Serial Killers, A pattern???

[DVV]

Are you telling me that you've dated a girl who played rugby in America ??

Now, in your country, it's hard to find a man that knows rugby - let alone to play it.
And you...are my pitchounette back.

[corey123]

Yes I did know a girl who played it, not professional, but played it. This was way back though.

And just call me Corey.

[DVV]

And just call me Corey.

Yeah...
Corey ?
Is it in theBible ?

[corey123]

David,

I think so. Im not a very regulary reader of the bible.

[perrymason]

You 2 seem to be on sleight binge lately, thats a shame.

The thread which seems to be of utmost importance to you corey allows for discussion on both sides of your question, so please refrain from trying to suppress those ideas...these are best kept as open discussions.

Ive made my opinion clear, as have others, so...any contrary theories are hardly "Mikes", or from one of "Mikes" pals. Im inspired by some others as perhaps they might be from me at times, but no-one's claiming anything as their own.

Ive suggested less dramatic scenarios than your blood creature of Spitalfield, and myself and others have offered quotations and other such information that substantiates that Fenians were thought to have been involved with the crimes in some capacity long before any serial killer suicidal barristers theories surfaced. By the highest authorities involved with the investigations. We have cited sources and comments that are explicit and are clearly intelligible.

What, aside from yours or contemporary opinion, is the foundation data that defines these crimes as serial, and as having been committed by a single killer.

There is a requirement here in this kind of dialogue that to dismiss a contrary opinion to yours all you need is a contrary opinion, but to prove someone incorrect and to authenticate your own theory requires data far more substantive and impartial than the same old opinion.

Opinions are like a*******, we all have one. What makes one better or more worthy of serious consideration is how much better the rubber meets the road...some support for the theory needs to be found or suggested within the known physical and circumstantial data.

I say the only basis for your serial killer theory can be found in opinions. If you feel you can make that case and prove me wrong....more cohesively than to date....Id be interested in reading it.

There is a fine line between a genius and a fool at times....only a fool rejects what is provably so.

Best regards

[DVV]

David,

I think so. Im not a very regulary reader of the bible.

"Male and female He created them"
Corey, III, 26.

[DVV]

Mike,
the mood was like that...
Our posts do have a date...

De tout mon coeur,
Meilleurs voeux,
David

[corey123]

Mike,

I dont even know how to reply to that.

The idea that it is the work of a serial killer is no theory. It should be obvious.

And you are the first one that I have heard of using the "opinion" that there might be three murderers.

So what do we call it then, if not a theory you believe?

And there is many data saying it is a serial murder. Which I am very tired ot typing them over and over again.

I have no problem with your and others opinion Mike.

And Yes I like this thread to stay on a certain topic. But however I dont mind it evolving any. So please do continue.

And about my "theory" of my "blood creature" why dont you try a look at the victims some more.

And I reject what is least likely and im sad to say for what you guys have brought forth so far is not enough to prove it isnt the work of my "blood creature".

p.s I like the new name.

[corey123]

david,

So that has what to do with my name???

[DVV]

david,

So that has what to do with my name???

Heavens!

One tries his best to save one soul, and gets kicked in the mouth...

[corey123]

Im not saying Im not christian,

just not a regular reader of the Bible.

[DVV]

Ah, please,

it's enough to know you're a man, and even a bearded man...
Any plan to settle in Tora-Bora?

[corey123]

Dont know where that is??

[Phil Carter]

Mike,



The idea that it is the work of a serial killer is no theory. It should be obvious.

And you are the first one that I have heard of using the "opinion" that there might be three murderers.

And there is many data saying it is a serial murder. Which I am very tired ot typing them over and over again.


And Yes I like this thread to stay on a certain topic. But however I dont mind it evolving any. So please do continue.

Hello Corey,

1) Serial killers are not always the answer to every multiple murder of the like kind. Even IF these murders (and you list 6) were true likenesses in every way, which they are not.

2) There have been many in the past who have said 3 murderers. Tabram's killer, Stride's and a.n.other. There are grave doubts about Stride in the canonical 5, and the sway of current opinion is towards her NOT being of the same hand as of the other 4 canonical victims. Kelly is also under question, by established Ripperologists of repute.

3) Yes, and more and more people, of repute, question this, as it (the canonical 5) was based on ONE man's (Macnaghten's) opinion, who based it on Dr. Bond's opinion, who only ever saw, first hand ONE victim. That same man, Magnaghten, gave us Druitt, without any proof at all. I therefore question his ability to reason soundly.

4) You could have fooled me after the banta that has been spread over nearly two pages!

best wishes and a Happy New Year,

Phil

[perrymason]

Mike,

I dont even know how to reply to that.

The idea that it is the work of a serial killer is no theory. It should be obvious.

And you are the first one that I have heard of using the "opinion" that there might be three murderers.

So what do we call it then, if not a theory you believe?

And there is many data saying it is a serial murder. Which I am very tired ot typing them over and over again.

I have no problem with your and others opinion Mike.

And Yes I like this thread to stay on a certain topic. But however I dont mind it evolving any. So please do continue.

And about my "theory" of my "blood creature" why dont you try a look at the victims some more.

And I reject what is least likely and im sad to say for what you guys have brought forth so far is not enough to prove it isnt the work of my "blood creature".

p.s I like the new name.

I would definitely agree that the evidence required to prove such allegations as the ones Ive made is far from "Case Closed"...they are merely signposts, and a misread might mean you end up in Romford for the day, instead of focused on the facts in the case. And you do realize that a theory without fact is opinion, right?

For these to be crimes that we can see in some evidence were committed by the same man, I assume you feel these questions are already answered...

1. Was he left handed, right handed or likely ambi-dexterous?
2. Did he always cut the throat in the same direction, and from the same location?
3. Did he use different knives?
4. Since no sexual element was discovered as having occurred during the attack/murders and/or mutilations, what precisely does he suffer from, and were these sexual crimes without a sexual act?
5. Were they all strangers to him?
6. What prevented him from killing more each night, or more frequently?
7. I assume he is either killed or caught if your assumptions are based on modern serial killer stats, which is it?
8. Does he exhibit any consistent traits throughout the Fall?
9. The doctors who gave evidence at the Nichols Inquest surmised that her killer and Annie Chapmans killer shared the same ultimate objective, why are no other Canonical murders observed with similar comments?
10. What dictates his schedule, or, for example, why doesnt he ever kill on Wednesdays?

Best regards