Local Knowledge

[Geddy2112]

Okay. I stand corrected.

....said the man in the orthopaedic shoes.

[John Wheat]

Yes, but McKenzie was killed in July, and the 1888 series started in August.

But aren`t you tied to a suspect ? So you have to doubt McKenzie to keep your theory afloat?

I didn't regard McKenzie as a Ripper victim before I decided Bury was the likely the Ripper.

[John Wheat]

There is a three-month gap between the murder of Mary Kelly and the death of Ellen Bury.



The Baron

But Rose Mylett was killed between that three month period.

[The Rookie Detective]

There is another possibility that could explain the time gap...


I can feel the tingling of a new hypothesis just about to erupt.


Be warned, here it comes!


Hold on for the ride!...










The Ripper was female




She had a particular hatred for Unfortunates in their 40's stemming from a controlling and abusive mother with odd sexual kinks, and her father's penchant for sexual violence

She had slain Nichols in a random unprovoked attack, and would have done more if that odd looking Carman hadn't of interrupted her.

She had then enticed Chapman into the back garden after suggesting they have an out-of-public-view, girl on girl encounter.

She had also written Dear Boss (in a distinctly female hand)...and a few letters; because she liked to write.

She had heard that a theatrical acquaintance of hers had been bragging about knowing the identity of the killer, and so she then arranged to meet Eddowes, to silence her.
However, she then inadvertently witnessed her own male partner randomly kissing another woman in the street outside of a pub...and so she followed them to Berner St, and after seeing Stride get assaulted by BS Man, she went over to help Stride by offering her some sweet meats...

The killer then fled and headed towards the prearranged meet with Eddowes.

She had seen Eddowes walk into Mitre Square alone, after witnessing Eddowes male companion walk away after being spooked by 3 Jewish men who had noticed him talking with Eddowes.

As the Ripper stepped out of the shadows, Eddowes engaged with her, However, before Eddowes could say a word, she was dead.

But this is when the killer then got carried away, and accidentally cut herself as she was in the process of disembowelling her victim.

She then realised she needed to stop the bleeding, so took a piece of apron and just walked away towards Goulston St

The Ripper then walked away from the square and towards Goulston Street, dropping the apron after she had noticed it was covered in more than just blood.
.
She went to hospital to receive treatment for her cut, where she then was told something she wasn't expecting to hear... that she was around 4 months pregnant!

The Ripper discovered herself to be pregnant just after having her self inflicted cut treated in early October.

She then intended to stop killing, but to test her resolve; her male partner then leaves her after she tells him she is with child. But it has little impact because she already killed Stride and she never needed that cheating waste of an excuse for a man anyway.

October, and she is now focusing on being pregnant... or trying to focus on not killing.

Her attempts to abstain are successful in the short term and October is murder free.

But she then hears that her cousin has just split with her partner, but has chosen to let prostitutes into her flat.

The line between family and murder is then crossed.

She then plans to spend the night over at her cousins.

She waits for her cousin's blotchy head punter to leave and then goes to the room. He's only there 4 minutes.

MJK is happy to see her cousin for the first time in a while. They share a bed and spoon together to keep warm...but as soon as her cousin is asleep, the Ripper obliterates her.

But what compounds the tragedy; is that as she cuts into her womb, she realises MJK is also pregnant.

She has just inadvertenrly murdered an innocent child.

This has a profound effect

The Ripper then chooses to stop killing after MJK, in order to deal with her mistake, properly recoup from her previous self inflicted knife injury, and to also finish her own pregnancy.

She finally gives birth in the spring of 89

But the child doesn't survive infancy.

After a fews months of physical and emotional recovery, her bloodlust is overwhelming and she recommences operations again in the July of 89.

So who was the Ripper?

Well, she was an actress who worked as a male impersonator in the theatre and the cousin who MJK had mentioned in a passing comment to Barnett.

A woman with a dark secret.


And in the end?


Well, she was randomly ran over and killed by some moronic carman.

A crime for which the driver escaped prosecution.


Yes...Charles Cross killed the Ripper.






And that, as they say...is that!







OR...


There was just a natural time gap between murders and my hypothesis is a little off.



Hehe!

[The Baron]

There is another possibility that could explain the time gap...


I can feel the tingling of a new hypothesis just about to erupt.


Be warned, here it comes!


Hold on for the ride!...










The Ripper was female




She had a particular hatred for Unfortunates in their 40's stemming from a controlling and abusive mother with odd sexual kinks, and her father's penchant for sexual violence

She had slain Nichols in a random unprovoked attack, and would have done more if that odd looking Carman hadn't of interrupted her.

She had then enticed Chapman into the back garden after suggesting they have an out-of-public-view, girl on girl encounter.

She had also written Dear Boss (in a distinctly female hand)...and a few letters; because she liked to write.

She had heard that a theatrical acquaintance of hers had been bragging about knowing the identity of the killer, and so she then arranged to meet Eddowes, to silence her.
However, she then inadvertently witnessed her own male partner randomly kissing another woman in the street outside of a pub...and so she followed them to Berner St, and after seeing Stride get assaulted by BS Man, she went over to help Stride by offering her some sweet meats...

The killer then fled and headed towards the prearranged meet with Eddowes.

She had seen Eddowes walk into Mitre Square alone, after witnessing Eddowes male companion walk away after being spooked by 3 Jewish men who had noticed him talking with Eddowes.

As the Ripper stepped out of the shadows, Eddowes engaged with her, However, before Eddowes could say a word, she was dead.

But this is when the killer then got carried away, and accidentally cut herself as she was in the process of disembowelling her victim.

She then realised she needed to stop the bleeding, so took a piece of apron and just walked away towards Goulston St

The Ripper then walked away from the square and towards Goulston Street, dropping the apron after she had noticed it was covered in more than just blood.
.
She went to hospital to receive treatment for her cut, where she then was told something she wasn't expecting to hear... that she was around 4 months pregnant!

The Ripper discovered herself to be pregnant just after having her self inflicted cut treated in early October.

She then intended to stop killing, but to test her resolve; her male partner then leaves her after she tells him she is with child. But it has little impact because she already killed Stride and she never needed that cheating waste of an excuse for a man anyway.

October, and she is now focusing on being pregnant... or trying to focus on not killing.

Her attempts to abstain are successful in the short term and October is murder free.

But she then hears that her cousin has just split with her partner, but has chosen to let prostitutes into her flat.

The line between family and murder is then crossed.

She then plans to spend the night over at her cousins.

She waits for her cousin's blotchy head punter to leave and then goes to the room. He's only there 4 minutes.

MJK is happy to see her cousin for the first time in a while. They share a bed and spoon together to keep warm...but as soon as her cousin is asleep, the Ripper obliterates her.

But what compounds the tragedy; is that as she cuts into her womb, she realises MJK is also pregnant.

She has just inadvertenrly murdered an innocent child.

This has a profound effect

The Ripper then chooses to stop killing after MJK, in order to deal with her mistake, properly recoup from her previous self inflicted knife injury, and to also finish her own pregnancy.

She finally gives birth in the spring of 89

But the child doesn't survive infancy.

After a fews months of physical and emotional recovery, her bloodlust is overwhelming and she recommences operations again in the July of 89.

So who was the Ripper?

Well, she was an actress who worked as a male impersonator in the theatre and the cousin who MJK had mentioned in a passing comment to Barnett.

A woman with a dark secret.


And in the end?


Well, she was randomly ran over and killed by some moronic carman.

A crime for which the driver escaped prosecution.


Yes...Charles Cross killed the Ripper.






And that, as they say...is that!







OR...


There was just a natural time gap between murders and my hypothesis is a little off.



Hehe!

Appreciate your post, your approach to the topic is both creative and insightful. It’s great to see such original thinking.



The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

For me, the gap is no issue. Any number of things could have accounted for it..illness, incarceration, re-location, injury, no impulse etc. The glaring difference is between the horrific and extensive mutilations of Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly and the “…superficial cuts on the lower part of the body” of Mackenzie. The difference couldn’t really have been more pronounced and I don’t think that they can’t be explained away by a lack of time as we would have to ask why the killer would have wasted time making these pointless scratches in the first place so I can only see it as a choice between, a) it was a different killer, or b) it was some kind of injury. The overall effort required would have taken some strength in itself (as Tom points out) and must say that I find it hard to believe that the killer would have undertaken to kill until he was fit enough to do it or that he had a sufficiently sharp knife. I can’t help favouring a different killer although I’m not attempting to state this as a fact; it’s purely my opinion. I still tend to favour her being killed by someone with a connection to her. Someone who feared that the police might come knocking on his door at some point. So with the ripper killings still fresh in everyone’s mind, in panic, he takes his knife and makes some abdominal cuts hoping to leave the police believing that she was a ripper victim with the killer feeling safe in the knowledge that he could produce alibi’s for the other murders. IMO of course.

[Tom_Wescott]

I'm somewhere between the thinking of John Wheat and Herlock. I can't agree that an eight month gap suggests a different killer but I wouldn't dismiss it as meaningless. I've studied non-Ripper criminology enough to know that gaps are normal and even to be expected. BUT I believe there must be reasons for it. Plural. Not necessarily a single reason. And let's not forget that after McKenzie, there are no more murders until 1891 (and Coles is a whole different subject I won't tackle now). So there is a reason too why the successful killing of McKenzie didn't lend itself to a fresh killing following the close of the inquest. One of the possible reasons for the gap might be that the killer had reached a plateau with Kelly that he hadn't reached before and it took longer for the urge to strike him. Similar to how he may have felt after the double event, leading to the longer than usual gap before Kelly. Police patrols had been beefed up following Kelly, adding another layer of risk, and only weeks before McKenzie had they been lessened and lightened. So, here we have another factor. The killer is willing to risk a lot to commit his crimes, but only to an extent.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Baron]

I'm somewhere between the thinking of John Wheat and Herlock. I can't agree that an eight month gap suggests a different killer but I wouldn't dismiss it as meaningless. I've studied non-Ripper criminology enough to know that gaps are normal and even to be expected. BUT I believe there must be reasons for it. Plural. Not necessarily a single reason. And let's not forget that after McKenzie, there are no more murders until 1891 (and Coles is a whole different subject I won't tackle now). So there is a reason too why the successful killing of McKenzie didn't lend itself to a fresh killing following the close of the inquest. One of the possible reasons for the gap might be that the killer had reached a plateau with Kelly that he hadn't reached before and it took longer for the urge to strike him. Similar to how he may have felt after the double event, leading to the longer than usual gap before Kelly. Police patrols had been beefed up following Kelly, adding another layer of risk, and only weeks before McKenzie had they been lessened and lightened. So, here we have another factor. The killer is willing to risk a lot to commit his crimes, but only to an extent.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Hi Tom,

You might find this link interesting:


Victorian Era Medicine: Laudanum


https://www.valmcbeath.com/victorian...cine-laudanum/

• Drowsiness: The occurrence of tiredness or drowsiness, was another side effect of treatment. It meant that laudanum became popular as a sleeping aid.

And

• Mental impairment: A longer-term effect of laudanum is that patients appear to be in a daze, disconnected from daily life. They are often in a severe state of indifference, not knowing or caring what was going on around them.

The Baron

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Baron, are you suggesting I take laudanum? Or that I've been taking laudanum for years and have developed mental impairment? And what are you doing in my medicine cabinet???

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Baron]

Hi Baron, are you suggesting I take laudanum? Or that I've been taking laudanum for years and have developed mental impairment? And what are you doing in my medicine cabinet???

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Of course not Tom, I am suggesting that the Ripper may have been under the influence of these drugs after Kelly's murder.



The Baron

[Juniper4576]

Sorry, I missed the earlier posts, so sorry if I am repeating something.

As a twist, what if JtR hung around to see the reaction of his work; in the shadows for instance, and got some sort of kick from it. As the crowd that gathered left the scene, so did he.

Just another potential angle to come in from.

[C. F. Leon]

Sorry, I missed the earlier posts, so sorry if I am repeating something.

As a twist, what if JtR hung around to see the reaction of his work; in the shadows for instance, and got some sort of kick from it. As the crowd that gathered left the scene, so did he.

Just another potential angle to come in from.

There's been some suggestions of this, both here and in the podcasts, based on the behavior of other serial killers & arsonists. But, as crowded as Whitechapel was, it was probably the equivalent of a free show: "Hey, Bob! There's ANOTHER gutting over on Mitre Street! Let's go for a lookee! BYOB!!"

[Fiver]

For me, the gap is no issue. Any number of things could have accounted for it..illness, incarceration, re-location, injury, no impulse etc. The glaring difference is between the horrific and extensive mutilations of Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly and the “…superficial cuts on the lower part of the body” of Mackenzie. The difference couldn’t really have been more pronounced and I don’t think that they can’t be explained away by a lack of time as we would have to ask why the killer would have wasted time making these pointless scratches in the first place so I can only see it as a choice between, a) it was a different killer, or b) it was some kind of injury. The overall effort required would have taken some strength in itself (as Tom points out) and must say that I find it hard to believe that the killer would have undertaken to kill until he was fit enough to do it or that he had a sufficiently sharp knife. I can’t help favouring a different killer although I’m not attempting to state this as a fact; it’s purely my opinion. I still tend to favour her being killed by someone with a connection to her. Someone who feared that the police might come knocking on his door at some point. So with the ripper killings still fresh in everyone’s mind, in panic, he takes his knife and makes some abdominal cuts hoping to leave the police believing that she was a ripper victim with the killer feeling safe in the knowledge that he could produce alibi’s for the other murders. IMO of course.

I see an option c)

It was the Ripper, but the thrill was gone. After being able fully indulge his impulses on Kelly's corpse, he'd reached a high. He tried to capture the thrill again, with Mackenzie, but it just wasn't there any more.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I see an option c)

It was the Ripper, but the thrill was gone. After being able fully indulge his impulses on Kelly's corpse, he'd reached a high. He tried to capture the thrill again, with Mackenzie, but it just wasn't there any more.

Yes, it could have been something like that. It’s another part of the case the we can never get a conclusive answer to.