Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Coincidence?

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

  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Kelly might have been a name that she used regularly for all we know and this seems a reasonable, plausible possibility when you consider her relationship with John Kelly.
    Precisely.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by etenguy View Post

    Well then, I respect your opinion, but I struggle to dismiss such a coincidence as thoroughly as you.
    I'm not dismissing a coincidence. I'm accepting a coincidence.

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

    i tend to think that the opinion of someone who's job included locking up drunk people and releasing them when sober would be more relevant than most, but each to their own.
    .


    But we only have Robinson's opinion of how drunk she was, and as that is no more relevant than anyone elses, perhaps Kate was not actually as drunk as you seem to think.



    You asked when the inspector made the decision, i was merely pointing out that in his absence there were others who were empowered to make the call.



    Perhaps they were just being polite and the inspector was out paying a visit to the shitter?
    You've clearly not come across drunk people too often .... they always like to get up after 3 and a half hours and wander aimlessly in the rain looking for money that was completely unnecessary had they stopped singing, rolled over and gone back to sleep.

    Robinsons observations are quite different in that he had to pick her up off the floor and get help to carry her to the station.... it's a physical thing ,not an opinion matter .

    Like i said ,Hutt contradicted himself if that was the case ..... maybe they could have waited until he'd finished in the shitter ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Joshua Rogan
    replied
    Originally posted by packers stem View Post

    As for your first point
    The opinion of a PC is only as relevant as anybody else's , it doesn't carry extra weight
    i tend to think that the opinion of someone who's job included locking up drunk people and releasing them when sober would be more relevant than most, but each to their own.
    .
    When someone is so drunk they can't stand without assistance then head hitting the pillow = out for the night in my opinion and many others would share that view .
    I'm sure many of us have been similarly drunk on occasion through our lives
    But we only have Robinson's opinion of how drunk she was, and as that is no more relevant than anyone elses, perhaps Kate was not actually as drunk as you seem to think.

    The second point I really don't get other than it shows that Hutt contradicted himself
    You asked when the inspector made the decision, i was merely pointing out that in his absence there were others who were empowered to make the call.

    Still doesn't help us understand where Collard had disappeared to or why
    Perhaps they were just being polite and the inspector was out paying a visit to the shitter?

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Yes but I’m not suggesting a relevance in the fact that she used the name Kelly. Kelly might have been a name that she used regularly for all we know and this seems a reasonable, plausible possibility when you consider her relationship with John Kelly. You might prefer the Dan Brown method but that’s up to you of course.
    I doubt even Dan Brown would write a novel where the last two victims of a serial killer used the same pseudonym

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Monty View Post
    Apologies, I’m late to this discussion.

    Collards whereabouts is significant why?

    Monty
    He was ' out visiting ' at 1am
    Just wondering who he may be likely to visit at this hour

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by packers stem View Post

    She might have used the name Victoria Saxe Coburg Gotha .... but we have no record of that either
    Yes but I’m not suggesting a relevance in the fact that she used the name Kelly. Kelly might have been a name that she used regularly for all we know and this seems a reasonable, plausible possibility when you consider her relationship with John Kelly. You might prefer the Dan Brown method but that’s up to you of course.

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
    Is it worth pointing out that just because there’s no record of Eddowes using the Kelly alias before this doesn’t mean that she didn’t? She was a fairly anonymous prostitute after all. Her murder brings her into the spotlight for the first time and so it might have been the case that she used Kelly fairly regularly but we just have no record of it.
    She might have used the name Victoria Saxe Coburg Gotha .... but we have no record of that either

    Leave a comment:


  • Monty
    replied
    Apologies, I’m late to this discussion.

    Collards whereabouts is significant why?

    Monty

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Losmandris View Post

    Has anyone ever speculated that the victims of the Yorkshire Ripper knew each other or may have known who the killer was, so were trying to blackmail him? No. Any other serial killer case? Again no.
    Can Sutcliffe's victims all be placed living (or staying) on the same side of one street within 10 doors ?

    Any other 'serial killer' who's last two victims both used the same pseudonym on the night they died?

    Any other serial killer cut out organs at the roadside in darkness?

    There are reasons aplenty why JTR is very different to the typical late 20th century serial killers that people seek to pigeon hole him into

    Leave a comment:


  • packers stem
    replied
    Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

    Sgt Byfield: "Would it be possible put drunk in a cell at nine o'clock to be perfectly sober at one? - Yes."



    Hutt: "The inspector was out visiting, and I was directed by Sergeant Byfield to see if there were any prisoners fit to be discharged....I found the deceased sober."
    As for your first point
    The opinion of a PC is only as relevant as anybody else's , it doesn't carry extra weight .
    When someone is so drunk they can't stand without assistance then head hitting the pillow = out for the night in my opinion and many others would share that view .
    I'm sure many of us have been similarly drunk on occasion through our lives

    The second point I really don't get other than it shows that Hutt contradicted himself

    Still doesn't help us understand where Collard had disappeared to or why

    Leave a comment:


  • Al Bundy's Eyes
    replied
    Originally posted by Trapperologist View Post
    Florence's insider info came from the daughter of her friend and fellow painter, Violet Overton-Fuller. So I think either Florence was wrong or she was telling the truth. I think she was telling the truth. I think we have more reason to believe it now with some of the other information on the other forum about Captain Verney. Maybe he was the one being blackmailed or giving hush money.

    I don't doubt that Catherine and Mary knew each other and Mary could have informed her about the insider story in connection with Sickert and Florence Pash. Catherine supposedly liked to impersonate fire engines. Who knows if she didn't impersonate Mary?
    As I learnt much to my chargin, the fire engine was a later embellishment

    Leave a comment:


  • Trapperologist
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post

    The bit about Eddowes buying the boots is possibly true, but the bit about Florence Pash's alleged claim that she knew Mary (Jane) Kelly is rather dubious, tied up as it is with the Sickert saga.

    I say "possibly true" because, whilst John Kelly/Eddowes bought the boots at Arthur Pash's shop, I don't see how this means that Pash himself, as opposed to a shop assistant, sold the boots to them. Even if they'd dealt with Pash personally, I find it extremely unlikely that he'd tell his (presumably) insider story about the Ripper to a couple of raggedy strangers who'd dropped in to buy a pair of cheap boots. If he told them, then he must have been in the habit of telling many others, yet we only know about (Florence) Pash's alleged insider info from one or two decidedly iffy sources, and then only in connection with various Sickert theories.
    Florence's insider info came from the daughter of her friend and fellow painter, Violet Overton-Fuller. So I think either Florence was wrong or she was telling the truth. I think she was telling the truth. I think we have more reason to believe it now with some of the other information on the other forum about Captain Verney. Maybe he was the one being blackmailed or giving hush money.

    I don't doubt that Catherine and Mary knew each other and Mary could have informed her about the insider story in connection with Sickert and Florence Pash. Catherine supposedly liked to impersonate fire engines. Who knows if she didn't impersonate Mary?

    Last edited by Trapperologist; 10-15-2019, 07:41 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • etenguy
    replied
    Originally posted by Sam Flynn View Post

    I don't do disingenuous, though.
    Well then, I respect your opinion, but I struggle to dismiss such a coincidence as thoroughly as you.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sam Flynn
    replied
    Originally posted by etenguy View Post

    I am still on the side of the argument which says it is a coincidence, but I think it disingenuous to suggest it is as silly as the Nothing connection.
    I don't do disingenuous, though.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X