It seems to me that we are ignoring some basic questions here - Do five murders establish a pattern that is set in stone or is that number too small from a statistical standpoint for valid comparisons? Since there are differences in all five murders does that mean that there had to be five different killers? Can a pattern be deviated from in any way or does it have to be rigidly adhered to?
It would appear that your mindset on these questions determines how you see the C5.
c.d.
It would appear that your mindset on these questions determines how you see the C5.
c.d.

Actually, Sam is the usual 'ruler on the wrist' guy for us around here. Ask Perry Mason about that. He's usually the first to point out if someone has made an unsupported statement - and rightly so in most cases - but it's only fair to do him the same service. He says that murders like Liz Stride's were commonplace in Whitechapel, but I have never seen this demonstrated. We are only told about women murdered by their husbands at home. Obviously, Stride's murder is more in line with the Ripper murders than these women murdered at home by their husbands, so the comparison doesn't wash. We can't say that Kidney killed Stride, because in all likelihood he did not. So who did if not Jack? And why? And is it likely the murder could be so 'clean' if it were an act of passion or a drunken brute?
Comment