Faecal matter on apron piece

[Monty]

Thank you Lynn,

I'm afraid I do not have the incination to respond in full, sorry.

How strict do you wish these evidences so that a series is confirmed? Because I feel whatever they are, your criteria will not be met.

Locations, victims, M.O and signature are all very similar.

No, coincidences cannot be confused with evidences, else they would be called evidences, however they are coincidences.

Apologies, stats are inconclusive and unhelpful. Especially when they go against ones beliefs? Or do I have that wrong also?

So just because one side hasn't presented evidence (though I believe they have) exempts the other side from such an act? Wow, that's a sound base to present theories.

Similar mutilations, you heard me right. Where mutilation occured, including Kelly.

No, the police didn't solve the murders. Neither has anyone here so I see no reason for anyone to feel superior and attack them. Especially given the ignorance shown on the matter.

Jacksters? What an awful term. Bluff and distraction, not worth commenting upon in my opinion.

Monty

[lynn cates]

scribatus interruptus

Hello Neil. Thanks. No problem with the truncated reply. I’m sure you don’t mind the same.

“Apologies, stats are inconclusive and unhelpful. Especially when they go against ones beliefs? Or do I have that wrong also?”

I’m afraid you do have that wrong. Try this for illustration. Statistically, how many people meet their demise driving through Devonshire and being “attacked” by a bale of hay? Of those so dying, how many are rock cellists and have last names beginning with a vowel, not a consonant? So did Mike Edwards not die?

“So just because one side hasn't presented evidence (though I believe they have) exempts the other side from such an act? Wow, that's a sound base to present theories.’

Actually, I think it’s referred to as the pot having certain epithets for the kettle. Put another way, “What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.”

“Similar mutilations, you heard me right. Where mutilation occurred, including Kelly.”

Ah, WHERE they occurred. Interesting codicil.

“No, the police didn't solve the murders. Neither has anyone here so I see no reason for anyone to feel superior and attack them. Especially given the ignorance shown on the matter.”

Attack? Hmm, don’t recall that. In fact, your name did not come up in my previous posts as I recall. Did mine come up in yours?

“Jacksters? What an awful term. Bluff and distraction, not worth commenting upon in my opinion.”

Perhaps. But the point of view it encapsulates may be worse.

Well, I would have written more, but I was INTERRUPTED. (heh-heh) But I’m sure it’s all part of a SERIES of my posts.

(And don’t be offended—I’m certainly not.)

Cheers.
LC

[Monty]

That was truncated Lynn?

Statistical joke will never catch on. 50% of the readers won't find it funny whilst 45% are still trying to figure it out whilst reading my post.

Figures are there, like them or not. As it kinda breaks your opinion its only natural you would do your best to belittle them.

However they are there.

As I've stated, there is evidence to include at least 3 murders in the series, and stated that evidence. So, where's your sauce? Surely there is some.

No, I didn't mention your name in previous posts regardind attacks on the police. I was fully aware of that why I wrote it, that's why I didn't use your name, I stated "anyone". So your point is?

Re Jackster - the point of view it encapsulates may be worse? I can think of far worse views.

Monty

[lynn cates]

wandering thoughts

Hello Neil. Thanks.

“That was truncated Lynn?"

Of course. I could go on and on. But I recall what Shakespeare said about mercy. (heh-heh)

“Statistical joke will never catch on. 50% of the readers won't find it funny whilst 45% are still trying to figure it out whilst reading my post.”

Ah, but my humour may. In fact, the probability that I will play the Palladium this year is . . .

“Figures are there, like them or not. As it kind of breaks your opinion it’s only natural you would do your best to belittle them.”

What figures? Do you mean the 67% spike in knife murders on women from 1887 to 1888 or the 200% spike from 1886 to 1887?

“As I've stated, there is evidence to include at least 3 murders in the series, and stated that evidence.”

SOME evidence? OK. And there is some not to include. And I’m delighted to see the 3 figure. Any fewer and talk about a series would go up like vapour.

“So, where's your sauce? Surely there is some.”

There is indeed. You may have it to baste the crow. (heh-heh)

“No, I didn't mention your name in previous posts regarding attacks on the police. I was fully aware of that why I wrote it, that's why I didn't use your name, I stated "anyone". So your point is?”

My point is that you mentioned an attack. As you are well aware, I do not attack—haven’t and won’t. Police? I haven’t attacked them either. Right now they rather impede progress, so I put them in brackets.

“Re Jackster - the point of view it encapsulates may be worse? I can think of far worse views.”

Oh, sure. As bad as it is, at least it’s not Dodgson or Toulouse-Lautrec. (By the way, one must be careful of the spelling. 2 letters and you have Kosminski.) (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Monty]

I'm still waiting for the smart arsed 5% to stated I've only accounted for 95% Lynn,

And whilst you are performing the probability these women were murdered in a series remains very good. Certainly better than Jack the Ripper never existed. Mainly due to the lack of supporting evidence, especially re Nicholls, Chapman and Eddowes.

SOME evidence is better than NO evidence or a RELIANCE on OPINION. Fact remains women were being throat cutted in a small area and having their bodies ripped open. Be that 3 or 5 or any in between.

I never said you did attack did I? Again, your point is?

Somehow I don't think the Palladium will be calling you.

Monty

[Michael W Richards]

I'm afraid you're getting Bond mixed up with Phillips in this instance. Bond did believe the murder of Alice McKenzie showed traits of the previous murders.

We don't know what Bond's opinion of Tabram's murder was. Anderson did not submit her file to him for evaluation.

I did missplace my irony Hunter, thanks, it was the skilful cuts suggestion when he had pronounced no skill or knowledge for the Canonical killer in the summary.

Cheers,
Mike R

[Rob Clack]

I take it very few people here have read "The Kiler who never was" by Peter Turnball then?

Rob

[Michael W Richards]

I think its fair and accurate to state that a series is but one of many unproven possibilities for these crimes. It is not accurate at this time to state it was a series.

Best regards,

Mike R

[Rob Clack]

Of course it was a series of murders. To suggest otherwise is extremely silly and naive.

Rob

[lynn cates]

style

Hello Neil. Thanks.

"And whilst you are performing the probability these women were murdered in a series remains very good. Certainly better than Jack the Ripper never existed."

As you know, probability is a way of calculating what we don't know. And "Jack's" non-existence looks much more "probable" after 125 years of futility.

"Mainly due to the lack of supporting evidence, especially re Nicholls, Chapman and Eddowes."

Again, at least you are pushing only 3. I see glaring discrepancies in Kate and the other two.

"SOME evidence is better than NO evidence or a RELIANCE on OPINION."

Completely agree. Hope to see some soon.

"Fact remains women were being throat cutted in a small area and having their bodies ripped open. Be that 3 or 5 or any in between."

Yes, Neil. And some people are shot in the head, hands tied and kneeling. It's called "Gangland style." One hand?

"I never said you did attack did I? Again, your point is?"

If you did not intend me, I beg pardon. I assumed from context--rather like assuming the C5. (heh-heh)

"Somehow I don't think the Palladium will be calling you."

Sure they will. Did you hear the one about . . . ?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

worth it?

Hello Rob. No, I have not read that one. Is it worth a read?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

series and series

Hello (again) Rob. Thanks.

From one who is silly and naive, permit me to suggest that there is a sense in which I agree to a series.

Please to consider the following.

A. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 . . .

B. 1, 4, 9, 16, 25 . . .

C. 6, 11, 19, 3 . . .

These are all, technically, a series. A is formed by taking all the odd numbers and listing them sequentially. B is formed by taking the square of each positive integer. C is a slapdash random listing of numbers.

Polly and Annie began a nice, neat sequence--same kind of double cut, same overt marks of strangulation, same undamaged clothing. That portion of the series then terminated. The other 3 are merely "put" there, as in C above--although Kate, I will agree, fits better than Liz or MJK.

Cheers.
LC

[Rob Clack]

Hello Rob. No, I have not read that one. Is it worth a read?

Cheers.
LC

Peter Turnball suggests that each murder was a copycat killing, so those that believe in more than one killer should find it interesting.

Hello (again) Rob. Thanks.

From one who is silly and naive, permit me to suggest that there is a sense in which I agree to a series.

Please to consider the following.

A. 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 . . .

B. 1, 4, 9, 16, 25 . . .

C. 6, 11, 19, 3 . . .

These are all, technically, a series. A is formed by taking all the odd numbers and listing them sequentially. B is formed by taking the square of each positive integer. C is a slapdash random listing of numbers.

Polly and Annie began a nice, neat sequence--same kind of double cut, same overt marks of strangulation, same undamaged clothing. That portion of the series then terminated. The other 3 are merely "put" there, as in C above--although Kate, I will agree, fits better than Liz or MJK.

Cheers.
LC

These are women we are talking about, not numbers and not just the Macnaghten five. People seem to be forgetting about Smith, Tabram, Mylett, McKenzie, Pinchin Street victim and Coles. The Met files were about 'The Whitechapel Murders' a series of eleven murders.

Rob

[lynn cates]

math

Hello Rob. Thanks. Five one offs? Don't think so. I have always found the similarities in Polly and Annie stark--even when I believed in the C5 and Jack.

Yes, I understand they were women. My remarks were about the mathematics of a series. I would be delighted to drop math observations. Of course, that would include both probability and statistics.

I didn't quite pick up on your remarks about all the WCM. I take it you were not suggesting one hand throughout?

Cheers.
LC

[Rob Clack]

Hello Rob. Thanks. Five one offs? Don't think so. I have always found the similarities in Polly and Annie stark--even when I believed in the C5 and Jack.

Yes, I understand they were women. My remarks were about the mathematics of a series. I would be delighted to drop math observations. Of course, that would include both probability and statistics.

If I was pushed I would say there was five by one hand and six one offs. One of those six one offs, the Pinchin Street victim, the murderer may have committed some of the other torso murders. The other one offs were spread over a period of three years.

I didn't quite pick up on your remarks about all the WCM. I take it you were not suggesting one hand throughout?

Cheers.
LC

What I mean is, the Metropolitan Police viewed them as a series of murders and they were investigated as such.

Rob