Double Event Timeline

[Malcolm X]

Hi Malcolm.

Why would he mind someone seeing him chatting her up? As far as any casual observer is concerned he's just a punter chatting up a prostitute. If the "double event" is accepted as two murders by the same killer, you have to ask, for your point to be valid, why JtR was worried about being seen in Dutfields Yard, but not in Church Passage?

Cheers, Bridewell.

aah no, inside the yard of Dutfields is exactly on the murder scene, Church Passage is not, Mitre square could therefore be another client that came along later on, that wasn't seen, or even another victim...... a prosecutor can not prove that Sailor boy went to Mitre square with her, he could say ``no i walked off, i was just flirting with her``.

but inside Dutfields is too close for comfort, the killer is standing right on her murder site.... it doesn't matter being seen earlier on up the road, it's the murder site that he cant be seen at.

JTR therefore thinks, `` i must kill her instantly, i can not afford to be seen talking to her before she dies, anyone could walk out of that door beside her, in fact; i shouldn't really be killing her at all ``.

so you see JTR kills her, but this location is far too risky to chat first, because whatever the case, JTR has made his mind up to kill her anyway!

so if he's seen, he'll only come back again and he knows this...so no, ``i'd better kill her right now and get the hell out of here while i can``

he's desperate for a victim on this location, so he will not give up like he should, but the priority is always not to be seen at the murder site too close to the time of death...... no way!

[Monty]

Its like you know him Malcolm.

Monty

[RedBundy13]

Its like you know him Malcolm.

Monty

Either that or alot of research...

[Malcolm X]

you have to think like him, because then you realise what ``feels`` about right, but i cant get my head inside no13 no way, the rest is simply over enthusiasm.

[curious]

[QUOTE=curious4;203989]She took longer to bleed to death because of the single cut.

Cheers,
C4

Hi, Curious, too, uh 4,

That single cut is so different from any of the other cuts, how do you reconcile it with it being made by JtR?

The cut is almost tentative compared to the others. Doesn't it appear to be by a different hand?

I still have more questions than answers and remain, Curious, How about you, C4, are you developing answers?

curious

[curious4]

[QUOTE=curious;204521]

She took longer to bleed to death because of the single cut.

Cheers,
C4

Hi, Curious, too, uh 4,

That single cut is so different from any of the other cuts, how do you reconcile it with it being made by JtR?

The cut is almost tentative compared to the others. Doesn't it appear to be by a different hand?

I still have more questions than answers and remain, Curious, How about you, C4, are you developing answers?

curious

Hello there Curious,

I think the difference (if there is one) is only because he only had time for one cut. What would the other victims have looked like with only one cut? Jack seemed to be a risk-taker, perhaps he heard the cart coming while in the act of cutting the throat.

No I`m with the Jack dunnit bunch and so were the police at the time, even though it would have caused less panic if they had been able to prove/suggest otherwise.

Best wishes,
C4

[Monty]

I blame CSI Miami.

Monty

[The Good Michael]

I blame CSI Miami.

Monty

Monty,

I understand. It just gets to you after a while. Fleming, Hutchinson, whoever, it just gets to you. I think Gareth and Hinton are in a better place maybe. At least my internet's bad enough that I only have to see this stuff sporadically.

Mike

[Monty]

Indeed Mike,

Amateur profilers, whose training lasts for an hour every Friday night on Fox, are now confusing personal opinion with fact.

Then again, that's how its ever been.

Monty

[lynn cates]

profiling

Hello Michael, Neil. Wish profiling had never begun. I still prefer to look at cuts, bruises, body placements, etc.

Cheers.
LC

[The Good Michael]

Amateur profilers, whose training lasts for an hour every Friday night on Fox, are now confusing personal opinion with fact.

Then again, that's how its ever been.

I think it's worse now. The delusional are becoming louder, and the CSI offspring attach themselves like leeches to them. Just look at the Fleming stuff... er, don't.

Mike

[Monty]

Oh I've seen it all right.

There was a period, at the turn of the last century, when this field held some brilliant minds.

It still does, however it seems they do not have the drive to wade through the mire anymore.

Even Trevor Marriott no longer posts as often.

Monty

[mic_ads]

To add to the discussion about the double event, I discovered some significant evidence through a study I finished towards the end of 2011.

Catherine Eddowes and Elizabeth Stride forms part of a crime series of 8 homicide victims.

For further detail, you can link to this thread:
http://forum.casebook.org/showthread...445#post211445

There was a general direction of travel of the offender from the murder of Elizabeth Stride to the murder of Catherine Eddowes, followed by a direction of travel to the location of a cut piece of apron.◦

After reviewing the facts about the apron piece, I considered it as a crime scene location, but I am aware that Trevor Marriot put forward a theory disputing its significance by considering this apron piece as a sanitary product used by Catherine Eddowes. In the absence of any other information, this could be considered a plausible theory, but the items found on Catherine’s body included 12 pieces of white rag. The cutting of her own apron for use as a sanitary product seems less likely when she had suitable items on her person. A further point is that the apron was described as cut, not torn. No knife or bladed article was listed in her possessions.

The finding of the stained apron piece in Goulston Street on the same night Catherine Eddowes was killed is considered as a crime scene characteristic of her homicide. This piece of apron was found in Goulston Street, .23 miles away in a north-easterly direction (N 36°E) from the location of the body in Mitre Square.

If this general direction of travel (Mitre Square to Goulston Street) is extrapolated, it indicates a direction of travel towards the general area where a number of the victims were known to reside at the time of their death.

In addition to this, there is a question over whether JtR had an anatomical or medical knowledge that specifically links back to the timelime of the double event; it appears that there is a ten minute window where Eddowes is murdered and mutilated.

Considered the context of this attack, the offender has not had hours or days to mutilate the body, nor has he had privacy to do this. This attack was done at night where street lighting was not what it is today, so he was working at night in limited light, in a public location with limited time and able to mutilate the abdominal cavity and sexual organs to the extent recorded.

I would submit there the double event adds support to the arguement that the offender displayed some degree of anatomical knowledge.

the whole point of research - to explore, share and discuss

[lynn cates]

question

Hello Mic. Thanks for that.

Perhaps you have a theory about something that has always puzzled me. Given the usual take on the "Double Event," and given the assailant lived near Goulston st., and given that--for whatever reason--he chose Berner st for a murder, why (given he was disturbed and was nondum satiatus) did he head for Aldgate first? Why not go east and perhaps north, where he had had success before? Why would the murderer travel further from home in such a frustrated, excited condition?

Cheers.
LC

[moonbegger]

Hi Folks , i still find it hard to beleive that the writer of the GSG , being the killer, or accomplice would have stopped off in Goulston street in heat of a manhunt to scribble down a message on a wall , was he really the most lucky killer ever to live , or as is my assumption was the GSG was done a few hours before the double event, And that maybe the apron was thrown down beneath it on the way back from the Eddows murder with the sole reason being to authenticate it "what other reason would the killer have for throwing away evidence , that he didnt really need to throw away ? " bearing in mind the assumption of many [ Not Me ] that the killer wrote or didnt write the message whilst having in possesion a lot more blood and gore than Cathy's apron , just a thought

moonbegger