Oh, and the best question... What the hell was she doing out on the street, footpath, after Midnight? One long date? Or waiting to clean? Soliciting? If no club member was involved in what happened to her, and she was there to clean, then it might appear a little ludicrous the notion of the club fabricating a scenario to "protect themselves". Kinda whimpy anarchists to tuck tail at a fine opportunity such as that anyways.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
What's your profile for Jack?
Collapse
X
-
a few points
Hello DLDW. Thanks.
"If it looks like a rose. . ."
Or was it a geranium? Perhaps a dahlia? And the fern--maidenhair or asparagus? See what I mean?
"There is evidence to support the fact she had prostituted before."
Yes, aged 16 and in Sweden. When I was 16 I was very anti-intellectual--posh toffs, not down to earth.
"Not sure cleaning alone would be sufficient to support her if she was in the clutches of a binge portion of a cycle."
Do we know she was a binge drinker?
"We are not certain of the specifics of anything other than a woman was out late on the street possibly seen with multiple men that evening."
Indeed. So why not suspend at that point, or perhaps do a double flow chart?
Cheers.
LC
Comment
-
Well it would seem that the relevant question would be is it a requirement that the woman be a prostitute in order for her to have been a victim of Jack the Ripper? I see no reason why that answer has to be yes. As has been pointed out (and a nice job on that, too) all that was really required was that the victims be available.
c.d.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lynn cates View PostHello Patrick. Not a bad idea. We could USE some fresh thinking.
What about no JTR? How's that for fresh?
Cheers.
LC
PDS
Comment
-
result
Hello CD. Thanks.
"Well it would seem that the relevant question would be is it a requirement that the woman be a prostitute in order for her to have been a victim of Jack the Ripper? I see no reason why that answer has to be yes. As has been pointed out (and a nice job on that, too) all that was really required was that the victims be available."
Quite. So perhaps we should cease the talk about prostitution? Delighted so to do.
Of course, in our next discussion of "JTR" there could be no intelligent talk about victimology.
Cheers.
LC
Comment
-
wandering lunatic
Hello Patrick. Thanks.
I have no doubt that Polly and Annie were killed by the same hand. Both were soliciting, both were strangled, both had deep parallel cuts to the neck.
I think they were killed by a wandering lunatic. The most likely (in my mind) wore an apron and carried knives. At one point he tried to strangle his wife. When apprehended he claimed he had been getting sheep heads and entrails for resale. Moreover, he had a violent temper and was quite delusional.
The other ladies did not exhibit the traits that Polly and Annie did.
Cheers.
LC
Comment
-
Originally posted by lynn cates View PostHello Patrick. Thanks.
I have no doubt that Polly and Annie were killed by the same hand. Both were soliciting, both were strangled, both had deep parallel cuts to the neck.
I think they were killed by a wandering lunatic. The most likely (in my mind) wore an apron and carried knives. At one point he tried to strangle his wife. When apprehended he claimed he had been getting sheep heads and entrails for resale. Moreover, he had a violent temper and was quite delusional.
The other ladies did not exhibit the traits that Polly and Annie did.
Cheers.
LC
If for the sake of argument, we eliminate Liz from the C5 since she was not mutilated, you have still only accounted for two of the four remaining murders. That would mean that there were two more killers roaming the streets of Whitechapel who remarkably also had a penchant for cutting women's throats and removing their internal organs.
c.d.
Comment
-
C5
Hello (again) CD. Thanks.
"If for the sake of argument, we eliminate Liz from the C5 since she was not mutilated . . ."
A weak reason. I have listed MANY better ones.
". . . you have still only accounted for two of the four remaining murders."
Alright. Nor have I touched Emma and Martha, nor yet Alice and Frances and those torsos. And, personal conjecture notwithstanding, I can't account for the Ramsey girl, Jonbenet.
"That would mean that there were two more killers. . ."
Perhaps more.
". . . roaming the streets of Whitechapel. . ."
Why roaming? What about IN Whitechapel or thereabouts? Does "roaming" somehow make the case more compelling?
". . . who remarkably also had a penchant for cutting women's throats and removing their internal organs."
Polly had no organs removed. If you wish to take THAT criterion, then we have Annie, Kate and "MJK" by one hand.
Cheers.
LC
Comment
-
Originally posted by lynn cates View PostHello Patrick. Thanks.
I have no doubt that Polly and Annie were killed by the same hand. Both were soliciting, both were strangled, both had deep parallel cuts to the neck.
I think they were killed by a wandering lunatic. The most likely (in my mind) wore an apron and carried knives. At one point he tried to strangle his wife. When apprehended he claimed he had been getting sheep heads and entrails for resale. Moreover, he had a violent temper and was quite delusional.
The other ladies did not exhibit the traits that Polly and Annie did.
Cheers.
LC
So of the six (expanded from 5 just because) victims we'd have something like this?
Tabram = angry customer (soldier?)
Nichols = Jacob Isenschmid
Chapman = Jacob Isenschmid
Stride = Michael Kidney (?)
Eddowes = ?
Kelly = Hutchinson or Barnett
I've said this before, since we know so little, it sounds as good as anything else. I'm troubled that in order to make the theory work we have to discount completely the contemporary policework and assume it was almost completely incompetent.
A final note: I'd suggest that there WAS a Jack the Ripper even if he only killed Nichols and Chapman! It's just too good a name to abondon completely.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lynn cates View PostHello (yet again) CD. Thanks.
Whom? Certainly not I.
Prostitution has NOTHING to do with it--pro or con.
Yawn, yawn.
Cheers.
LC
And yet, to my knowledge, the victims in this case have never been described as being nuns, shop girls, members of parliament or ballerinas. They have always been described as prostitutes even by the police at the time. I have to assume that there is a reason for that.
c.d.
P.S. You might want to take a break from Casebook for a while and catch up on your sleep. You seem to be doing a lot of yawning.
Comment
Comment