Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Different Killers

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Natasha View Post
    It's a possibility I guess. I wonder weather she was right handed or left. Seeing as the box was in her left hand and there was no mention of blood on that hand, and there was blood on her right hand, I would say she was right handed.
    I assume that having been attacked she used her dominant hand, the right hand to clutch at her throat. So saying that I would have thought that if they were up her sleeve, might they have been up her right sleeve.
    But surely, a right-handed person would place the package using their dominant hand, up the left sleeve?
    Right handed people wear their watch on the left wrist, and men put their wallet in their left inside breast pocket.

    Actually, I think the blood on her right wrist was there because PC Lamb grasped her hand to find a pulse, after touching the blood in the yard to see if it had congealed, transferring the blood.
    Regards, Jon S.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
      But surely, a right-handed person would place the package using their dominant hand, up the left sleeve?
      Right handed people wear their watch on the left wrist, and men put their wallet in their left inside breast pocket.

      Actually, I think the blood on her right wrist was there because PC Lamb grasped her hand to find a pulse, after touching the blood in the yard to see if it had congealed, transferring the blood.
      That does make sense I'm such an idiot

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Natasha View Post
        Hi All

        I have mentioned in another thread, that they may have been placed in her hand after she was killed. The cachous were held between the fore finger and the thumb, quite a strange way to hold on to something especially just after having been attacked.

        Also they were not only wrapped in tissue paper. They were in a box and the box was wrapped in tissue paper.
        I think I've posted in the cachou thread, or somewhere, previously that I find it hard to believe the cachous weren't placed in her hand postmortem. Especially if they were indeed grasped by her fingers like that. Just incredibly unlikely that was the result of any kind of spasm.

        I know hair, leaves and all sorts have been found in the clenched hands of drowning & violent attack victims, but a box isn't hair or leaves, and if this pincer-grip is correct it adds to my skepticism re her somehow holding on.

        Sorry if that's off track.

        John G, I'll have to go back and look at the murder cases involving cut throats, but iirc there were a few where the head was nearly severed. Hopefully I'll get some time soon to sit down to that site and work up a few rough stats. It was pretty eye-opening, for me at least.

        Another thing I found was a huge lack of throat slashings and the like, coming from Whitechapel. In fact, I'm pretty sure I found zero or close to it, for the time period in question 86-91). Most crimes prosecuted were robberies, forgeries, scams pulled, that sort of thing. But as I don't know if cases from there all went through the Old Bailey or not, and I am also unaware of exactly how many unsolved throat slashings (attempted or actual murders) happened, I can't yet comment on what this proves except that none were prosecuted in that particular court, whereas plenty of other types of crime from Whitechapel (and Spitalfields) were.

        So, it seems (at this stage, hehe) that while cut throats were pretty common, the vast majority were DV cases. Not many involved deep cuts, but a few murders did. And that sort of crime was - ironically - quite rare in Whitechapel/Spitalfields (I say this tentatively, for lack of knowledge as mentioned above).

        So yeah, it's not like cases of deep throat slashes (of any number) -and/or- postmortem mutilation were ten a penny around there. If you don't count 'the Autumn of terror' that is. Plus more sparsely a year or two either side.
        Last edited by Ausgirl; 03-04-2015, 10:16 PM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Batman View Post
          Here is another obvious reason why Eddowes and Stride are linked and why Eddowes is randomly selected by JtR.

          If you take the time of Stride's death and then walk towards Mitre Square direction at a pace which isn't making you stand out, would it just so happen that there would be a convergence between that route and a certain prostitute called Eddowes being released from the drunk tank? I think yes and this convergence is evidence that someone leaving Dutfield's yard would have randomly met with Eddowes within a short time of her getting out of the drunk tank. He didn't plan to meet her. She was just there on his route.

          If it was the case that they would have to race flat out to meet them or circle blocks a few times to make up for the time gap, that would be interesting but from what I know the timing is bang on for someone leaving Dutfield's yard and is another reason why the investigators linked their deaths.
          But if you had killed Stride in a busy area and had perhaps been disturbed, and with the likelihood of someone seeing you who you hadn't seen, you would want to get off the streets as quick as possible not go looking for another victim.

          www.trevormarriott.co.uk

          Comment


          • George's yard where Tabram was killed and around the corner is where emma smith was attacked. This is within the hot zone from where the murders extend out from.

            If you where to draw circles whose diameters intersect with each murder you will find that the radiation outwards is contained mostly within Whitechapel but Eddowes slightly outside in city jurisdiction. If the killer wanted to keep away from the hot zone it would make sense to travel to a radial point where he had not murdered before. Hence the lower western direction where he met Eddowes, which is bang on timing for someone leaving Dutfield's yard at the time Stride was killed. He simply wasn't going to go home just yet. We follow that lead with the Goulston St apron.
            Bona fide canonical and then some.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by c.d. View Post
              Question - I think this might have been addressed before but if Liz were meeting someone could she have gone into the club to wait or was that against policy? I mean it is a cold night, it is late and she is a single woman in a bad neighborhood. Wouldn't the gentlemanly thing to do be to tell her to meet him inside?

              c.d.
              Hello C.d.,

              Not sure of club policy but meeting someone inside the club just doesn't feel right to me, i.e it doesn't seem consistent with her being subsequently murdered.

              Thus, if she did, indeed, meet her killer at the club I think we can agree that this would be a domestic murder, not JtR. But ordinary people, unlike serial killers, don't usually kill on a whim or for no logical reason. I therefore feel there would have to have been some sort of argument or heated discussion immediately prior to her death, which prompted her killer to act in the way that he did. After all, Stride would have gone to the club voluntarily based upon this scenario so she clearly wasn't expecting to be murdered, and obviously wouldn't have regarded the person she was arranging to me as representing a serious threat.

              Of course, she could have been lured into a trap, but that feels all wrong. Surely there would have been far better venues for that than outside the club, and definitely a better venues than inside the club.

              The difficulty is, if there was an argument or heated discussion, i.e. because Stride was meeting a secret lover and wanted to end the relationship, then why wasn't this heard by club members assuming it took place inside the club? After all, they claimed they would have heard a dispute even if it had taken place outside of the club.

              I suppose she could have met someone inside the club, they had a brief discussion, not heated, he then followed her out and killed her. However, that feels all wrong to me; I can't see that it's likely that someone would have been prompted to take such an extreme, reckless step following a brief, civilized discussion.

              And then there is the problem of the cachous. Wouldn't she have been likely to have taken them out when feeling reasonably relaxed? In other words, not just after having had a stressful, heated argument/discussion. Of course, that applies whether such an argument took place inside or outside of the club.

              Finally, could she have gone to the club on business, i.e. to repay a debt. Possibly, but in this scenario I can't see her killer murdering her in such a risky location, and on impulse, over a simple money dispute. Crime of passion maybe; business transaction, almost certainly not.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                But if you had killed Stride in a busy area and had perhaps been disturbed, and with the likelihood of someone seeing you who you hadn't seen, you would want to get off the streets as quick as possible not go looking for another victim.

                www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                Hi Trevor, well perhaps you would if you were a well-balanced person; perhaps not if you were a deranged serial killer who couldn't control your impulses! Moreover, I don't think, Berner Street was particularly busy. Fanny Mortimer, for instance, saw just one person walk by, Leon Goldstein, over a period of around 15 minutes. And when Diemshitz, Kozebrodsky and Eagle ran off in opposite directions shouting "police" and "murder" only one member of the public seemed to have responded: Edward Spooner. This seems to confirm Dr Philips' observations at the inquest, that this wasn't the sort of neighbourhood where people were likely to respond to cries for help.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                  George's yard where Tabram was killed and around the corner is where emma smith was attacked. This is within the hot zone from where the murders extend out from.

                  If you where to draw circles whose diameters intersect with each murder you will find that the radiation outwards is contained mostly within Whitechapel but Eddowes slightly outside in city jurisdiction. If the killer wanted to keep away from the hot zone it would make sense to travel to a radial point where he had not murdered before. Hence the lower western direction where he met Eddowes, which is bang on timing for someone leaving Dutfield's yard at the time Stride was killed. He simply wasn't going to go home just yet. We follow that lead with the Goulston St apron.
                  In the Whitechapel Murders. Drawing circles, crosses on maps, and attempts at profiling are about as much use as a chocolate teapot

                  www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                    In the Whitechapel Murders. Drawing circles, crosses on maps, and attempts at profiling are about as much use as a chocolate teapot

                    www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                    The Whitechapel Murders geoprofiling is the foundation upon which all geoprofiling has been adapted from, especially here because the killer would not have been forensically aware of it.

                    For example do you know which suspect worked in George's Yard shortly after the murders?
                    Bona fide canonical and then some.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by John G View Post
                      Hi Trevor, well perhaps you would if you were a well-balanced person; perhaps not if you were a deranged serial killer who couldn't control your impulses! Moreover, I don't think, Berner Street was particularly busy. Fanny Mortimer, for instance, saw just one person walk by, Leon Goldstein, over a period of around 15 minutes. And when Diemshitz, Kozebrodsky and Eagle ran off in opposite directions shouting "police" and "murder" only one member of the public seemed to have responded: Edward Spooner. This seems to confirm Dr Philips' observations at the inquest, that this wasn't the sort of neighbourhood where people were likely to respond to cries for help.
                      You use this term deranged but was this killer deranged I have to agree with you. Personally though I don't subscribe to one singular killer for all the victims.

                      If the killer was deranged and certainly his actions in killing and mutilating Chapman, Tabram, Nicholls and Eddowes suggest that. But would a deranged killer, killing quickly be able to suddenly come back to reality,calm down sufficiently enough and be able to remove organs, with what has been described as some anatomical knowledge,in double quick time in almost total darkness?

                      Try not to fall into the trap of believing all that has been written about these murders. In the first instance look at each one individually and not collectively you get a much clearer picture that way. Ignore the Canonical five as being the only victims of this killer or killers. And when you go back and look at the C5 you can see that two of those were not killed by the same hand.

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                        The Whitechapel Murders geoprofiling is the foundation upon which all geoprofiling has been adapted from, especially here because the killer would not have been forensically aware of it.

                        For example do you know which suspect worked in George's Yard shortly after the murders?
                        Just because one of the persons of interest lives or works in the area that does not add to the evidence against them. This is one thing that annoys me is suspects coming out of the woodwork based solely on the fact that they lived or worked in the area where the killings took place, or they had relations living in Whitechapel who they visited.

                        Thousands of males who could have been the killer or killers lived in Whitechapel or in close proximity to Whitechapel. Any one of those could have been the killer or killers. Likewise there is distinct possibility that the killer did not live or work in this area but came to Whitechapel to kill and then left.

                        Take the blinkers off !

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                          Try not to fall into the trap of believing all that has been written about these murders. In the first instance look at each one individually and not collectively you get a much clearer picture that way. Ignore the Canonical five as being the only victims of this killer or killers. And when you go back and look at the C5 you can see that two of those were not killed by the same hand.

                          www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                          In the annuals of crime there is no precedence, zero, for the multi lust killer hypothesis being presented here.

                          In the annuals of crime there is tons of precedence, hundreds, for the single lust killer hypothesis.
                          Bona fide canonical and then some.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                            In the annuals of crime there is no precedence, zero, for the multi lust killer hypothesis being presented here.

                            In the annuals of crime there is tons of precedence, hundreds, for the single lust killer hypothesis.
                            Statistics dont solve crimes !

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                              Just because one of the persons of interest lives or works in the area that does not add to the evidence against them. This is one thing that annoys me is suspects coming out of the woodwork based solely on the fact that they lived or worked in the area where the killings took place, or they had relations living in Whitechapel who they visited.

                              Thousands of males who could have been the killer or killers lived in Whitechapel or in close proximity to Whitechapel. Any one of those could have been the killer or killers. Likewise there is distinct possibility that the killer did not live or work in this area but came to Whitechapel to kill and then left.

                              Take the blinkers off !

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                              Sorry Trevor but in any modern case the geoprofiling here would have everyone in that area DNA tested.

                              You have the typical geoprofiling radial signature here that modern investigators hope to find. Yet you ignore it for an outside force. Go figure.
                              Bona fide canonical and then some.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                                Statistics dont solve crimes !
                                Obviously you haven't experienced court cases where forensics uses them constantly. Why not just open any undergraduate book on forensics and reada page with the math on it without skipping over it.

                                http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_statistics

                                I have no clue how someone in your profession can be making the statements you are.
                                Bona fide canonical and then some.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X