how close was 'jack' to being caught

[Monty]

My recollection is that Morris opened the door moments before Watkins called.

Either Jack was lucky or clever or, alternately, he or Eddowes was aware of routine.

Monty

[lynn cates]

skilled personnel

Hello Monty. If Eddowes knew the routine, and that the 2 PC's were due at 1:40 or 1:42 and the other was due at 1:44, and given that it was 1:36 or 1:37 before they headed into Mitre Square from Church passage, she must have been awfully confident of her "skills."

On the other hand, if Jack knew the routine and yet went ahead, he must have had nerves of steel.

The best.
LC

[Monty]

Lynn,

With routine I was reffering more to Morris than the beat bobbies. However I see your point.

That said the two bobbies concerned did have their disciplinary issues, with one having been caught drinking on duty and the other been caught having sex whilst on duty. Now this doesnt mean they didnt conduct their duties on the day however we must be wary of their fallabilities.

Also, as a side note, thats assuming it was Eddowes in Church passage.

Monty

[lynn cates]

ID

Hello Monty. Good points.

I have lately become accustomed to adding the codicil that you append to Kate, for most of the sightings depended on clothing for justification. (Imagine that taking place today. "Yes sir, that's the prostitute I saw." "And how did you recognize her?" "Why, by her attire. She was wearing a short skirt, fishnet hose, and hoop earrings." [Nothing like a unique, positive ID.})

I knew that one of the PC's was discharged (Harvey?); I did not know the reason. Thanks.

Cheers.
LC

[perrymason]

I liked Monty's Morris in Mitre idea, cause based on proximity while the murder was ongoing, he would be probably one of the closest. I wonder about Cadosche. I think in the big picture I have less trouble assuming that Annie was killed by Jack the Ripper than I do Kate, so in those terms, maybe Morris was near to a killer....and not the killer.

But if Jack killed in Mitre Square, that had to be his closest shave. Harvey, Watkins, Morris, the three wise men who give us the approximate earliest start time for the murder...then you have the 3 detectives a few streets over, ...Pearce sleeping with his bedroom window facing onto the murder site....that was seemingly a quiet spot, but not on that night anyway.

The timings of the comings and goings regarding that murder are something that a stage Manager on Broadway would envy.

Best regards all.

[lynn cates]

odd one out

Hello Mike. I appreciate your phrasing:

"I have less trouble assuming that Annie was killed by Jack the Ripper than I do Kate[.]"

I don't wish to post off topic, but consider:

1. AC was the only 1 of the C5 who was only (about) a week later than the predecessor [given the non-inclusion of C3].

2. AC is the only one who was purported both to have been slain for her uterus AND to have it taken.

3. Given the accuracy of Richardson, Long, and Cadosch, AC is the only 1 killed after sunrise.

Would it not be shocking if AC were the non-canonical victim?

The best.
LC

[Sam Flynn]

That's one for the "Pinching the Canon fuse" thread, methinks, lynn... but a very good point nonetheless.

[perrymason]

Hello Mike. I appreciate your phrasing:

"I have less trouble assuming that Annie was killed by Jack the Ripper than I do Kate[.]"

I don't wish to post off topic, but consider:

1. AC was the only 1 of the C5 who was only (about) a week later than the predecessor [given the non-inclusion of C3].

2. AC is the only one who was purported both to have been slain for her uterus AND to have it taken.

3. Given the accuracy of Richardson, Long, and Cadosch, AC is the only 1 killed after sunrise.

Would it not be shocking if AC were the non-canonical victim?

The best.
LC

I agree with Sam, thats a very good point Lynn. My immediate response would be that the first 2 murders seem to mirror each other, and they were unique for that or any year...even locally. I believe that Alice is the ONLY woman the following year who could be categorized as being a victim of an abdominal mutilator. Its rare.

If Mary Anns death, which so significantly differed from any of the previous attacks or murders that year, was indeed the work of the same man who 10 days later kills in almost identical fashion...with suggested similar motives...as was assumed by all the investigators who believed Mary Ann was the first victim of "Jack"...then I dont see how Annie could be anything but the quintessential victim....the motivation for the 2 kills realized in the second, more private, location.

I think when women were being "ripped" we have the watermark....and thats late August 1888, and thats Mary Ann Nichols. But Annies murder, in the opinion of men in authority and of some responsibility in the assignation of the cause of death and its likely methodology, was a success for the killer.

Thats why to me, she is basis for the litmus test.

Cheers Lynn.

[lynn cates]

thinking out loud

Hello Mike. I agree, but was picking up on your comment about Annie's death being an "assumption."

I have long regarded AC as the paradigm of the C5--but I could not resist "thinking out loud" and remarking some differences.

But I fear I stray from the topic and that is, "How close was the assailant to being caught?" If AC's murder REALLY occurred at 5:30, then this was perhaps a close second to Kate. (Unless, of course, one wishes to uphold the "conventional wisdom" regarding Liz.)

The best.
LC

[Observer]

2. AC is the only one who was purported both to have been slain for her uterus AND to have it taken.

Slain for her uterus? Who had access to the mind of the murderer to suggest such an idea?

3. Given the accuracy of Richardson, Long, and Cadosch, AC is the only 1 killed after sunrise.

So what, why should this fact have any bearing whatsoever upon Chapmans inclusion or exclusion into the canon?


Observer

[lynn cates]

risk

Hello Observer. At the risk of being in trouble for off topic posting, let me say it was Baxter who made the suggestion for the first.

For the second, well, if Dracula were charged with 4 killings during the dark, could we also subsume a #5 who was attacked AFTER sunup? Just a thought regarding modus operandi.

Cheers.
LC

[Observer]

I stand by my original observation

Only the murderer could have supplied us with the reason why he extracted Annie Chapmans uterus. Baxter was one man expressing an opinion, and in my opinion he was incorrect in his assumption. As I implied did he have access to the mind of the murderer?

Also

Chapman was murdered at the back end of the unsocial hours, at an hour when most people were still in the process of rising, lets make no bones about that. Consequently, regarding her time of death I can see no reason to exclude her from the canon.

Observer

[lynn cates]

thread

Hello Observer. Let's go to the canon thread. I wish not to abuse the good graces of admin.

The best.
LC

[perrymason]

Hi Observer,

Your argument is with the gentlemen that espoused the theory some 121 years ago at Mary Anns Inquest, neither I, Lynn or anyone else is responsible for those words and that theorizing.

Always good to remember that one of the men was the man that examined Annies body in death, and the coroner was the same for both murders Inquests.....he is the one that summed up the findings and his opinions.

I think they are validated with their speculations quite nicely by the physical and circumstantial evidence.

Cheers Observer

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Observer,

Your argument is with the gentlemen that espoused the theory some 121 years ago at Mary Anns Inquest, neither I, Lynn or anyone else is responsible for those words and that theorizing.

Always good to remember that one of the men was the man that examined Annies body in death, and the coroner was the same for both murders Inquests.....he is the one that summed up the findings and his opinions.

Get that "Canonical Two" kudzu talk off this bloody thread!!!

(He said light-heartedly, but seriously too )