Tweet
yup
Hello Chris.
Bingo!
Cheers.
LC
Hello Chris.
Bingo!
Cheers.
LC
-
-
But it is intriguing that BS Man is almost identical in description to the man Marshall saw with Stride an hour earlier. Marshall described the man`s hat as something that a sailor would wear. Lawende would describe the man he saw as having the appearance of a sailor.Originally posted by Wickerman View PostComment
-
Only one of the men was giving Stride grief.Originally posted by chrismasonic View Post
But yes, it`s more reasonable to assume that BS Man killed Stride (in my opinion). Although, the police did accept that there was enough time for another person to enter the scene after BS Man (especially if Stride was soliciting for trade)Comment
-
using the method described the arterial blood is going to be suppressed by the sleeve of the assailant...Comment
-
But won`t some blood run down the front of the victim.Originally posted by chrismasonic View Post
Dr Llewellyn noted such in the case of Nichols.Comment
-
I don't think so...forearm of the hand over the mouth arm is going to stop it...i'm confident in the methodComment
-
There is overwhelming pathology and crime scene evidence that they where killed while on their backs from the way blood was found pooled including frontal bruising. In Chapman's case blood had even sprayed a few inches from above the ground onto the fence.
Stride was even seen thrown down to the ground by the witness Schwartz.
Rear attacks never happened by JtR or else more evidence of blood down neck and front would be present.Bona fide canonical and then some.Comment
-
I think the pathology, crime scene evidence and documentation used in 1888is crude and untrustworthy...and the surviving evidence does not provide you with any of them details...all you have is statements to interpret as you will...
you do not have the authority to say something never happened...Comment
-
I can imagine Jack getting ready to strike, knife poised in mid air when suddenly the victim turns..."um....excuse me, could you move just a little bit to your left, I like to be consistent with all my knife cuts."
c.d.Comment
-
Not really. By the late 1800s science was considerably more advanced, especially since the biological revolution of Darwin in 1859. During the Eddowes pathology examination there was a facility in place to chemically test for poisons. Only a few years later fingerprints where used to convict.Bona fide canonical and then some.Comment
-
And you're right. Even if we have an accurate idea of the victimology, which can never be confirmed, we are still missing most of the the things we need to compare it to. And even if we weren't there are still big gaping holes.Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
It's like the blind men and the elephant. You feel what's in front of you, I'll do the same. The first to identify the bit they have, shout it out and we'll see if we can put together the whole. You look at facts the evidence, I'll look at behavior and emotion. At some point hopefully we get an elephant. But in the mean time, we're going to get a tree, a rope, a wall... but hopefully eventually an elephant.
Victimology may not be a tool you can use. But I can. Maybe. Who knows. Something might stick, so to speak.The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.Comment
-
i'm sorry...I do not agree
advanced science in 1888 is limited and basic by todays knowledge and standards...Comment
-
I disagree because the knowledge curve shoots through the roof around this time period. Post civil war surgery had entered us into the realm of trying to achieve kidney transplants which succeeded by the end of the century.Originally posted by chrismasonic View Post
Besides its really obvious that the lack of blood down their front or neck and blood pooling suggested to investigators they where killed while down without much of a struggle (except MJK). Modern investigation suggests strangulation occurred and with this I agree that there was some.
Eddowes wounds clearly form the position of the killer on her right side while on the ground and who stays there throughout due to locations of removed organs and knife angles.
Stride is quite simply a ripper victim in a crime that was disturbed, likely by Schwartz whose testimony describes the woman been thrown down.
No need to add the additional complexity of another killer.Last edited by Batman; 02-17-2015, 11:20 AM.Bona fide canonical and then some.Comment
-
There's every need according to the usual suspects. There have already been viable explanations offered for the disparity in skill between Chapman & Eddowes' disembowelments. Ripper could've been physically or mentally impaired (be it alcohol or illness), he could've been on a buzz after his close call with Stride, or much likelier than the murderer struggled with Eddowes' various undergarments. Something as simple as that can justify why the post-mortem signature wasn't as clean as before, but now we've got another Ripper on the scene and we haven't got done with the first one yet!Originally posted by Batman View Post
And for all the talk of Eddowes' mutilations being unskilled, it's not exactly child's play to remove two internal organs from a body, in the dark, within a few minutes whilst looking over your shoulder for passers-by.Comment
-
Both Chapman and Eddowes where murdered while lying down. Their necks slashed the same way.
Like Chapman, Eddowes intestines where thrown over her shoulder. Chapman's abdominal opening was done in pieces like MJK because he had more time. Eddowes appears done more quickly like in Nichols. All the women have their legs bent at the knees but only Eddowes right leg is.
I still don't see the need for more complexity by adding more murderers. You also need more bodies too.Bona fide canonical and then some.Comment
Comment