'the biggest blunder in the search for Jack the Ripper'

[Monty]

To state that the police of today are far more intelligent than they were in 1888 is quite false in my opinion Phil.

I cite Trevor.

Your post states personal opinion, which is fine, however it lacks proof and motive. It also leans away from probability.

You yourself freely admit there is no motive for Halse to act in such a way. There is for the murderer.

And the fact Halse was in the presence of two others at the time Eddowes was murdered takes him out of the killer equation.

As much as it frustrates you, the likelihood Halse took the apron piece, in view of Watkins, Harvey and others is very remote.

Monty

[Phil Carter]

Hello all,

Pratt and McLean here.

( That will confuse a few of the musically ignorant ones and make them google frantically)

Lets just get some facts right here shall me?

1. There is no proof of link between the rag and the writing.
2. There is no proof of link between the writing and the killer.
3. ditto the killer and the transportation of the rag
4. Ditto the rag and WHEN it was ripped from the other piece
5. ditto the transportation of the kidney and the rag use thereof.
6. Ditto that Eddowes was soliciting
7. That the killer was seen by a witness
8. That Eddowes DIDNT visit Goulston St before Mitre Square.
9. That the killer wasnt hiding in a dark recess BEFORE Eddowes entered the square.
(just because a pc didnt see anyone previously doesnt mean the ßuare was empty)
10. ditto the rag was placed between 2.20 and 2.55
11. Ditto the rag was placed between 1.45 and 2.20
12. The writing wasnt there from much earlier than the time of murder
13. Ditto the writing was done after 1.45 am
14. The police told the truth( Long, Halse) in their statements
15 the police lied in their statements

There is NO proof EITHER WAY on any of the above points. So given that, we come down to individual interpretation and likelyhood. We simply CANNOT just close our eyes to many possibilities within this murder case. The variables are too many.
BECAUSE of lack of certainty. Example- and I dont mean this is my idea- but its an example-
killer was a person hiding in MS. A policeman actually sees him and runs away frightened. Said pc lies at inquest. Other policemen cover for him to sotect the good name of the force.

Now thats a wild example- but it is possible. Its unlikely- its a cert for a conspiration theory and its very incredible. BUT- its possible.

Grven ALL possibilities, keeping an open mind is essential- AS LONG AS it isnt made up by introducing false possibilities- like an escaped gorilla being introduced into the scenario.

The blinkered ones wont want to accept open variants and stick to their most likely turn of events that concetes their own favourite suspect or timeline/vision. Some will argue vehemently that NOTHING must change at all from what was theorised 124 years ago.

Finally- here's a goodie. It is often pointed out thjt the police did the best they could given the period they worked - the LVP- and the tools at their disposal.
Policemen and Detectives are far more intelligent today than then, because they have greater knowledge of people, crime and criminal behaviour. Whats good for the goose is etc.

When I said 'had he not been a policeman, Halse would have means and opportniity to have transported the rag, because he was the ONLY KNOWN person in all places at convenient times' I got pilloried for doing all sorts of things to the good record of a policeman. The only lack was motive (known motive) I said.
OK- NAME ONE person known to be in the area who had the means and opportunity to have taken the rag to Goulstone Street? There isnt one- so it is assumed the killer did- you know the namelesr and faceless one- who soon is GIVEN a name (Jack the Ripper) And even in some high ranking policemens eyes a religion, a mental condition, and even an escape route from capture ( asylum). Or he is ' KNOWN' to have killed hinself and the owner of the story refuses to tell us why or who or any detail correctly and 'destroys all his papers'...
And saying Halse, who was actually there, with all opportunity, is not possible, and is so 'out there' people prefer to believe MADE UP images and lay convenient names to fit the 'image' of the killer! (who they cant even show was within 5 miles of the place on that night) is amazing.
Yet Halse a transporter of the rag? Sacred sanctity lost!

I dont know if Halse, or the police or anyone was involved in any way, i just dont know, but I refuse to accept the tripe we have been served and refuse to ignore possibilities that go against the grain. Its not conspiratorial. Its simply keeging an open mind.


Jrouble is- that irks. No one can name JTR. No one. But 'Jack the Ripper' this master fiend- is a maf up name and a made up image. And I'll give you no prizes for who it was that ENCOURAGED the promotion of that image! From murder 1 to the last memoir or jotting of pen. The police.

Ever wondered why? To some its obvious. But that irks the 'nothing was wrong and nothing must change' brigade.

All together now!- ahhhhhhh.

Or 'heyyyyyy' as The Fonz would say..open armed. (aod open minded)

best wishes

Phil

[Simon Wood]

Hi Hunter,

Unfortunately a want of evidence works both ways.

It hasn't been proved by anybody that "the Ripper" did take any organs. Because the idea fits in with his alleged lightning surgical skills it has merely been assumed.

When was it first discovered that one of Eddowes' kidneys was missing?

Regards,

Simon

[moonbegger]

Evening All

"And it hasn't been proved by anybody that he didn't take the organs. As I've said before I'm more than willing to debate you on that subject on these or the other boards any time you wish... and you can bring all of the 'experts' you want. All I need is the evidence"

Whats this [ Gunfight at the casebook corral ]

" Your only suppose to blow the bloody doors off "

moonbegger.

[mariab]

Hi Maria,
When I cut on animals they are already dead. The circulatory system is no longer functioning.

I simply wondered if you had any experience with finishing off a deer or something. And for the record, I would NEVER hurt an animal – unless lost in the woods and starving. I didn't even (seriously) hurt my cat when he got bonkers and attacked me a few times.

I doubt Elizabeth Stride's killer got much - if any - blood on his hand or knife. I think Tom has a valid point. The cut was swift and clean. If he had stabbed her in the throat (which is what usually happened in other murders of this type) and dragged the knife across using the point, it might be a different story. Whoever killed Stride and Eddowes knew exactly how to kill with a knife effectively - down to even following the edge of the neckerchief instead of haphazardly cutting through it and causing an impediment.
He also didn't just cut across the front of the throat, which might only sever the windpipe. He reached around under the left ear to make sure the carotid artery was cut in both cases. And this was not by accident but by design.

I hear what you're saying. And I was thinking, if the perp who did the C5 also did Tabram, it's a possibility that he did a few animals in between and "honed his skills", so to say.

[Hunter]

I have to agree with Trevor here. It seems what Hunter is suggesting - and please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you - is that the killer spent his valuable time cutting off this bulky apron piece (when many more suitable rags were literally lying at his finger tips) in order to wrap these tiny organs so that he could carry them as far as the middle of Goulston Street, where he lingers more and transfers the organs to another container and tosses the apron. Why didn't he just use this more suitable container while in Goulston Street? Or one of the smaller rags?

It would take no more time to whack off a piece of the apron than it would to scrounge around for some rags that were likely in her pockets anyway. He had probably aready cut the apron up the middle when he ripped through her clothes. He only had to cut the string.

In a fast moving situation like this, the apron (which was readily visible and on the outside of her garments) would have been the easiest thing to get at quickly. He had already cut the strings to her pockets and there is no telling where they ended up.

[Hunter]

I'd be interested to hear what Hunter would say to this, since he's got some experience with, well, venison.

Hi Maria,

When I cut on animals they are already dead. The circulatory system is no longer functioning. However, I do bow hunt, which requires a well placed shot in the heart-lung area of the deer with very sharp broadheads. Of course, an arrow travels much quicker than a hand with a knife, but there is never any blood on the broadhead when the arrow is recovered (which is the first thing you do in order to tell if it was a good hit). There is blood on the shaft and fletching if a good clean pass-through was made.

I doubt Elizabeth Stride's killer got much - if any - blood on his hand or knife. I think Tom has a valid point. The cut was swift and clean. If he had stabbed her in the throat (which is what usually happened in other murders of this type) and dragged the knife across using the point, it might be a different story. Whoever killed Stride and Eddowes knew exactly how to kill with a knife effectively - down to even following the edge of the neckerchief instead of haphazardly cutting through it and causing an impediment.

He also didn't just cut across the front of the throat, which might only sever the windpipe. He reached around under the left ear to make sure the carotid artery was cut in both cases. And this was not by accident but by design.

[Tom_Wescott]

I have to agree with Trevor here. It seems what Hunter is suggesting - and please correct me if I'm misunderstanding you - is that the killer spent his valuable time cutting off this bulky apron piece (when many more suitable rags were literally lying at his finger tips) in order to wrap these tiny organs so that he could carry them as far as the middle of Goulston Street, where he lingers more and transfers the organs to another container and tosses the apron. Why didn't he just use this more suitable container while in Goulston Street? Or one of the smaller rags?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Hunter]

If he takes them away in the apron piece which has been proved he didnt then why would he transfer them when he has them already wrapped

Because the apron piece was big and bulky and not easily concealed. It was also stained with excrement. It was used as a stopgap measure until he could get to a safe spot and get better organized; wipe his hands and the organs and then transfer them to a smaller place for concealment. The apron piece had served its emergency purpose so he discarded it. Better for someone to find it there later than to get caught with it later.

If this was the same person who killed the others, this was probably the first time he had gotten into this big of a mess.

And it hasn't been proved by anybody that he didn't take the organs. As I've said before I'm more than willing to debate you on that subject on these or the other boards any time you wish... and you can bring all of the 'experts' you want. All I need is the evidence.

[mariab]

If the blood is under a pump pressure at the instant the knife severs the first part of the artery wall it will make the knife bloody. The pressure is high. The release of pressure would be by the sharp edge of the knife, not the rest of the blade. It would spurt in the direction of the least pressure - in this case in the direction towards the blade of the knife that had not yet passed through the artery.

Stride was cut from behind with her face towards the Yard pebbles. In that case, I expect gravity to have taken its course. And by the by, there was NO blood whatsoever found on the wall next to the body.

[mariab]

I've been there couple weeks ago, but the complete experience would be to eat at that restaurant, then drop a bloody object on my way out.
Or maybe, the complete experience would be to drop a bloody object by the bank on Mitre Square, then have my rat pet carry said object to the Happy days restaurant.

[PhiltheBear]

The knife is moving...the neck is stationary...by the time the blood is reacting to the fresh opening in the artery, the knife has moved well out of the way. So yes, the blood has absolutely no choice but to spurt in a different direction that from where the knife is at that moment.

If the blood is under a pump pressure at the instant the knife severs the first part of the artery wall it will make the knife bloody. The pressure is high. The release of pressure would be by the sharp edge of the knife, not the rest of the blade. It would spurt in the direction of the least pressure - in this case in the direction towards the blade of the knife that had not yet passed through the artery.

To give you some idea of what we are talking about I've seen a standing man bleeding from a temple cut which is fed by the carotid - the blood spurted about 3 feet and that's not carotid volume or pressure. Nor was he lying down (which increases blood pressure).

[Monty]

Happy Days resturant incorporates thw dwelling stair entrance now Tom.

Monty...who is waiting to see Fonz Marriott jump over that pool of sharks on a push bike.

[Tom_Wescott]

Ironically, wasn't a restaurant named 'Happy Days' opened next to 108 Goulston?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Trevor Marriott]

Statement of probable fact. Ah, the West Midland Police approach huh?

Yes, you rattle.

Monty

happy days !