Skill or no Skill, that is the question

[Sunny Delight]

One of the most respected and revered and well published ex-Policemen Ripperologists answered a direct question from me here some years ago, in case you think suggesting that these 5 victims are not all connected is somehow radical thinking, and he told me that after studying these crimes for 50 years he cannot see more than 2 or 3 of the Canonical Group as likely being connected by one killer. I dont know how long youve been studying these crimes, Ive been at this since 1988, but I suggest that you have a naive idea of the people and environment of that time. And so you dont continue believing that all contemporary investigators bought the Canonical Group theory, maybe read about the ones that openly admitted they had no idea how many victims were by one man, why they were killed and by whom.

Whats really a bit sad is adopting something others have said as some kind of stable foundation to use. Just like Trump supporters.

Trump supporters are the antithesis to my beliefs and way of operating. I have no idea what someone agreeing with you or the length of time studying the case is supposed to make me say? Well done I suppose for the longevity. I do not have a naive opinion of people at that time nor the environment.

I am from Ireland and am a history graduate. As part of my Masters degree I was researching the Fenian movement in Ireland. I then began to look in depth at the dynamite campaign in London which eventually led me to the Jack the Ripper case. There is no connection by the way rather than location. I digress, the case then became of interest to me moreover for the social aspect of which there is more myth yet again(a look at Charles Booth's map shows this clearly). When trying to research connections with the crimes I think the vast majority are in agreement that the Ripper killed at least four, probably six and possibly eight. That is not really up for discussion. In fact the discussion has moved far beyond that.

The Doctors and Surgeons who looked at the case settled on five definite victims. They were there. They saw the bodies and saw the reports. They analysed documents we can only dream of seeing. How someone 135 years later believes they have a better idea of things I just do not know. That is even more pertinent when they are not a doctor nor a surgeon.

[Michael W Richards]

A little snippet of yours from the JFK thread below - your usual know it all attitude that irritates. Stop acting like your god's gift to every subject and people might listen. The JFK stuff does work people up, myself included and I've been pretty rude to certain people on here, but you act like this on every subject as far as I can see.

'Did either of you illustrious critics look at the Zapruder tape and the specific frames I cited. I think not. Otherwise you might have learned something. Not surprising that you also buy the bs in this case too. IF youd looked'

If youd also posted the rebuttal snippet I was reacting to, it might be in bettter context. If youll also note, the opinion is not just my own.

[Aethelwulf]

I just seem to be a know it all when Im discussing with know very littles. Cheers back at ya.

A little snippet of yours from the JFK thread below - your usual know it all attitude that irritates. Stop acting like your god's gift to every subject and people might listen. The JFK stuff does work people up, myself included and I've been pretty rude to certain people on here, but you act like this on every subject as far as I can see.

'Did either of you illustrious critics look at the Zapruder tape and the specific frames I cited. I think not. Otherwise you might have learned something. Not surprising that you also buy the bs in this case too. IF youd looked'

[Michael W Richards]

I'm familiar with your posts from before you emerged from your long break. Then, as now, they all have the same annoying, overbearing, pompous know-it-all attitude.
Cheers mike

I just seem to be a know it all when Im discussing with know very littles. Cheers back at ya.

[Aethelwulf]

You take whatever you want from whomever you like, because I never said to anyone that Im right

I'm familiar with your posts from before you emerged from your long break. Then, as now, they all have the same annoying, overbearing, pompous know-it-all attitude.
Cheers mike

[Michael W Richards]

Heres a great example of how informed some of these profilers and enforcement people can be..."According to a 1999 issue of Texas Monthly, the Killing Fields — the name given to a strip of abandoned oil fields near Interstate 45 — have long been known as a favorite dump site for killers. In 1984, news went national with the discovery of four naked, carefully posed, female murder victims. At the time, law enforcement had a suspect: Robert Abel, a NASA engineer who worked on the original Apollo missions. Abel was around 60-years-old when the murders — and more disappearances — happened, and the same law enforcement officials who considered him a suspect were also forced to admit that they had absolutely no evidence that he had anything to do with the killings."

They named a suspect without any evidence link to any of the murders. Something like stating a lone man killed 5 women in Whitechapel in 1888, without a single shred of evidence that one murder had any link with another other than the historical timing and geographical range, and zero evidence that a lone man killed them all.

Now I wish I sold swampland here.

[Michael W Richards]

I'll take my lead from someone who might know what they are talking about. e.g.

• Keppel narrowed down a large list of suspects until he was left with 25, including Ted Bundy. He confronted Bundy, but Bundy dismissed the conversation
• Keppel was asked to assist in the Green River Task Force for the investigation of a set of murders in Washington
• Keppel retired as chief criminal investigator for the Washington State Attorney General's Office in 1995

Some relevant publications

• Offender Profiling (2006; ISBN 075938875X)

• Serial Violence: Analysis of Modus Operandi and Signature Characteristics of Killers (with William Birnes) (2008; ISBN 9781420066326)

• Profiling: Principles, Processes, Practicalities (with David V. Canter) (2010; ISBN 9780131192768)

My assessment: Keppel - knows his sh*t

Michael W Richards - knows jack sh*t

You're welcome

I forgot to mention, taking someone elses "lead" is a good practice for you. Some lead, some follow.

[Michael W Richards]

You take whatever you want from whomever you like, because I never said to anyone that Im right and you're wrong...like you just did. You have no idea who I am or what I know, although I will share this one bit with you, I know an a** when I see one. And I know a guess from a fact.

[Aethelwulf]

I'll take my lead from someone who might know what they are talking about. e.g.

• Keppel narrowed down a large list of suspects until he was left with 25, including Ted Bundy. He confronted Bundy, but Bundy dismissed the conversation
• Keppel was asked to assist in the Green River Task Force for the investigation of a set of murders in Washington
• Keppel retired as chief criminal investigator for the Washington State Attorney General's Office in 1995

Some relevant publications

• Offender Profiling (2006; ISBN 075938875X)

• Serial Violence: Analysis of Modus Operandi and Signature Characteristics of Killers (with William Birnes) (2008; ISBN 9781420066326)

• Profiling: Principles, Processes, Practicalities (with David V. Canter) (2010; ISBN 9780131192768)

My assessment: Keppel - knows his sh*t

Michael W Richards - knows jack sh*t

You're welcome

Knew.

[Aethelwulf]

Just so you dont miss the point....in the opening paragraph..."An evaluation of the murders revealed that six of those murders were linked by a number of distinct, personal signature characteristics, including picquerism (speculative), overkill (1), incapacitation, domination and control, open and displayed (2), unusual body position, (3) sexual degradation (4), mutilation,(5) organ harvesting (6), specific areas of attack, preplanning and organization(speculative), and a combination of signature features.(?)"

1. If the killer made some additional cuts after the murder cuts, that in of itself is not Overkill. Marys murder surely was, Annies wasnt.
2. The position that 3 of those victims were in was the result of the killer setting up the body so he could have access to the abdomens. the abdomen mutilations were obviously part of his objective. "Displayed" is the author of the papers interpretation.
3. There is no hard evidence that any of these women were "degraded" based on their sexuality.
4. 1 victim had no mutilations, 1 victim included in this supposed Canonical Group of Six was stabbed repeatedly, not "mutilated".
5. Only 3 victims of this group of 6 had organs taken.
6. There has never been a consensus whether the killer was Organized or just Opportunistic.
7. Signature features? Like women being murdered with knives? What signatures are shown as evident in all 6 of this alledged series?

When you start off with indefensible presumptions what kind of output might you expect?

One additional point...there is no evidence at all that the cutting was a source of sexual pleasure to the killer, so Piquerism is also presumed prematurely.

I'll take my lead from someone who might know what they are talking about. e.g.

• Keppel narrowed down a large list of suspects until he was left with 25, including Ted Bundy. He confronted Bundy, but Bundy dismissed the conversation
• Keppel was asked to assist in the Green River Task Force for the investigation of a set of murders in Washington
• Keppel retired as chief criminal investigator for the Washington State Attorney General's Office in 1995

Some relevant publications

• Offender Profiling (2006; ISBN 075938875X)

• Serial Violence: Analysis of Modus Operandi and Signature Characteristics of Killers (with William Birnes) (2008; ISBN 9781420066326)

• Profiling: Principles, Processes, Practicalities (with David V. Canter) (2010; ISBN 9780131192768)

My assessment: Keppel - knows his sh*t

Michael W Richards - knows jack sh*t

You're welcome

[Michael W Richards]

If you intend to recreate an event that was recorded only by witness statements, be they police, medical personnel, bystanders, passers by, friends or acquaintances..etc...in order to get a factual reconstruction of the activity in focus, then you will always run the risk of inaccurate interpretation of the data. So when someone stamps these murders as "series", without having any supporting evidence other than official opinions or "guesses" based on the cumulative data gained from the above, then its a premature proclamation. And after 135 years, thats the reality. We have never had enough evidence to have "series" by Jack the Ripper, we only have peoples personal interpretations of the data.

Which is why we have some officers who say he was known and caught, some who say they had no idea who was to blame, some who openly speculated about a suspect or 2 and presumed motives, and some who believe the killer was protected by higher powers. And most of them thought 5 victims, not 6 as the paper you referred me to begins.

[Michael W Richards]

Just so you dont miss the point....in the opening paragraph..."An evaluation of the murders revealed that six of those murders were linked by a number of distinct, personal signature characteristics, including picquerism (speculative), overkill (1), incapacitation, domination and control, open and displayed (2), unusual body position, (3) sexual degradation (4), mutilation,(5) organ harvesting (6), specific areas of attack, preplanning and organization(speculative), and a combination of signature features.(?)"

1. If the killer made some additional cuts after the murder cuts, that in of itself is not Overkill. Marys murder surely was, Annies wasnt.
2. The position that 3 of those victims were in was the result of the killer setting up the body so he could have access to the abdomens. the abdomen mutilations were obviously part of his objective. "Displayed" is the author of the papers interpretation.
3. There is no hard evidence that any of these women were "degraded" based on their sexuality.
4. 1 victim had no mutilations, 1 victim included in this supposed Canonical Group of Six was stabbed repeatedly, not "mutilated".
5. Only 3 victims of this group of 6 had organs taken.
6. There has never been a consensus whether the killer was Organized or just Opportunistic.
7. Signature features? Like women being murdered with knives? What signatures are shown as evident in all 6 of this alledged series?

When you start off with indefensible presumptions what kind of output might you expect?

One additional point...there is no evidence at all that the cutting was a source of sexual pleasure to the killer, so Piquerism is also presumed prematurely.

[Michael W Richards]

And yet you get upset when people don't agree with your guesses. And dismiss the theories of actual investigating police and doctors as mere guesses.

Is the Journal of Investigative Psychology and and Offender Profiling just a guess?

I think you need to refresh yourself on just what these investigations actually revealed. As for the doctors, who said I set their opinions aside as guesses. Never said that at all. In fact Ive defended Phillips observations on Chapman and Bonds on Mary Kelly. Your link leads to some interesting material, but when you enter data as Known that isnt actually Known, then what do you really have? Like a victim count for example.

[Fiver]

Just so you have the record straight on that, there is no established series nor victim count. Its just guesses by contemporary sources and from folks like you. Forgive me if I dont agree with those guesses.

And yet you get upset when people don't agree with your guesses. And dismiss the theories of actual investigating police and doctors as mere guesses.

Is the Journal of Investigative Psychology and and Offender Profiling just a guess?

[The Rookie Detective]

I am aware that I've gone way OFF TOPIC, my apologies!...


I will cut and paste and put the above post onto the 'DR B' thread instead.