Evidence of Jack The Ripper's existence

[The Good Michael]

If someone was convinced of Isenschmid's guilt, and made sure he was walking around free, why not just hire him to kill Eddowes....pretend it's the queens desire or something.

Mike

[c.d.]

Hello CD. Thanks.

My praise was most sincere. You saw something that few have seen. Yes, whoever killed Kate must have been convinced--or nearly so--of Isenschmid's guilt. And he must also have thought he would be caged permanently--no thought of being let out a year later.

I'm sure you have seen the recent research on Charles Hammond on another site? He ran the brothel at Cleveland st and was said to be violent. Research is ongoing.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

I am a bit confused here. How could Kate's killer expect Isenschmid to be blamed for her death when he was in custody at the time?

c.d.

[lynn cates]

free

Hello Michael. Thanks. Walking around free? Umm?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

phantom

Hello CD. Thanks.

Oh, no. Isenschmid would get NO blame. Only "Jack the Ripper" (or, at that point, the WC murderer) would be blamed. So the "phantom" created by Jacob's two murders and the press would get the blame.

And it would be absolutely essential that:

1. Isenschmid committed the killings.

2. He never be identified as such nor become lucid enough to confess.

If he were to, the whole story would unravel and Kate may eventually be blamed on her perpetrator.

See what I mean?

Cheers.
LC

[c.d.]

Hello Lynn,

Ok. Got it. Thanks for the clarification. But what motive do you assign to Kate's killer? Is it some personal vengeance?

c.d.

[Observer]

No, the killer of Kate had to be ABSOLUTELY certain of:

1. the identity of Polly and Annie's killer.

2. that he was safely caged.

And I believe he waited until Annie's inquest was over to act.

Your reply made my day and I'd be MORE than happy to further discuss this.

Why would Eddowes killer need to know Isenschmid killed Nichols, and Chapman? No matter who killed them, he was getting the blame for Eddowes murder anyway. More to the point, how did he find out Isenschmid murdered them?

[lynn cates]

data

Hello CD. Thanks.

Excellent question.

I think (and have thought for some time) that she had some incriminating evidence (kept safe in a tin) and used to bleed someone important.

Please consider these (admittedly circumstantial) items:

1. Most of London returned from Kent the first week of September. Why should John and Kate be different?

2. If you read John's interview, it was when returning to London that he got the Birrell pawn ticket. This is consonant with the first week of September.

3. Moreover, John admitted in his "Echo" interview that, AFTER arriving back in London, he and Kate spent many days without food and some without lodging. This observation does not lie well with a 27 September return date.

4. Sub-conclusion: John and Kate were in London for some time before the Mitre event.

5. John was NOT a well man. Debs has established that he was already suffering from the pulmonary disease that soon after claimed his life.

6. He may have been too ill to work.

7. Hence, an alternative source of income was required.

8. There were brothels--male and female--that hired touts. These people were hired to do adverts for the brothel.

9. The nobility (who used these brothels) wrote letters to their "objects of affection." For example, Summer 1889, when Lord Arthur was implicated in the Cleveland st business, his boy love, Algernon Allies was instructed to burn the letters Lord Arthur had sent him.

10. If Kate could obtain a tout card or letter, she could have "leverage" with the wealthier sort.

11. There is a story, admittedly apocryphal, about a friend of Kate's receiving money from a man. This happened about a week before she was killed.

Thought experiment: can the events of Saturday night be dovetailed to accommodate these data?

(You asked a great question and are on a roll.)

Cheers.
LC

[SirJohnFalstaff]

Hello Sir John,

If you are going to write fiction then go for it. You are certainly under no requirement to make it conform to known facts. Throw in Queen Victoria as well. After all it is fiction.

c.d.

Yeah I know.
But i want it to be plausible.
Like "The Accursed Kings" from Maurice Druon or "American Tabloid" from James Ellroy.

[Observer]

On second thoughts stay well clear of this thread Sir John

[c.d.]

Hello Lynn,

You make some interesting points but I think our good friend Occam and his sharp instrument may not agree.

The big problem I have with copy cat theories (in the sense of making it look like the work of another) is the nature of what the copy cat is required to do. Cutting a throat? Ok, I can go that far but ripping open a woman and removing her internal organs seems completely beyond the pale for someone who is not seriously deranged.

c.d.

[lynn cates]

Ockham

Hello CD. Thanks.

Not sure what William of Ockham and his dictum, "Entia non multiplicanda sunt--sine necessitate" applies here. After all, what ontological entity is being multiplied?

At any rate, I had not envisioned Kate's killer as mentally stable or virtuous.

Cheers.
LC

[SirJohnFalstaff]

Hello Lynn,

You make some interesting points but I think our good friend Occam and his sharp instrument may not agree.

The big problem I have with copy cat theories (in the sense of making it look like the work of another) is the nature of what the copy cat is required to do. Cutting a throat? Ok, I can go that far but ripping open a woman and removing her internal organs seems completely beyond the pale for someone who is not seriously deranged.

c.d.

I agree. But I'm not talking copy cat as I'm more talking about a consensus among the assassins, for shocking purposes.

This is for a work of fiction, not a real theory.

By the way, there was a man that was never caught 100 years before JtR that was nicknamed the London Monster. He practiced "piquering" which is sexual gratification through puncture of another person. While he didn't kill anyone, he had allegedly 50 victims. Lots of them where not true, since he attacked only beautiful women, and some alleged victims were more victims of vanity.

It created a bit of chaos, nothing like JtR, but nevertheless.

So, I know a lot of people point out that JtR's killing weren't sexual in motives, and I disagree. In some sick pervert and twisted way, he penetrated these women.

But I digress.

Thanks a lot for your input.

Currently reading the Keppel analysis. Very interesting.
I love the distinction he makes between Modus Operandi and signature.
He says that usually, M.O. will change, adapt, but the signature will stay the same.
He adds Tabram as a JtR victim as well, plus the C5.
This fits my scheme very well.

I'll read what this forum had to say about Keppel's analysis over the week end.

[TomTomKent]

Hello CD. Thanks.

Not sure what William of Ockham and his dictum, "Entia non multiplicanda sunt--sine necessitate" applies here. After all, what ontological entity is being multiplied?

At any rate, I had not envisioned Kate's killer as mentally stable or virtuous.

Cheers.
LC

In terms of Occams Razor the complications being multiplied would be the number of killers using a noticeable degree of savagery that stands out from the norm.

[lynn cates]

Norelco

Hello Tom. Thanks.

In which case poor old William of Ockham would be well advised to switch to an electric razor--Liz shows no signs of increased savagery. Indeed, the opposite.

Cheers.
LC

[Observer]

Kate Eddowes was blackmailing a VIP then?

I seem to remember that the Fenians were responsible for Eddowes murder.

So, if Hammond killed Eddowes, and ripped her up to make it appear that the Whitechapel fiend had murdered her, this puts the Fenians in the clear.

Although, how about a gay Irish VIP, with Fenian sympathies? He used his contacts in the Fenian movement to murder Eddowes. Hammond was used ,errr, as a go between, yes, a go between, he went between. Sorted.