: And This Is Factual! - (4 posts)
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (2 posts)
Rippercast: Questions for Michael Hawley - Jack the Ripper Suspect Dr. Francis Tumblety - (2 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #3301  
Old 04-21-2018, 03:55 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16,626
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by harry View Post
Fisherman,Abby,
I'll make it easier then.Discount a court of law .Name the element that justifies beyond reasonable doubt.
Your replies so far only show an ignorance coupled with a lack of knowledge..
STRANGE.
I have to confess, in my case it is more a lack of interest than one of knowledge.

Not that one cannot lack both, of course.

Last edited by Fisherman : 04-21-2018 at 04:07 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #3302  
Old 04-21-2018, 04:25 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
You really need to brighten up.
When it comes to research, you're in no position to tell me what to do.
Quote:
If you have a beef with the matter, then it is up to you to do the research
It is you who should have done some research before throwing stats around. You stated that only two such murders had occurred in 218 years and that you had "seen the data" to that effect. Imagine our disappointment, then, when we found out that the source of this "data" was merely a Wikipedia list of some major/famous murders.

This reveals a certain lack of rigour in your approach, to put it mildly.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3303  
Old 04-21-2018, 04:45 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16,626
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
When it comes to research, you're in no position to tell me what to do.
...and THAT comes from somebody who calls me deliberately misleading. Do you think that forms a good ground for being treated with respect?
For your information, I am not telling you what to do. I am telling you that if you want your questions answered, then YOU should not tell ME to do it for you. I trust you can see how that works?

As of now, it seems your major interest is to avoid the facts and try and quarrel as much as possible. You may do better to try and explain why two killers are a better suggestion than one - although it would be in total conflict with the statistics and known facts.
Quick reply to this message
  #3304  
Old 04-21-2018, 05:21 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Do you think that forms a good ground for being treated with respect?
If you treated others with respect first, instead of scoffing at them and insulting their intelligence, then you might get the same in return.
Quote:
As of now, it seems your major interest is to avoid the facts and try and quarrel as much as possible.
My overwhelming interest is to stick to the facts, not to avoid them. I wish others did likewise.
Quote:
You may do better to try and explain why two killers are a better suggestion than one
I, and others, already have.
Quote:
although it would be in total conflict with the statistics and known facts.
...and that from a man who appears to think that a list in Wikipedia is a representative enough sample from which to draw statistical inferences.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3305  
Old 04-21-2018, 05:45 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 16,626
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
If you treated others with respect first, instead of scoffing at them and insulting their intelligence, then you might get the same in return.
That does not alter the fact that you started out by calling me deliberately misleading. You can check out the posts for yourself, and you will find that this is the starting point for the quarrel between you and me - this time. You made along post in which you painted me out as unreliable twister of facts and a liar, more or less.
Once that happens, I see no reason at all to treat you with any more respect than such a thing earns you.

In short - if you only have fallabellas to hand, don´t get on your high horses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
My overwhelming interest is to stick to the facts, not to avoid them. I wish others did likewise.
No. If your interest had been sticking to the facts and not to avoid them, you would not avoid the wording "large flaps" and "the lower abdomen of a woman, cut in two". Nor would yo alter Hebberts "slips" for "strips".

If you only have fallabellas...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
I, and others, already have....
Failing miserably and disrespecting facts along the way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
and that from a man who appears to think that a list in Wikipedia is a representative enough sample from which to draw statistical inferences.
That from a man who is not presenting a book, but instead having a debate on a public forum. There is a lot of very good Wikipedia material, and you may have missed that I wrote in my post that it was not a very scientific remark I was making.
But such things you blithely disregard, don´t you? You have fallabellas to mount.

This "debate" suits you eminently, I believe. It takes the focus away from the core issue of how it is extremely unlikely to have two eviscerating and mutilating serial killers active in the same period and area, and producing the same type of damage to their victims.

Let´s not concentrate on that, shall we? It could go awfully wrong.

Last edited by Fisherman : 04-21-2018 at 06:14 AM.
Quick reply to this message
  #3306  
Old 04-21-2018, 10:15 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,956
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
Hello Abby,

Would Jane Beadmore’s murder qualify, I wonder? She was killed and eviscerated on Sept 22 1888 by her lover. Did he share the same paraphillia as the Ripper or was he taking advantage of the recent Ripper scare?
I don’t know enough about her. Could you provide details or point me in right direction.
__________________
"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
  #3307  
Old 04-21-2018, 05:05 PM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is online now
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 9,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
That does not alter the fact that you started out by calling me deliberately misleading.
And so you are. You're (consciously or subconsciously) misleading yourself, at least.
Quote:
This "debate" suits you eminently, I believe. It takes the focus away from the core issue of how it is extremely unlikely to have two eviscerating and mutilating serial killers active in the same period and area, and producing the same type of damage to their victims.
Stop blurring the boundaries. The Ripper cases were, quintessentially, instances of disembowelment, (frequent) evisceration and (occasional) mutilation... with NO dismemberment WHATSOEVER. The torso cases were, quintessentially, instances of dismemberment with (occasional) evisceration and (rare) mutilation. As to "extreme unlikelihood"... how many cases of dismemberment occurred in the 218 years you've cited? Wikipedia lists of "greatest hits" arent' good enough, by the way.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message
  #3308  
Old 04-21-2018, 05:47 PM
harry harry is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,734
Default

Misleading would be an understatement Fisherman.After the hundreds of words you have written on the subject,beyond reasonable doubt is now of no interest you say.How STRANGE.
Quick reply to this message
  #3309  
Old 04-21-2018, 06:49 PM
MrBarnett MrBarnett is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Tower of London
Posts: 1,390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Flynn View Post
And so you are. You're (consciously or subconsciously) misleading yourself, at least.
Stop blurring the boundaries. The Ripper cases were, quintessentially, instances of disembowelment, (frequent) evisceration and (occasional) mutilation... with NO dismemberment WHATSOEVER. The torso cases were, quintessentially, instances of dismemberment with (occasional) evisceration and (rare) mutilation. As to "extreme unlikelihood"... how many cases of dismemberment occurred in the 218 years you've cited? Wikipedia lists of "greatest hits" arent' good enough, by the way.
Gareth,

Can you quantify your classifications of 'frequent' and 'occasional'? It sounds like a huge difference. What are we talking about, dozens, hundreds?

Gary
Quick reply to this message
  #3310  
Old 04-21-2018, 07:52 PM
Pcdunn Pcdunn is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 1,634
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
Hello Abby,

Would Jane Beadmore’s murder qualify, I wonder? She was killed and eviscerated on Sept 22 1888 by her lover. Did he share the same paraphillia as the Ripper or was he taking advantage of the recent Ripper scare?
Excellent example. The young man responsible for Jane's death confessed he was angry at her, and that he had attacked her in anger. He said he had recently been reading the accounts of the Ripper murders, and that a sort of madness overtook him during Jane's murder, leading him to cut her open in the same way.

How much we can believe of his confession may be debatable, since criminals may well try to minimize their crime, but I think he doesn't really fit into either the categories you have suggested. If he copycatted, was it premeditated or semi-accidental?
__________________
Pat D.
---------------
Von Konigswald: Jack the Ripper plays shuffleboard. -- Happy Birthday, Wanda June by Kurt Vonnegut, c.1970.
---------------
Quick reply to this message
Closed Thread


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 08:34 AM.


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