Same motive = same killer

[Sam Flynn]

Your statistical argument is flawed.

[Sam Flynn]

How does the fact that the eyes are missing from the Tottenham torso make my statement that her nose was cut off a "coincidence, exagerration or overgeneralization"?

Quite right. It comes under another heading, namely "only telling part of the story", ie the part that suits your argument.

[Fisherman]

If you want to claim predictability, then why did so many of the similarities you claim only happen in a few of the torso cases, and only then if one loosens the criteria such that the emptying of the entire thorax becomes a simplistic "heart removed", and decapitation becomes a mere "cut neck"? (et cetera)

Because the killers agenda was wide enough to harbor different inclusions in different murders - but the similarities nevertheless gives him away.

Both took out uteri, both took out hearts, both cut away... you know the list. Itīs the same list that you failed do fault on any single point in your former post. Thatīs where there seems to have been a large measure of predictability.

I hope you are following the Original nightstalker case. It has much bearing on this thread, if you take a look at how the varying jurisdictions wised up as time went by; detectives said "Oh, that guy in the East area does the same thing as the Visalia ransacker did, he keeps many escape routes open" and "Oh, look how this man puts dishes in front of the doors, like alarms" and so on - signs of a common originator.

I thoroughly - thoroughly! - recommend an hur or two spent on the net to see how detectives reason in cases like these, what makes them go for a conclusion of one killer only. There are many cases where the polce knew they had a serial killer on their hands long before he was caught, and in many cases, it really did not take much for them to draw that conclusion.

It works from both sides. Not only is it an issue of sinilarities being there, but it is also the statistically based insight that one should not expect two serialists being on the prowl in the same area and time. Weighed together in our case, the only logical conclusion is one of a single killer.

[Fisherman]

She'd also had her eyes taken out, quite unlike any other victim.
The overgeneralisations and exaggerations speak for themselves, as any objective reading of the facts will demonstrate.
I'm not the one who's making things up.

More egotistical crowing.

How does the fact that the eyes are missing from the Tottenham torso make my statement that her nose was cut off a "coincidence, exagerration or overgeneralization"?

You say that the "overgeneralizations and exagerrations speak for themselves" - which is another way to say that you cannot prove it in any single case I made. So no, they do not speak for themselves, and no, it is not okay not to substantiate and prove your points.
Once more, Gareth, you are on the shamefullest of journeys here.

And you ARE the one making things up, as proven by how you cannot substantiate one single point you made. So the facts I listed ARE facts, and they DO stand.

Egotistical to me is when somebody is so fond of himself and his thinking that he is unable to admit when he is wrong. That is egotistical and counterproductive on the boards.

[Sam Flynn]

Then, when you have proven your suggestion (which is all it amounts too), we can discuss the 1884 Tottenham case - which was the one I was referring to.

She'd also had her eyes taken out, quite unlike any other victim.

Now, PROVE that the facts - which they are - I listed are "coincidences, exaggerations or overgeneralizations"!

The overgeneralisations and exaggerations speak for themselves, as any objective reading of the facts will demonstrate.

Oh, but you canīt, can you? You just made it up, didnīt you?

I'm not the one who's making things up.

The shame, Gareth. The shame.

More egotistical crowing.

[Sam Flynn]

To me, it seems they are doing nothing of the sort - if one of them does a very odd thing, it seems the other will do the same very odd thing too.

Thatīs not unpredictability, itīs more like predictability.

If you want to claim predictability, then why did so many of the similarities you claim only happen in a few of the torso cases, and only then if one loosens the criteria such that the emptying of the entire thorax becomes a simplistic "heart removed", and decapitation becomes a mere "cut neck"? (et cetera)

[Fisherman]

Coincidences, exaggerations or overgeneralisations - fact

Then you should have no problems proving that. Facts are proven matters, see.

Then, when you have proven your suggestion (which is all it amounts too), we can discuss the 1884 Tottenham case - which was the one I was referring to.

And THEN we can discuss wether it is the cutting away of a nose that matters - or the exact amount of millimeters that were cut off.

Now, PROVE that the facts - which they are - I listed are "coincidences, exaggerations or overgeneralizations"!

Oh, but you canīt, can you? You just made it up, didnīt you?

The shame, Gareth. The shame.

[Fisherman]

Statistics are inapplicable to guilt.
We are dealing with people,who act randomly/unpredictably.Out of the blue one person decides this, another decides that then things happen.That's it,it has nothing to do with statistics.Then one has to find evidence for those crimes.

-

It has a whole lot to do with statistics when it comes to how the police do their work.

You say that we are dealing with people who act randomly/unpredictably. To me, it seems they are doing nothing of the sort - if one of them does a very odd thing, it seems the other will do the same very odd thing too.

Thatīs not unpredictability, itīs more like predictability.

The fact that it CAN happen theoretically is what allows you to express your view. The fact that it will virtually never happen is what tells me that you are with an almost 100 per cent certainty wrong.

[Sam Flynn]

Hearts taken out - fact
Uteri taken out - fact
Abdominal walls cut away - fact
Rings missing - fact
Necks and throats severed - fact
Nosetips cut off - fact
Colon sections cut out - fact
Prostitute victims - fact
Both series in London - fact
Series overlapping - fact

Coincidences, exaggerations or overgeneralisations - fact

Also, it is emphatically NOT a fact that the 1873 torso victim had her "nosetip cut off". Quite the opposite, in reality - it was the UPPER part of her nose that was missing, not the tip.

[Fisherman]

It's like butchers making similar cuts.

-

No, itīs more like identical twin butchers with the same urges and paraphilia making the same cuts in the same area and time. Or like just the ONE butcher. Itīs anybodys guess which is the likelier thing.

[Fisherman]

Coincidences.
-

Ten of them? Not very likely, no.

But the important thing to remember is that since we cannot tell whether one or more of the similarities were coincidental, what we do until we know what applies is to work from the presumption of one killer only.

If we can dismiss that picture by actually proving that all the similarities are coincidental - not lead on, PROVE! - then a common originator remains the by far best bid.

[Fisherman]

If the prediction,as in post 4019,is correct,then the murder of Polly Nichols in 1888,should immediately have alerted,and convinced police ,that her murder was connected to the oveflapping,sorry overlapping,torso murders,and if not her death,then surely that of Annie Chapmn.What evidence is there that they did consider one person responsible for the two series?

Chapman was killed in September 1888, and Jackson was found the following summer. So the police cannot be hold accountable for not realizing in September of 1888 that another victim would be found with the abdominal wall cut away in 1889.

The question you forget to ask is why we do not have the police saying in November 1888 that Chapmans and Kellys deaths were connected since they both had the abdominal wall cut away.

The police were not up to scratch, for reasons earlier given.

[harry]

If the prediction,as in post 4019,is correct,then the murder of Polly Nichols in 1888,should immediately have alerted,and convinced police ,that her murder was connected to the oveflapping,sorry overlapping,torso murders,and if not her death,then surely that of Annie Chapmn.What evidence is there that they did consider one person responsible for the two series?

[Varqm]

Statistics are inapplicable to guilt.
We are dealing with people,who act randomly/unpredictably.Out of the blue one person decides this, another decides that then things happen.That's it,it has nothing to do with statistics.Then one has to find evidence for those crimes.

-

[Varqm]

It's like butchers making similar cuts.

-