Just a thought...

[The Doctor]

If any of the 'modern' serial killers hadn't of been caught, would it of been possible to identify who it might of been - JTR style? Part of me thinks that it could be an ordinary person who was JTR - they might not have been local.

I do think it was two people, and that a covered cart was used.

Brian

[Nemo]

Hi Doctor

What do you think the covered cart was for?

I don't think a cart was used myself - one may have been used in the Torso murders for transportation reasons.

All the C5 victims were clearly killed where they were found with no carts involved as far as I am aware.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I never understood the 'more than one person' theory as, I'm assuming the whole point of it is to explain how the 'killers' got away with the murders, but surely with more people involved there would've been more risk of being caught?

As far as I can tell, that originated or stemmed from the Stride murder, and the theory goes that one person was the murderer/eviscerator and the other was the look-out. Well, if that was the case then the Stride murder was a complete and utter failure; not only were both perpetrators witnessed, but they didn't get to accomplish the mutilations.

I'm not quite sure what the cart would've been used for or what you mean by an 'ordinary' person, if not local. I also don't see how not catching modern serial killers would've made identifying Jack the Ripper easier.

[The Doctor]

I don't believe the mutilations were carried out in situ, in the dark, in the time possible. I think they were done in the back of the cart. If it was 2 people, there is the possibility that one killed the other, for whatever reason.

If Sutcliffe was never caught - what sort of clues would there be to point an amateur sleuth in his direction?

[Mascara & Paranoia]

I can see why that would makes sense... until you read the victims' pages on this site. Especially with the Annie Chapman affair, not only would it be more difficult to 'plant' her body in the backyard, but there was also blood splattered up the fence where she had been killed.

I'm not sure what the second person would benefit from the rippings either, unless they were up to some kind of anti-Jew conspiracy thing, and if that was the case then they should've been more clear as in being cryptic they failed to get whatever their point was across.

[Mitch Rowe]

Philips assures us that Annie was alive when she entered the back yard. We know there was at least a massive amount of blood on the ground around the neck area. Concerning the blood on the fence. Its not clear whether it was feathered as if it landed there under pressure or if the blood was in fact smears. Others describe the blood as like it squirted from the neck but Philips only mentions them as smears. In fact when asked about signs of a struggle he says none but do not forget about the smears! Without an actual picture Im afraid we will never know. Although I personally consider two actors and or the use of a vehicle of some kind highly highly unlikely I dont really know for sure. I also think it was next to impossible for Annie to have been carried through the narrow hallway without alarming anyone or smearing blood.

[Limehouse]

Although there have clearly been pairs of killers, for me, the ripper killings point to an individual. The charactersistics of the multilations signify a personal expression rather than a joint effort and, as Mascara and Paranoia has pointed out, what's in it for the second person?

It is quite clear that the mutilations were carried out in situ due to the evidence at the scene and for all the reasons the other posters have given. Also, in Annie's case, it would not have been dark at all at that time of the morning.


Re 'modern' serial killers. Not all of them have been caught, despite 'modern' methods and facilities. For example, the 'stripper' murders in the 1960s. Several suspects have been described and identified, but no one has been arrested or charged. There was a good deal of forensic evidence but no arrests were made. Additionally, the 'Boston Strangler' killings of the 1960s also remain a bit of a mystery. A man was identified (can't remember his name) and I think the case was closed with him confirmed as the killer but there is a strong body of theory that suggests he was not the killer at all.

[Jeff Leahy]

Reasons for assuming two killers:

1, Emma Smith was the opening murder in the investigation. She claims to have been attacked by more than one person.
2. Martha Tabram. Was last seen with Pearly and two soldiers. Suggestion that two knives were used (bayonet) has lead people to speculate that two people were involved.
3. Nichols. Witness heard two people whispering beneath her window only minutes before the body was discovered.
4. Chapman. Nothing as I’m aware
5. Stride. It has been suggested that BS and Pipeman were working together.
6. Kelly. It was raised in parliament that an amnesty was offered to the Rippers accomplice. It has been suggested that there was an accomplice keeping watch.

Given consideration none of these stories really hold much/any water. Jack was almost certainly a lone serial killer. All victims were killed where they were found. No skill or medical knowledge of any kind was required to carry out the attacks.

Pirate

[The Doctor]

No skill or medical knowledge of any kind was required to carry out the attacks.

Pirate

Isn't that still unproven? It's not the skill or lack of it, it's the time he had i'm arguing about. If it was thought it was a lone man, would the victims not get onto a cart more willingly? The murder and mutilation could take place in the back with a torch undetected.

We cannot say for definate that Jack was a lone killer or one half of a pair. This is just another theory that is about in the absence of the real killer!


Brian

[Mitch Rowe]

Isn't that still unproven? It's not the skill or lack of it, it's the time he had i'm arguing about. If it was thought it was a lone man, would the victims not get onto a cart more willingly? The murder and mutilation could take place in the back with a torch undetected.

We cannot say for definate that Jack was a lone killer or one half of a pair. This is just another theory that is about in the absence of the real killer!


Brian

Personally it hasnt been proven to me no medical knowledge was involved but I would accept a Ripper with no medical knowledge.

You see.. What a homicide detective is supposed to do is attend the autopsy and ask questions. If Philips says look here this is very unusual then Abberline says show me where and why. There was nothing of the sort going on back then.

So.. If a leading doctor says there wasnt enough time unless the guy had skill Im always going to have to pay attention to that.

As far as not being noticed with a light on in a cart sounds highly unlikely as I suspect people were quite nosy back then and anything unusual in plain sight like a wagon even without a light would have been reported.

[Limehouse]

Isn't that still unproven? It's not the skill or lack of it, it's the time he had i'm arguing about. If it was thought it was a lone man, would the victims not get onto a cart more willingly? The murder and mutilation could take place in the back with a torch undetected.

We cannot say for definate that Jack was a lone killer or one half of a pair. This is just another theory that is about in the absence of the real killer!


Brian

What type of torch were you thinking of doctor? I imagine it would have had to be something fuelled by a wick or something similar. Bit of a fire risk in the back of a cart I would think. Also, how would the cart be powered? It would have to be horse power. The people who heard whispering under their window the night Nichols was murdered would surely also have mentioned hearing horse hooves? Surely a horse-driven cart parked near any of the locations would have been mentioned by witnesses?