One size fits all?

[lynn cates]

reputation

Hello Miss Marple. Thanks.

"Serial killings are still extremely rare, even more so a hundred years ago."

Precisely. Now I know why your namesake has such a great reputation.

Cheers.
LC

[miss marple]

Lynn, you being ironic?

Miss Marple

[Rubyretro]

jousting with the Jacksters.

A great Sit-Com.

My X,Y chromosomal structure has deprived me of such

.
Pity. In our new Sit-Com, your character would look quite good with "female antennae".

I just think it silly to suggest that she was soliciting straightaway from gaol.

'
Let's look at it simply...she and her bloke had no money in the afternoon before her death. She told him that she was going to see her daughter to borrow some money, but her daughter had moved and so she couldn't have gone there (and those antennae tell me that she knew very well that her daughter had moved, and she never intended to go to her daughter's house, and her man preferred to cling to what she told him rather than to accept the fact that his partner was selling herself and all that comported. He averted his face). But when Kate got the money -she drank it. She ended up in gaol, and she didn't dare go back, brassic (a mixture of fear...she hinted as much... and not wanting to disappoint, possibly. She knew that Kelly was waiting for her and hoping for cash. If she got back so late, with nothing, he'd know that she had gotten some money and selfishly spent it. He would be appeased by money).

So she headed straight down to the vicinity of St Botolphs...a 'red light' district to try and turn some rapid 'tricks'. Maybe she knew that it was a 'night' at the Jewish Club, or maybe the 'regulars' around the Church chased
away 'occasionals' on their patch...either way, she went slightly off track...

But that was an area where she would be likely to find a customer.

the facts almost unequivocally say that she was soliciting just before her death.”

What facts? Must have missed those. Have seen a good bit of supposition, though.

The facts say that Kate did hightail it to a red light district straight after being released from the Police Station. And she did go into a dark secluded corner of a deserted square between police beats, with an unknown man who turned out to be a killer of prostitutes. She kept as quite as possible as she passed Eagle. She could have discussed blackmail on the street in a low voice...she went into that square for sex, Lynn -face it.

She wasn't going to buy a sandwich, and she had long skirts and it was pitch black...she could have squatted just inside the entrance to the Square for a piss...she didn't need to go so far into the square.

“It's a bummer for me, but I still haven't got round to reclaiming my Neal Sheldon book , on the victims, from a friend. But I know that he gives concrete evidence, including the dates and place, of a court appearance in London for Liz getting 'done' for prostitution.”

I look forward to that. But how does this apply to 30 September, 1888?

It applies because it proves that we are writing about a documented, professional prostitute, and not an 'occasional' . Liz was maybe the most professional of all of them ...bar Mary.

“Unless you are particularly naive or obtuse, all the witness reports on Liz's behaviour on the night that she died, point to her soliciting.”

May be both. But what signs? The flower? Yes, all the better to ensnare a wealthy, free spending anarchist.

Not the flower . No. The fact that she obviously went to the pub alone..something really not done by respectable women at the time (and I suggest that it looks bad, even today). She was then seen getting physical with several different blokes during the course of the evening. The fact that BS Man was treating her roughly (Would he have done that to a respectable woman just going past ? More likely to a prostitute working the Jewish Club, I would think). And why would she go into that pitch dark yard with her killer anyway, clutching breath freshners ?...not to take the taste away when she was giving him a blow job ? (I'm sorry I don't think that it was for spying, nor exchanging a chaste kiss with a "beau").

“Well, you seemed to want to say that she was more stable than the others, because she had her own room and they lived in lodging houses. I want to say that the difference between her and the other victims was superficial.”

Wanted to say? Then I should have said it. Stable? Oh, don’t horse around. That was not my mane point. (heh-heh)

“C'mon...which is really more likely? Objectively?”

[/QUOTE]

Neither.[/QUO

TE]

Then you are ignoring reality. MJK was on a slippery slope (it is true -there is aways hope, and nothing is a fatality. But at the time of her death, Mary wasn't turning her life around, but she was in a downward spiral).

“Because she was almost certainly killed by the same hand.”

Certainly? Hmm, perhaps you have vastly different epistemic standards

.

I can't be arsed to google wotsit standards right this minute -but she was almost certainly killed by the same hand as the others.

“You seem to be saying...forgive me...that all the victims didn't have the point in common that they were alcoholics (which is my take).”

Don’t know. I believe that’s a medical diagnosis? Not qualified there.

I didn't say that I was qualified, but I said that it was "my take" on things. Still is.

“Well once again, all these women were malnourished (so they couldn't fight back -a criteria for Jack's victims). You appear to dispute this.”

Well, since you choose to include Tabram, you might pop round to Dr. Killeen’s discussion on this point.

Once again, I can't be bothered -but I would hazard a guess that she would have chosen 5 pails of beer above 5 portions of fruit or veg. Therefore, she would have been malnourished (unless she was an eskimo...please let's not go there).

“The only victim who seemed physically capable of fighting back seemed to be MJK -but as the killer surprised her waking from sleep and supine on her bed, she didn't get a chance...”

How do we know that she was surprised whilst sleeping?

Because she would have fought back more than she did !

“Yep. Very careful.”

Indeed? Why would a sane man:
1. Talk loudly with Annie against the shutters?
2. Then go through the house?
3. Kill her and disembowel her under the windows with many people present?
4. Stop to steal some worthless brass rings?

Blimey..
1. I don't believe Mrs Long's testimony
2. To get to the yard.
3. Because it was hard under the windows and out of sight to anyone looking
out by chance ; It was very dark ; Everyone was aseep.
4. Because they were worth something to pop or to give to women down the pub, when chatting them up.

I have lost the will to go on...But I do like being a Jackster (just as long as it's not a Jacksy).

[GregBaron]

Not so fast...

"Serial killings are still extremely rare, even more so a hundred years ago."

Sorry Lynn and miss marple,

Murderers of this type have likely been around since caveman days but then we called them vampires and werewolves. It’s likely the modern industrial city, with its overpopulation and anonymity, has only provided a more favorable environment for such atrocities. I don’t believe we can say with any confidence that serial killing was more rare 100 years ago especially compensating for population and city growth. It is a rather rare phenomenon thankfully..

With that said, I agree miss marple that serial killing isn’t just an odd career choice. Poor Cross the carman, can you believe people seriously posit him…………!


Greg

[Rubyretro]

[QUOTE][QUOTE]

Hello Ruby. What worries me is that she is given as Beetmore, Beadmore, and, I think, Savage.

With those aliases do you suppose . . . ? Na

A Fenian ? A Russian spy ?

[Rubyretro]

Poor Cross the carman, can you believe people seriously posit him…………!

Much more likely than vampires and werewolves.

[miss marple]

Greg,
I am not talking about myths. The facts are that although various forms of killing and torture have existed since time began, the serial killer does seem to be a modern phenomenon. Perhaps men who delighted in torturing women and men as witches,or for not believing the state religion, might have been serial killers if they had not had an official sanction for torture or murder.
I believe Matthew Hopkins was a psychopath, and many others who killed needlessly, enjoying state protection.

In modern times when torture is illegal, the serial killer has flourished.Brady wanted to break the bounds of acceptable behaviour and commit acts to horrify the public. Serial killers feed on the oxygen of media interest and with so many of them in the 20th century, the can learn from each other. We the public indulge their egos with films, books and the internet.
I say it again, serial killing was extremely rare before Jack,[ motiveless murder] and domestic murders common, but still the murder rate was low in England in the 19th century.

Miss Marple

[GregBaron]

Gilles de Rais anyone?

Greg,
I am not talking about myths. The facts are that although various forms of killing and torture have existed since time began, the serial killer does seem to be a modern phenomenon. Perhaps men who delighted in torturing women and men as witches,or for not believing the state religion, might have been serial killers if they had not had an official sanction for torture or murder.
I believe Matthew Hopkins was a psychopath, and many others who killed needlessly, enjoying state protection.

In modern times when torture is illegal, the serial killer has flourished.Brady wanted to break the bounds of acceptable behaviour and commit acts to horrify the public. Serial killers feed on the oxygen of media interest and with so many of them in the 20th century, the can learn from each other. We the public indulge their egos with films, books and the internet.
I say it again, serial killing was extremely rare before Jack,[ motiveless murder] and domestic murders common, but still the murder rate was low in England in the 19th century.

Miss Marple

Like all myths miss marple, they arise to explain the unknown. I believe vampires and werewolves arose to explain motiveless murders.

I agree with you about the media fueling the fire and I do think the modern city a perfect place for such crimes...

While I basically agree with your premise there were certainly serial killers pre Jack and psychopathy has probably also been with us since the dawn of man...


Greg

[Michael W Richards]

Hello all,

Just wanted to toss in a few cents on the issue of who we can state fairly was actually working the streets the night she died.

1) Martha: yes, attested to by a "workmate"
2) Polly: yes, she admitted not having her doss and needing to "earn" it.
3) Annie: yes, she admitted as much to a friend.
4) Liz: no, she has accoutrements that do not fit with that scenario and had mentioned to her landlady she had been working steadily recently. Among the Jews. She also left her lodgings with 6d and was sober when murdered.
5) Kate: unclear, she had only just been released from jail and was found in the opposite direction from Bishopsgate of where her mate was. She was however very likely was seen in a mans company just before her death.
6) Mary: no, she had been drinking at a pub and arrived home plastered before midnight with company, the company had a drinking stein likely from that same pub. Only 2 witnesses state they saw Mary alive after that, one is dismissed as mistaken and therefore irrelevant and one provides a highly improbable witness sighting.

The "string" that many attach to these murders is presumption, and in most cases, the presumption is not supported by the hard evidence, the facts.

When assessing the rest of the hard evidence records for the Canonical Group it should be clear that a specific pattern changed and a killers ability to do what was done to the first 2 victims diminishes. The first 2 kills were by someone knowledgeable about anatomy and semi skilled with a knife, they were killed so the killer could open their abdomens and excise organs. None of the remaining 3 Canonical kills required those skills, with the possible exception of Kates killer. And none were suggested as being killed for the same ulterior motive as the first 2 by the officials.

But with that 4th murder a new facet appears that makes the motive there questionable,... purely superfluous wounds. Not to access, open, or extract. Interesting new component...considering this murder may have been the fastest,... if Lawende saw Kate.

Was that killer killing so he could extract abdominal organs? His true ulterior motive? Perhaps. But it would seem he did so with less knowledge and skill than was apparent in Annies death, and he chose to spend some extra time not doing that very thing. Marys killer clearly was gluttonous in that respect. Spending critical time that could be used to escape simply emptying her.

It seems to me that punishment and/or destruction was at least part of the motive in those deaths, not acquisition. There was no coveting.

Best regards all,

Mike R

[lynn cates]

To a Jackster.

Hello Ruby. Thanks.

“Let's look at it simply...she and her bloke had no money in the afternoon before her death.”

Well, let’s look at it even MORE simply. John had no money either—even after popping the boots. So she goes to Mile End CW just to save 2d. Does she get money there? Doubtful. Next day she and john are chatting in the morning. Money? Don’t think so. Now she dies and a few days later John comes down to the station. Q: How had John lived in that intervening time?

“ She told him that she was going to see her daughter to borrow some money, but her daughter had moved and so she couldn't have gone there (and those antennae tell me that she knew very well that her daughter had moved, and she never intended to go to her daughter's house . . . “

Completely agree.

“. . . and her man preferred to cling to what she told him rather than to accept the fact that his partner was selling herself and all that comported. He averted his face).”

Now you are losing it. He would have known too. The daughter had NOTHING to do with it. Q: What were they REALLY up to?

“But when Kate got the money -she drank it.”

Oh, please. You would need 3 or 4 glasses of gin to get that snoggered. At 4d per glass, she would need to hustle 3 or 4 guys in the afternoon. And you think I’M a fantasist? (heh-heh)

“She ended up in gaol, and she didn't dare go back, brassic (a mixture of fear...she hinted as much... and not wanting to disappoint, possibly. She knew that Kelly was waiting for her and hoping for cash. If she got back so late, with nothing, he'd know that she had gotten some money and selfishly spent it. He would be appeased by money).”

“Here you go honey. Told you I hadn’t lost my touch.” (heh-heh)

“So she headed straight down to the vicinity of St Botolphs...a 'red light' district to try and turn some rapid 'tricks'. Maybe she knew that it was a 'night' at the Jewish Club, or maybe the 'regulars' around the Church chased away 'occasionals' on their patch...either way, she went slightly off track...”

AFTER contemplating a “fine hiding” for being late? Ugh.

“But that was an area where she would be likely to find a customer.”

If that were such a popular area for these ladies, why were none there with Kate?

“The facts say that Kate did hightail it to a red light district straight after being released from the Police Station."

Slight correction. Your slightly overactive imagination.

“And she did go into a dark secluded corner of a deserted square between police beats . . .”

True.

“. . . with an unknown man . . .”

Hold it right there. How do you know he was unknown to her? Her body English at Church passage says otherwise.

“ . . . who turned out to be a killer of prostitutes.”

Well, he turned out to be the killer of Kate.

“She kept as quite as possible as she passed Eagle.”

Eagle?

“She could have discussed blackmail on the street in a low voice...she went into that square for sex, Lynn -face it.”

You’re a fantasist—face it. (heh-heh)


“She wasn't going to buy a sandwich, and she had long skirts and it was pitch black...she could have squatted just inside the entrance to the Square for a piss...she didn't need to go so far into the square.”

I think she met her assailant just outside the gaol. He had been waiting for her.

“It applies because it proves that we are writing about a documented, professional prostitute, and not an 'occasional'. Liz was maybe the most professional of all of them ...bar Mary.”

No offense, but Graham Chapman said it best, “This is too silly, TOO silly.” (heh-heh)

“Not the flower. No. The fact that she obviously went to the pub alone . . .”

Which pub? Alone? Obvious?

“. . . something really not done by respectable women at the time (and I suggest that it looks bad, even today).”

Evidence?

“She was then seen getting physical with several different blokes during the course of the evening.”

Just to take a single example, why did Marshall see no flower if that was Liz?

“The fact that BS Man was treating her roughly . . . “

Did Brown see this? Why not? Who corroborated this fracas?”

“(Would he have done that to a respectable woman just going past? More likely to a prostitute working the Jewish Club, I would think).”

But if Liz was the professional prostitute you imagine her to be, why waste your time on a bunch of pauper anarchists? Makes no sense.

“And why would she go into that pitch dark yard with her killer anyway, clutching breath fresheners?”

But in your version, why would she do this AFTER being assaulted by him?

“. . . not to take the taste away when she was giving him a blow job?”

But this was BEFORE surely?

“(I'm sorry I don't think that it was for spying, nor exchanging a chaste kiss with a "beau").”

Nor do I. I think she, too, had a meeting.

“Then you are ignoring reality.”

After all the foregoing sex fantasies you’ve discussed, you talk of ignoring reality? Oy!

“MJK was on a slippery slope (it is true -there is always hope, and nothing is a fatality. But at the time of her death, Mary wasn't turning her life around, but she was in a downward spiral).”

Quite possibly so. But what has this to do with recreating her final night?


“I can't be arsed to google wotsit standards right this minute -but she was almost certainly killed by the same hand as the others.”

Let’s just say you have a different take on “certainty” compared to my professional colleagues.

“I didn't say that I was qualified, but I said that it was "my take" on things. Still is.”

I meant that I am not qualified to diagnose alcoholism.

“Once again, I can't be bothered -but I would hazard a guess that she would have chosen 5 pails of beer above 5 portions of fruit or veg. Therefore, she would have been malnourished (unless she was an eskimo...please let's not go there).”

Killeen called her “well-nourished.”

“Because she would have fought back more than she did!”

Can one be surprised from behind or with head turned? And was she falling asleep whilst he watched?


“1. I don't believe Mrs Long's testimony.”

Hmm, disregarding evidence?

“2. To get to the yard.”

Or caught on the way.


“3. Because it was hard under the windows and out of sight to anyone looking
out by chance”

You are joking?

“It was very dark.”

It was after sunup.

“Everyone was asleep.”

Everyone? How did her attacker know that? Did he knock them up and ask? (heh-heh)

“4. Because they were worth something to pop or to give to women down the pub, when chatting them up.”

Even the coppers knew they had no value.


“I have lost the will to go on . . . “

Is that like, “Bless me Father, for I have sinned? (heh-heh) If which case I absolve you. (heh-heh)

“But I do like being a Jackster (just as long as it's not a Jacksy).”

Hmm, more absolution required.

Take care.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

irony?

Hello Miss Marple.

"Lynn, you being ironic?"

Ironic? I? (Heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

serial killers

Hello Greg. Thanks.

"Murderers of this type have likely been around since caveman days but then we called them vampires and werewolves."

Wouldn't have any examples for this?

"It’s likely the modern industrial city, with its overpopulation and anonymity, has only provided a more favorable environment for such atrocities. I don’t believe we can say with any confidence that serial killing was more rare 100 years ago especially compensating for population and city growth. It is a rather rare phenomenon thankfully.. ."

Nor can we say the converse.

And IF there were many serial killers in a bygone era, that has NOTHING to do with Whitechapel.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

aliases

Hello (again) Ruby. Thanks.

"A Fenian? A Russian spy?"

No, a new suspect. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

hallelujah!

Hello Mike. Thanks. I take it you're not a Jackster then? (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[GregBaron]

An American Werewolf in London...

[QUOTE=lynn cates;227636]

Wouldn't have any examples for this?

Indeed. My favorite; Vlad the Impaler = Count Dracula...

Nor can we say the converse.

Not with conviction, true, young Lynn. We lack data. I believe though, with the requisite information, your favorite discipline - statistics - would show them to be comparable...

And IF there were many serial killers in a bygone era, that has NOTHING to do with Whitechapel.

Except to demonstrate that be it a 15th century French Castle, the El Castillo cave in Spain or a grimy district in Whitechapel - human nature remains the same.................


Greg