How would YOU catch the Ripper?

[bolo]

Hi RockySullivan,

The rooftop idea is brilliant. I'm surprised no one on the vigilance committee thought of this...

I guess the construction of typical LVP East End houses, the narrow alleys and squares and bad lighting would render this plan rather ineffective.

Best wishes,

Boris

[007]

Interesting thread with some great posts. I particularly like the rooftop idea. I'm not sure exactly what my plan regarding Jack would be, but the one thing I'd be sure to do is take a picture of the Goulston Street Graffito to see how it really was spelled (and going so far as to arrive the day before to see if it was written beforehand by someone else).

[Robert]

Are you allowed just the one trip for the Ripper, but another trip to do other things? If just one trip, then you'd have to sacrifice Tabram. You'd need to be in Austria because about the time that Tabram was being murdered, Hitler was being conceived. You could send Hitler's dad on a wild goose chase away from home, or kill Hitler's dad, or whatever.

[GUT]

G'day Rocky

..don't you think you would join the vigilance committee to stay on top of any possible plans and patrols?

That depends on what type of person he was.

If he was an insane person, no I don't think he would.

If he was a working class man, I doubt it, the committee seems to have been middle management types, Lusk ran his own construction business.

If he was a Toff or a Royal No.

So only if he was of that similar class to Lusk, remember 1880's England was very class conscious.

[RockySullivan]

The rooftop idea is brilliant. I'm surprised no one on the vigilance committee thought of this...which leads me to another thought....if you were the ripper...don't you think you would join the vigilance committee to stay on top of any possible plans and patrols? Also this would explain the killer having Lusks info. Is there any sort of list of the complete vigilance committee members? Was the committee doing patrols at all that they might have coordinated with the police? This also fits in with the inserting into investigation.

[GUT]

Yes Jeff so we'd be there for a long time. Hope we can takes food and clean under clothes with us perhaps we'd better try and find some old money as well, though $20 would go a long way once converted.

[Mayerling]

G'day Bridewell



But by then at least four others are dead, and at best you've caught Mary Jane's killer, we'd still argue forever over were there other killers.

So we'd actually have to "stake out" each of the canonical five cases, as well as those that might trouble us (i.e. Emma Smith, Marther Turner) just to make sure that the killer is the same or that they are different, but in any case we'd have to make sure that if the killer was caught (presumably before he fully showed his hand) he did not go back into circulation when out on bail to continue his skulduggery. And what if he is jailed on a night that was the day of the murder but the murder happens anyway (if you are a fatalist, a secondary figure pops up to commit the murder because the victim was doomed to die at that time no matter who killed her)?

Jeff

[GUT]

G'day Bridewell

With the wisdom of hindsight I'd stake out the Kelly room, with a concealed officer watching through a partition spyhole and others ready to move in and to block the entrance/exit to Millers Court.

But by then at least four others are dead, and at best you've caught Mary Jane's killer, we'd still argue forever over were there other killers.

[GUT]

G'day DM

But what if you successfully teleport to 1888 Whitechapel, catch the killer red-handed, and find out that it's the favored suspect of one of your rival posters or researchers? Would you really want to risk giving them the satisfaction of being right?

But that would never happen, because we all know my hypothesis is the right one.

[Damaso Marte]

But what if you successfully teleport to 1888 Whitechapel, catch the killer red-handed, and find out that it's the favored suspect of one of your rival posters or researchers? Would you really want to risk giving them the satisfaction of being right?

Anyway, I suspect that if one of us altered the timeline and caught the ripper(s), we would still be here. This would be a forum dedicated to the torso killer: a much more sophisticated and accomplished fiend than the Ripper. And a killer who, I'm sure, cursed the Ripper and his crude methods to his dying day for stealing the attention and infamy that rightfully should have been him.

[Bridewell]

With the wisdom of hindsight I'd stake out the Kelly room, with a concealed officer watching through a partition spyhole and others ready to move in and to block the entrance/exit to Millers Court.

In terms of police tactics, I don't think the 19th century police got a lot wrong. I would direct that (at night in that area) all lone men between the ages of 20 & 50 were stopped and searched, regardless of perceived class and status. I would have more supervisors in place to ensure that all officers were where and when they should be at all times. That too is with the wisdom of hindsight.

[Bridewell]

How do we know the police didn't already have prostitutes working as informants?

The police have always used prostitutes as informants. They know a lot of the local villains and spend a good deal of time hanging around on street corners.

[Mayerling]

G'day Jeff

I had a similar discussion revolving around:

If you could stop the attack on Pearl Harbor, would you?

It actually became very passionate because it involved some Americans, some Brits, some Aussies and some Jews, some of them took the views you might expect some surprised me a little.

However maybe we could just keep nipping back and forth knocking off all the bad ones as they become apparent.

Views on any matters can take an odd twist. I don't favor unlimited access to handguns, etc., but while considering it seriously I keep wondeing if minorities actually have a disadvantage at not having such access.

With Pearl Harbor you could find some weird views (it enables the U.S. to enter World War II, so it could be wished in some quarters that it occur, despite the horrendous loss of life - and the humiliation the U.S. Navy got.

If you want a peculiarly screwy "Iffy" conumdrum of history I have this one to ponder - one of Hawaii's most colorful monarchs was King David Kalakaua (1873-1891). Kalakaua spent money like it was water, but it was to enhance his state of monarchy. He had big plans. It was an age of 'unification" in Italy and Germany. So why not the Pacific. Kalakaua considered using Hawaii as the foundation for a unified Pacific empire, and actually sent a rediculous invasion force to take over Samoa in the early 1880s. It did not work of course.

But suppose he had more of the spirit of King Kamahameha the I, Hawaii's true founder and greatest king (and the only king honored in the Capitol Building's "Statutory Hall" or in the series of "state" quarters of a few years back). Suppose Kalakaua had conquered Samoa and made it part of Hawaii, and then took Tonga and some other islands. His successes attract notice, and he gets military support from some European states (Britain possibly). Even the U.S. decides it might be a good thing.

So by 1930 Hawaii controls Polynesia, Melanesia, and even such groups as the Philippine Islands and Guam. And it has one of the world's best crack navies and airforces.

The U.S. is concentrating on Latin America. Britain is concentrating on Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Singapore, and India. France has southeast Asia. The Netherlands have the Dutch East Indies.

Only Japan is really put out by this. She too has a fleet and an air force. She has begun fighting in China. But her expansion includes the European empires in Asia, and the Hawaiian one. Only the U.S. is uninvolved - and ironically is willing to sell oil and metal to Japan!

So the 1941 confrontation is between the Empire of Japan and the Empire of Hawaii.

Odd thought isn't it.

Jeff

[Mayerling]

G'day Jeff



Please, please, please show mercy and don't tell her!

Hi GUT,

If you don't tell her, I won't.

Jeff

[Mayerling]

Hi Jeff

The Anschluss would have stood, as this happened before Hitler's death in your scenario.

Hi Robert,

I got my dates wrong - I thought it was in March 1939, but you are right it was in 1938.

Jeff.