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 3 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Sam Flynn 25 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 1 hour and 28 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Fisherman 3 hours ago.
Mary Jane Kelly: A theory about some injuries! - by Fisherman 3 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (37 posts)
Mary Jane Kelly: A theory about some injuries! - (16 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (14 posts)
Tumblety, Francis: Tumblety - Hermaphrodite. - (10 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (6 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - (5 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 Media > Books > Non-Fiction

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #371  
Old 01-09-2017, 02:29 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
I wonder if you, or Sam, have ever heard of victimology.

Of course prostititutes make easy targets, no **** Sherlock. But serial killers, and we are talking about serial killers here, also target coeds, mothers, children, single females living alone, teenage boys, homeless people.

The torso man and the ripper both targeted the same type of person, it's called victimology there Occam. Hopefully that's "obvious" enough to you (and Sam.)
Although I think a very good case can be made for these two series having been perpetrated by somebody who actively and purposefully targetted prostitutes, it must be said that no such thing can be established with full certainty, Abby. What we can say is that both originators (or just the one originator, responsible for both series) preyed on prostitutes - whether consciously or not.

It may be that the killer/s was/were active in an area and at a time that would only offer prostitutes as prey, and therefore we cannot positively establish that there was an active targetting of them as a group.

However, just like you say, it remains that the identified victims in both series can be argued to have engaged in prostitution, and in some cases we know that they were killed when prostituting themselves.

It therefore remains that this is a common denominator, and just like you say, from what we can tell, the victimologies behind the series seems to be one and the same. And much as John G and Gareth seem to want to bagatellize this, no such thing should be done by any responsible student of the case. It is a matter that would be of the utmost interest to any investigator, and not something that can be looked away from.

It would seem that efforts are made to try and dissolve the details speaking for a common originator of both series. Typically, we now have John G suggesting that rummaging around the abdominal cavity of Kelly, knife in hand, could accidentally produce a removed abdominal wall, taken away in three large sections and placed on the bedside table. Whoops, sort of.

That is no way to move the case forward, least of all when we have a preceding case displaying the exact same thing. It looks much more like a defeated and frustrated poster failing to recognize the obvious for purely egotistical reasons.
Sadly, I have little doubt that there is more of the same to follow.

Last edited by Fisherman : 01-09-2017 at 02:33 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #372  
Old 01-09-2017, 07:20 AM
Abby Normal Abby Normal is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,300
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Although I think a very good case can be made for these two series having been perpetrated by somebody who actively and purposefully targetted prostitutes, it must be said that no such thing can be established with full certainty, Abby. What we can say is that both originators (or just the one originator, responsible for both series) preyed on prostitutes - whether consciously or not.

It may be that the killer/s was/were active in an area and at a time that would only offer prostitutes as prey, and therefore we cannot positively establish that there was an active targetting of them as a group.

However, just like you say, it remains that the identified victims in both series can be argued to have engaged in prostitution, and in some cases we know that they were killed when prostituting themselves.

It therefore remains that this is a common denominator, and just like you say, from what we can tell, the victimologies behind the series seems to be one and the same. And much as John G and Gareth seem to want to bagatellize this, no such thing should be done by any responsible student of the case. It is a matter that would be of the utmost interest to any investigator, and not something that can be looked away from.

It would seem that efforts are made to try and dissolve the details speaking for a common originator of both series. Typically, we now have John G suggesting that rummaging around the abdominal cavity of Kelly, knife in hand, could accidentally produce a removed abdominal wall, taken away in three large sections and placed on the bedside table. Whoops, sort of.

That is no way to move the case forward, least of all when we have a preceding case displaying the exact same thing. It looks much more like a defeated and frustrated poster failing to recognize the obvious for purely egotistical reasons.
Sadly, I have little doubt that there is more of the same to follow.
well that's for sure.
__________________
"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
  #373  
Old 01-09-2017, 08:13 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,437
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Firstly, Dr Brown.....didn't view Kelly's remains"
Are you sure about that? I think one paper lists him among the doctors who were at Miller's Court. Could be mistaken identity though; no two papers seem to have the same list, and none are definitive as far as I can see.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #374  
Old 01-19-2017, 11:28 AM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abby Normal View Post
I wonder if you, or Sam, have ever heard of victimology.

Of course prostititutes make easy targets, no **** Sherlock. But serial killers, and we are talking about serial killers here, also target coeds, mothers, children, single females living alone, teenage boys, homeless people.

The torso man and the ripper both targeted the same type of person, it's called victimology there Occam. Hopefully that's "obvious" enough to you (and Sam.)
Hi Abby,

Okay, let's focus on victimology. Now I could say that only one of the Torso victims was identified, and we certainly do not know that all of the C5 were soliciting at the time they were murdered.

But let's say, for arguments sake, that they were. What does that prove? Serial killers, such as the Yorkshire Ripper and Jack the Stripper, commonly target street prostitutes. And I'm sure you don't need me to tell you the reason why: they are vulnerable women, out alone at night, when it's dark, who will happily accompany a total stranger to a dark, lonely, venue.

Or course, these scumbags may subsequently try and justify their behaviour, say, claiming they were inflicting divine retribution after receiving instructions from God, as the Yorkshire Ripper did. But we know differently, right? I mean, how does this explain why the YR subsequently targeted none prostitutes, or why he attempted to murder a schoolgirl down a quiet country lane?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #375  
Old 01-19-2017, 11:42 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,792
Default

A reminder for John G:

In post 359 on this thread you make this claim:

What's next? Oh yes, Ed Gingrich. How did he remove his wife's organs? By making an incision in the abdomen and removing the abdominal wall! Ring any bells?


I am very interested in finding out how you source this - I have never seen any information at all about Gingrich removing the abdominal wall of his wife, and I am searching high and low for parallel examples. Id be grateful for a clarification.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #376  
Old 01-19-2017, 11:44 AM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Although I think a very good case can be made for these two series having been perpetrated by somebody who actively and purposefully targetted prostitutes, it must be said that no such thing can be established with full certainty, Abby. What we can say is that both originators (or just the one originator, responsible for both series) preyed on prostitutes - whether consciously or not.

It may be that the killer/s was/were active in an area and at a time that would only offer prostitutes as prey, and therefore we cannot positively establish that there was an active targetting of them as a group.

However, just like you say, it remains that the identified victims in both series can be argued to have engaged in prostitution, and in some cases we know that they were killed when prostituting themselves.

It therefore remains that this is a common denominator, and just like you say, from what we can tell, the victimologies behind the series seems to be one and the same. And much as John G and Gareth seem to want to bagatellize this, no such thing should be done by any responsible student of the case. It is a matter that would be of the utmost interest to any investigator, and not something that can be looked away from.

It would seem that efforts are made to try and dissolve the details speaking for a common originator of both series. Typically, we now have John G suggesting that rummaging around the abdominal cavity of Kelly, knife in hand, could accidentally produce a removed abdominal wall, taken away in three large sections and placed on the bedside table. Whoops, sort of.

That is no way to move the case forward, least of all when we have a preceding case displaying the exact same thing. It looks much more like a defeated and frustrated poster failing to recognize the obvious for purely egotistical reasons.
Sadly, I have little doubt that there is more of the same to follow.
Excuse me! Kelly was eviscerated by a murderer demonstrating no skill or finesse whatsoever: see the opinion of Dr Bond, and Dr Phillips-who not only used the phrase "most wanton" to describe her injuries, but also "savagery". And by the way, Dr Bond thought that the Whitehall victim had been dismembered by a perpetrator demonstrating a significant level of skill, stating: "We found the leg had been divided at the knee joint by free incisions, and very cleverly disarticulated without injury to the cartilages."

However according to you the injuries to Kelly demonstrated the same level of skill as the Torso victims. So Dr Bond, a highly experienced doctor, who I believe was Dr Phillips' senior, would have to have been an absolute dunce not to realize this.

Accidental removal of the abdominal wall? How do you accidentally remove an abdominal wall? This is a gross misrepresentation of the point I was making, I.e. Kelly's murderer needed to access the abdominal organs, and he achieved this in an unskilled manner by making numerous incisions, and then probably hacking away at the abdominal wall piecemeal.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #377  
Old 01-19-2017, 11:50 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,792
Default

John!

Point out to me where I have claimed that Kellys injuries showed the same level of skill as the torso victims.

The removal of the abdominal wall of Kelly WAS accidental unless it was intended.

First and foremost - source your claim that Ed Gingrich removed the abdominal wall of his wife.

Last edited by Fisherman : 01-19-2017 at 11:55 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #378  
Old 01-19-2017, 11:50 AM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
A reminder for John G:

In post 359 on this thread you make this claim:

What's next? Oh yes, Ed Gingrich. How did he remove his wife's organs? By making an incision in the abdomen and removing the abdominal wall! Ring any bells?


I am very interested in finding out how you source this - I have never seen any information at all about Gingrich removing the abdominal wall of his wife, and I am searching high and low for parallel examples. Id be grateful for a clarification.
Okay, a biology lesson. Could you please explain to me how else he was supposed to have removed all of his wife's internal organs with removing/displacing at least part of the abdominal wall?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #379  
Old 01-19-2017, 11:56 AM
John G John G is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 4,079
Default

[quote=Fisherman;406581]
Quote:
Originally Posted by John G: Excuse me! Kelly was eviscerated by a murderer demonstrating no skill or finesse whatsoever: see the opinion of Dr Bond, and Dr Phillips-who not only used the phrase "most wanton" to describe her injuries, but also "savagery". And by the way, Dr Bond thought that the Whitehall victim had been dismembered by a perpetrator demonstrating a significant level of skill, stating: "We found the leg had been divided at the knee joint by free incisions, and very cleverly disarticulated without injury to the cartilages."

However according to you the injuries to Kelly demonstrated the same level of skill as the Torso victims. So Dr Bond, a highly experienced doctor, who I believe was Dr Phillips' senior, would have to have been an absolute dunce not to realize this.

[B
Point out where I say that Kellys injuries displayed the same level of skill as the torso victims, please!
[/b]
Accidental removal of the abdominal wall? How do you accidentally remove an abdominal wall? This is a gross misrepresentation of the point I was making, I.e. Kelly's murderer needed to access the abdominal organs, and he achieved this in an unskilled manner by making numerous incisions, and then probably hacking away at the abdominal wall piecemeal.

That IS an accidental removal of the abdominal wall. It was not intended but came about anyway = accidentally.

But this is VERY uninteresting stuff, gone over a million times. Please answer my question about Ed Gingrich instead!
This is a diagram of the abdominal wall whicjay help you with your deliberations: https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...0&ajaxhis t=0

I would point out that I did study biology at UK Advanced Level, and during one step semester at university. Now that hardly qualifies me as a medical professional, but compared to you...

Do you need any other diagrams by the way? Or is this now suddenly hitting your consciousness like a horrible nightmare?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #380  
Old 01-19-2017, 11:56 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John G View Post
Okay, a biology lesson. Could you please explain to me how else he was supposed to have removed all of his wife's internal organs with removing/displacing at least part of the abdominal wall?
So you have no source stating that he removed the abdominal wall from his wife? You made it up? And whats this sudden adding of "displacing"? And "displacing part of the abdominal wall"?

Last edited by Fisherman : 01-19-2017 at 12:05 PM.
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 02:18 AM.


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