Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Different Killers

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

  • Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    But clearly, Nichols and Chapman are a proper subset and do not belong with the rest.

    Nor, I fancy, does "MJK."

    Cheers.
    LC
    There is a much stronger correlation between Chapman and Eddowes than Chapman and Nichols.

    Even the coroner agreed with the medics that the wounds where done the same regardless of minor differences.
    Bona fide canonical and then some.

    Comment


    • nyet

      Hello batman. Thanks.

      "There is a much stronger correlation between Chapman and Eddowes than Chapman and Nichols."

      No, there isn't.

      Cheers.
      LC

      Comment


      • Single killer hypothesis can show peer-reviewed articles

        Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
        Hello batman. Thanks.

        "There is a much stronger correlation between Chapman and Eddowes than Chapman and Nichols."

        No, there isn't.

        Cheers.
        LC
        In everyday life we accept expert methodology. There is no reason to reject this, especially if the individuals have used it to capture other lust criminals. This man help ID Ted Bundy and Gary Ridgeway. Here is what he has to say...

        http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jip.22/pdf

        For those who don't want to spend too much time, read the SUMMARY part at the end.

        Signature
        The killer’s signature characteristics did not change, and the evidence demonstrates that the same person murdered Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes and Kelly.


        Posing
        He often left the victims’ legs splayed and their genitalia exposed in a sexually degrading manner, such as in the Tabram, Chapman, Eddowes, and Kelly murders. Each murder had some element of posing, from the arrangement of clothes, the placement of a thimble, the splaying of legs, to the arrangement of organs, intestines, and tissues. In each case a pattern of successive efforts to pose the body was obvious. These efforts to pose the body became more blatant as the series progressed. In summary, the posing indicated that the killer intentionally left his victims in sexually degrading positions to emphasize that he considered them disposable.


        Eddowes/Kelly amputation attempts
        As evidenced in the Kelly murder, the killer amputated the victim’s breasts and attempted to amputate the legs at the thigh and knee. Similar mutilations and efforts to amputate were visible in the Eddowes case. In fact, efforts to mutilate can be traced back to the Nichols and Tabram cases, as well as forward to the Kelly murder.


        Crime Statistics
        As shown by the HITS analysis, the signature characteristics observed in the murders of Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly are extremely rare.


        Harvester
        Jack the Ripper progressed from multiple stabbings in the Tabram case, to mutilation in the Nichols case, and the harvesting of organs in the Chapman, Eddowes, and Kelly cases.


        Picquerism/No sexual activity
        While there was no evidence of the primary mechanisms of sexual activity, there was an overriding sexual nature as evidenced in the signature characteristic of picquerism. Martha Tabram, Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes, and Mary Jane Kelly were all victims of the same killer and showed characteristics unique to this killer’s signature, as well as to his MO.

        Lynn,
        it is so rare for this to happen by the hand of one person, that to suggest more, is to add unprecidented notions that don't even happen until the 20th century and in different counties/counties. There is quite simply no reason to try to add something almost impossibly unique to something that is already highly unique - a picquerist lust killer of prostitutes.
        Last edited by Batman; 03-28-2015, 07:59 AM.
        Bona fide canonical and then some.

        Comment


        • "Le Bon David"

          Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
          Hello John. Thanks.

          Interesting observation. However, the media influence today is far different from then.

          Incidentally, should Tom's thesis prove true and many of the WCM were done by a strong armed bully, I'd have no problem. But clearly, Nichols and Chapman are a proper subset and do not belong with the rest.

          Nor, I fancy, does "MJK."

          Cheers.
          LC
          Hello Lynn,

          Regarding Nichols and Chapman. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the distinguishing factors are the bruising and swollen tongues (suggestion that they were either strangled or suffocated) and the parallel cuts.

          Firstly, I would accept that there are no obvious signs that any of the other victims were strangled or suffocated, but I wouldn't regard this factor of being of any great consequence. Clearly, this is the means by which Polly and Annie's killer was able to quickly immobilize them. However, that suggests that such an approach formed part of the killer's MO- simply a means to an end-and I see no reason why a serial killer might not adapt this strategy. After all, Stride, Eddowes and Kelly were all quickly immobilized, like Nichols and Chapman, and many factors could have influenced the means by which the killer achieved this, i.e. capriciousness, type of victim and environmental factors (Dutfield's Yard was both dark and narrow, which would have impacted on the killer's ability to effectively manoeuvre).

          Secondly, the parallel cuts that were apparent in the murders of Annie and Polly might have been accidental. Even if they were not, there is no reason to suppose that the killer would have felt the need to reproduce such cuts in any subsequent attacks. Even if we suppose that the cuts were applied whilst the killer's mind was in a disassociated state, i.e. the consequence of insane automatism- for which we have no evidence- I don't see how that entitles us to conclude that the killer would be destined, by necessity, to repeat such acts. In fact, I would have thought that the reverse would be true; that an insane person is likely to be less predictable.

          In respect of the medical skill demonstrated by the killer, Dr Phillips clearly felt that Chapman murder indicated a greater degree of surgical skill than Eddowes. However, even in respect of Eddowes, Drs Brown and Phillips did not rule out the possibility that the killer had surgical ability. According to a report by Swanson the aforementioned doctors opined that, "...the murder could have been committed by a person who had been a hunter, a butcher, a slaughterman as well as a student in surgery or a properly qualified surgeon."

          Interestingly, one of the medical experts commissioned by Trevor Marriott was of the opinion that the removal of Eddowes' kidney demonstrated a greater degree of medical knowledge that the removal of Chapman's uterus: see Marriott (2013). I consider this to be of particular significance when you consider that it was the removal of Chapman's uterus that seemed to create the greatest impression on Dr Phillips.

          Perhaps in relation to the likelihood of the killer repeating the parallel cuts and other behaviour, in other words, that we can successfully use the past as a means of predicting the future, I should adopt this argument: "It is impossible, therefore, that any arguments from experience can prove this resemblance of the past to the future; since all these arguments are founded on the supposition of that resemblance. Let the course of things be allowed hitherto ever so regular; that alone, without some new argument or inference, proves not that, for the future, it will continue so." (David Hume, 1737)

          But, then again, if I did, I suppose I would damn all my arguments as well!
          Last edited by John G; 03-28-2015, 08:22 AM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by John G View Post

            Interestingly, one of the medical experts commissioned by Trevor Marriott was of the opinion that the removal of Eddowes' kidney demonstrated a greater degree of medical knowledge that the removal of Chapman's uterus: see Marriott (2013). I consider this to be of particular significance when you consider that it was the removal of Chapman's uterus that seemed to create the greatest impression on Dr Phillips.
            The suggestion being that the organs were removed at the two different mortuaries, by two different people, using two different methods of extraction !

            www.trevormarriott.co.uk

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
              The suggestion being that the organs were removed at the two different mortuaries, by two different people, using two different methods of extraction !

              www.trevormarriott.co.uk
              Hello Trevor,

              Yes, I know, I've read your book! However, there is no proof that the organs were removed at the mortuary and, if not, the argument relating to the medical skill demonstrated by the killer still holds. However, if your supposition is correct, and I accept that this is also the opinion of the medical experts you commissioned, then there is no need to disqualify Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes or Kelly being murdered by the same individual; at least not on the ground of surgical skill demonstrated. Therefore, if anything, your conclusions strengthen, not weaken, the single killer hypothesis.
              Last edited by John G; 03-28-2015, 08:14 AM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by John G View Post
                Hello Trevor,

                Yes, I know, I've read your book! However, there is no proof that the organs were removed at the mortuary and, if not, the argument relating to the medical skill demonstrated by the killer still holds. However, if your supposition is correct, and I accept that this is also the opinion of the medical experts you commissioned, then there is no need to disqualify Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes or Kelly being murdered by the same individual; at least not on the ground of surgical skill demonstrated. Therefore, if anything, your conclusions strengthen, not weaken, the single killer hypothesis.
                Well I have to disagree my three for the same killer are Chapman, Eddowes and Nichols.

                www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                Comment


                • Originally posted by John G View Post
                  What I do know, however, is that no two of these crimes are absolutely identical- they all have their differences and similarities- and even if they were that in itself doesn't necessarily imply a single killer. So I suppose in the end it comes down to this one simple question: just how much coincidence are you prepared to accept?
                  Hi John,

                  What you and others seem to be sidestepping is that there were in fact 2 murders within the Canonical murders that by character and execution defy an alternate killer scenario....which is what the debate is about here.

                  Polly and Annie. The way they met their killer is identical...both women were soliciting strangers for sex to earn their doss when they met their killer...both women were subdued in the same manner and with similar silence, both women had their throats cut twice and were nearly decapitated..(the double cut being unique involving very few Whitechapel murder victims), both victims were placed on their backs, legs akimbo and bent, both women suffered post mortem wounds that were focussed on the abdomen, and both women were killed within a 2 week period. And both were dispatched by someone the officials felt had knowledge and skills when it came to cutting. It is why they actively sought out people with specific knowledge skills relating to medical practices.

                  There are no other murders within that Unsolved Murders file that match each other so succinctly.

                  The explanations required to include additional murders with this killer are purely speculative and often have no basis in the known and accepted facts...like an interruption that prevented further damage to Stride..... even though there is no such event revealed within the evidence, the facial wounds on Kate....assumed to be a result of the supposed frustration with his botched attempt on Liz....again, without any supporting evidence, the evolution of a stabber to a slicer within a few short weeks...again, without any evidence support and with plenty of serial killer speculation, and a new venue and new level of carnage assumed to be the result of haphazardly finding a victim indoors to kill and revelling in that privacy...when its clear that a killer could have killed at anytime indoors if it had been his choice, as did the man who made Torsos.

                  What Lynn, myself and others would like to see happen in these discussions..if I may speak for you Lynn.... is a reality check when making these sorts of assumptions, for example....is the suggestion that I am making supported by any known physical evidence?

                  Known physical evidence isn't using serial killer profiles to explain the differences here, nor is it supposing that things happened even though there is no trace of them happening, its what happened...period.

                  What happened here is that with other than Polly and Annie, almost all the other victims within the Unsolved File were killed in different circumstances, with different objectives and almost certainly with a variety of different weapons.

                  Why people insist on using guesses versus what evidence there is has always been beyond me, but I suppose the ghouls and goblins in this area of study need to believe in a monster to explain all the disparate facts.

                  Monsters are rare, killing for sport or pleasure is rare...even today, but people are killed daily in a variety of heartless manners by cold calculating people.

                  Motivation is everything, and judging by the evidence, Id say Liz Stride was killed intentionally for some reason, Kate was killed intentionally for some other reason, and Mary was killed by someone she knew intimately.

                  Cheers
                  Michael Richards

                  Comment


                  • "What Lynn, myself and others would like to see happen in these discussions..if I may speak for you Lynn.... is a reality check when making these sorts of assumptions, for example....is the suggestion that I am making supported by any known physical evidence?"

                    Well said, Michael. I would like to see that too. Now does that reality check apply to you and Lynn as well or is it just the rest of us?

                    Oh, and there is something else I would like to see and that would be some posters refrain from making laughable, condescending statements.

                    c.d.

                    Comment


                    • Hello Michael,

                      Welcome back to the discussion. To address some of your points. Firstly, we do not know how any of the victims met their killer. Polly and Annie may have been soliciting but then so may Smith, Tabram, Stride, Eddowes and Kelly.

                      Secondly, in respect of subduing the victims with "similar silence". In this regard I would say Stride's killer was the most successful, and certainly the most audacious; considering the presence of the club, Fanny Mortimer, Mrs D in the kitchen with the window open, and the fact that Stride was most likely very relaxed at the time her killer struck, completely oblivious to the fate that awaited her.

                      Thirdly, both Eddowes and Kelly were also nearly decapitated. In fact Kelly's neck mutilations were, arguably, more extensive then either Nichols or Chapman.

                      Fourthly, Stride, Eddowes and Kelly also had their throats cut whilst on or close to the ground. In fact, in this respect, Stride's killer arguably exhibited the greatest amount of skill in avoiding arterial spray.

                      Fifthly, we cannot assume because Kelly was killed indoors that she was murdered by a different killer. Serial killers are not that predictable; Sutcliffe killed one of his victims indoors, and attempted to kill another in a quiet, rural location.

                      Sixthly, we can only speculate as to what the killer's objectives were. Moreover, the type of weapons used is again a matter of pure speculation. In any event, why would you assume that the killer would always be predisposed to use the same type of knife? The fact that he appears to have done so on two occasions proves nothing. To quote once again from "Le Bon David": " No amount of observations of white swans can allow the inference that all swans are white..." As I've noted before, serial killers can sometimes be very unpredictable in their habits:http://www.jaapl.org/content/38/2/239.full.pdf

                      Seventhly, as I noted in my earlier post we do not know how much surgical skill the killer of any of the victims had. Drs Brown and Phillips wouldn't rule out the possibility that Eddowes had been killed by a "properly qualified surgeon." And Trevor Marriott's experts were of the opinion that Eddowes' killer demonstrated at least as much skill as Chapman's; so much so, in fact, that they opined that the organs must have been removed elsewhere, i.e. the mortuary. And, if this is the case, it largely negates the argument that the killer of any of the C5 victims plus Tabram, Smith... exhibited any degree of surgical/anatomical knowledge whatsoever.

                      Eightly, we do not know what objectives of any of the killer of any of the victims happened to be; that is a matter of speculation. However, I'm somewhat perplexed by your argument that Stride and Eddowes were "killed intentionally for some reason." Are you implying that Nichols and Chapman were killed accidentally? If so, that is also wildly speculative.
                      Last edited by John G; 03-28-2015, 10:02 AM.

                      Comment


                      • There is zero evidence for multiple lust murders of the very rare type - Picquerism, doing this. London 1888 is not a common set of murders at all.
                        Bona fide canonical and then some.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                          There is zero evidence for multiple lust murders of the very rare type - Picquerism, doing this. London 1888 is not a common set of murders at all.
                          Hello Batman,

                          I don't know if you've read Tom Westcott's excellent book, The Bank Holiday Murders. In a well argued thesis, he casts serious doubt on whether Smith was, in actual fact, attacked by a gang rather than an individual (Keppel et al., based their conclusions on the understanding that she was assaulted by a gang). And isn't the fact that she had an object inserted in her clear evidence of picquerism? Of Course, her neck wasn't targeted, but then neither was Tabram's. Perhaps she should seriously be considered as a JtR victim.
                          Last edited by John G; 03-28-2015, 10:38 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by John G View Post
                            Hello Batman,

                            I don't know if you've read Tom Westcott's excellent book, The Bank Holiday Murders. In a well argued thesis, he casts serious doubt on whether Smith was, in actual fact, attacked by a gang rather than an individual (Keppel et al., based their conclusions on the understanding that she was assaulted by a gang). And, isn't the fact that she had an object inserted in her clear evidence of picquerism? Of Course, her neck wasn't targeted, but then neither was Tabram's. Perhaps she should seriously be considered as a JtR victim.
                            Yes. As should Ada Wilson.

                            Both Smith and Tabram happened near the geoprofile hot zone.

                            Like I said before and this has caused uproar, is that George Chapman is known to have worked there a few years after.
                            Bona fide canonical and then some.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Batman View Post
                              Yes. As should Ada Wilson.

                              Both Smith and Tabram happened near the geoprofile hot zone.

                              Like I said before and this has caused uproar, is that George Chapman is known to have worked there a few years after.
                              When are you going to stop banging on about this geoprofile crap. There is no supporting evidence to suggest the killer or killers lived anywhere near Whitechapel.

                              If there were more than one killer and one of them simply came into Whitechapel to kill then made his way out again you profiling is blown out of the water as it is even if there were just one killer who came into Whitechapel to kill and then left.

                              You might be better served sticking a pin in the runners and rider for The Grand National Horse race next week and trying to pick the winner !

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
                                When are you going to stop banging on about this geoprofile crap.

                                You might be better served sticking a pin in the runners and rider for The Grand National Horse race next week and trying to pick the winner !

                                www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                                Surprise!

                                Yes let's just ignore that Chapman thing with yet another coincidence card.

                                You are trying to dismiss a successful technique without any objection from the professional literature.

                                Here is an easy to understand article about how it has succeeded.

                                http://www.wired.co.uk/magazine/arch...murder/viewall

                                This is from people who solve serial crimes, Trevor. Do you have any respect for their insight? Is it all crap too?

                                P.S, adding more murderers increases the complexity of the arguments that you need to explain all the evidence. The odds in your model are the wrong way around. Read Keppel on rareness.
                                Last edited by Batman; 03-28-2015, 11:10 AM. Reason: evidence for geoprofiling
                                Bona fide canonical and then some.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X