Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Practicality or madness?

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

  • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    IMHO the killings seemed to stop with pinchin and Mackenzie.
    What makes you discount Coles as a Ripper victim?

    Comment


    • My god.. the so called "explanations" for conjoining obviously disparate acts is getting old Fisherman. One killer killed and mutilated street walking women in the open air and left their bodies to be discovered very shortly thereafter, that has nothing in common with a privately conducted dismemberment project...one that preceded any so called Ripper kills by more than a decade. The argument has no legs...its time to move on.
      Michael Richards

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

        What makes you discount Coles as a Ripper victim?
        Hi JR
        no abdominal mutilations and I think theres still a pretty good chance sadler did it.
        I don't totally rule her out-just lean heavily on it.
        "Is all that we see or seem
        but a dream within a dream?"

        -Edgar Allan Poe


        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

        -Frederick G. Abberline

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

          Hi JR
          no abdominal mutilations and I think theres still a pretty good chance sadler did it.
          I don't totally rule her out-just lean heavily on it.
          But the last man seen with her was wearing a peaked cap!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

            But the last man seen with her was wearing a peaked cap!
            sadler was the ripper! ; )
            "Is all that we see or seem
            but a dream within a dream?"

            -Edgar Allan Poe


            "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
            quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

            -Frederick G. Abberline

            Comment


            • Agree with you Michael.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                My god.. the so called "explanations" for conjoining obviously disparate acts is getting old Fisherman. One killer killed and mutilated street walking women in the open air and left their bodies to be discovered very shortly thereafter, that has nothing in common with a privately conducted dismemberment project...one that preceded any so called Ripper kills by more than a decade. The argument has no legs...its time to move on.
                Move on, by all means, Michael. Go solve it and get that half dozen killers behind mental bars.
                Last edited by Fisherman; 01-10-2020, 06:47 AM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Curious Cat View Post
                  I feel the perpetrator in the Ripper murders started with a relatively low level violent killing that went unsolved, with the immediate and local reaction to it triggering a need to see how far they could take it and how long they could safely go undetected. The thrill and the power of knowing they were the killer while frustrating and spreading fear among the police and public being the driving force. Creating the mystery itself was as methodical as the actual killings themselves. The killer stopped having fulfilled their personal remit, allowing the unsolved murders to pass into legend and their notoriety to live forever.

                  We've effectively all fallen perfectly into the killer's trap psychologically.
                  Logical enough. But...

                  I regard the 1873 torso murder as the earliest known instance of a murder committed by the combined killer. And I think that this murder was committed to allow the killer to produce something that correspoded to his fantasies. I believe he did precisely that by means of reshaping the body of his victim - and then he threw it away when he was done, after having cut it up in many parts. Accordingly, no other person than himself took part of his phantasy. What was left was the trash, so to speak, and the killer will have been very much aware that there was a large chance that for example the face he had cut away was never found.

                  It may well be that the ensuing press reporting fuelled a newborn or growing wish to terrorize and intimidate, but it seems to me that regardless of this, his aim was not to share his phantasies with the rest of the world at this stage. Once we get to Kelly, it is another story - she appears to be a fully-fledged demonstration of what he was about, proudly presented to a terrified world.

                  He warmed to the attention, Iīd say.
                  Last edited by Fisherman; 01-10-2020, 07:11 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                    the killer will have been very much aware that there was a large chance that for example the face he had cut away was never found.
                    So by throwing it in the river, he did not actually want it to be found?

                    Hmm, let me guess: once he saw how many pieces were found, he realized the river was the absolute best way of showcasing a body and he started pestering his father-in-law about the best dump sites?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                      He warmed to the attention, Iīd say.
                      But thats provided he was able to read all that was being said about him, and again it just another one of your unsupported, uncorroborated personal opinions which count for nothing

                      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                        But thats provided he was able to read all that was being said about him, and again it just another one of your unsupported, uncorroborated personal opinions which count for nothing

                        www.trevormarriott.co.uk
                        Yes, of course it predisposes that he took part of the information and gossip buzzing in the city. And Iīm afraid it counts for every bit as much as anybody elses theories.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Kattrup View Post

                          So by throwing it in the river, he did not actually want it to be found?

                          The inference is that he could not have cared all that much. Whether he eanted it found or not, he risked it not being found. If he wanted to secure that it was found, there were better ways.

                          Hmm, let me guess: once he saw how many pieces were found, he realized the river was the absolute best way of showcasing a body and he started pestering his father-in-law about the best dump sites?
                          Thatīs a great suggestion, and toitally in line with the evidence!°

                          Now, let ME guess, you think that although the parts were all found, more or less, time after time, he actually never lost belief in hos they would sink and go lost the next time?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Trevor Marriott View Post

                            But thats provided he was able to read all that was being said about him, and again it just another one of your unsupported, uncorroborated personal opinions which count for nothing
                            For once, not unsupported. Literacy was extremely widespread.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                              Thatīs a great suggestion, and toitally in line with the evidence!°

                              Now, let ME guess, you think that although the parts were all found, more or less, time after time, he actually never lost belief in hos they would sink and go lost the next time?
                              You so far have not offered any explanation for the fact that all the torsos heads were never found. Surely if a head was thrown in the water it would soon bobble about and easily be found

                              www.trevormarriott.co.uk

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Fisherman View Post

                                Thatīs a great suggestion, and toitally in line with the evidence!°

                                Now, let ME guess, you think that although the parts were all found, more or less, time after time, he actually never lost belief in hos they would sink and go lost the next time?
                                I just find it stimulating to see how you go from
                                we should ask ourselves when it became a certified method to take away an identity to carefully cut away the face and scalp from a victim before dumping it, with the very obvious possibility of it beiong found and ID:d.

                                to

                                What was left was the trash, so to speak, and the killer will have been very much aware that there was a large chance that for example the face he had cut away was never found.
                                Personally, my guess is that there’s no link between the 1873 case and the 87-89 ones, at least so far none has been found.

                                Therefore no reason to infer anything about the killer hoping anything about later cases.

                                There were other cases reported in the papers about dead bodies and body parts being fished out of the water. Just because it happened did not mean the people disposing of a body stopped chucking it in the river.

                                So my guess is actually that the perpetrator of the 1873 case mostly wanted to rid himself of the body parts in a manner that was quick, anonymous, hard to trace and with a good chance of the parts never being found, or if found, then with some delay.
                                Pretty much the same reasons why other criminals chose and choose to throw stuff in a river or the ocean.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X