Why not always indoors?

[Amanda]

Nope....

What if someone swallows a pencil? Does it become an organ by proximity?

Mike

Hi Mike,

If someone were stupid enough to swallow a pencil he'd just become a 'Lead Beat'
Amanda

[The Good Michael]

Hello Michael,

A quick quiz -- which of these five things is different from the rest? Uterus, kidney, heart, bladder, pencil.

If you said pencil, you are correct. The others are ALL ORGANS.

What if someone swallows a pencil? Does it become an organ by proximity?

Mike

[c.d.]

"I don't know about anyone else, but I find it extraordinary that you're nitpicking over what organs the killer(s) took, rather than the fact they were taken in the first place! Different organs mean different killers? Perhaps the killer fancied a slightly different trophy as the murders progressed? I'll repeat, no argument there were plenty of wrong'uns on the streets capable of murdering women, but how many of them were willing and able to disembowel them on the street, and how come they all happened to come crawling out of the woodwork a few weeks within each other? Why invent a multi-killer theory when you don't need to? Occam has a razor you can borrow."

Damn, Harry. You are rapidly becoming one of my favorite posters. You cut right to the chase (no pun intended).

c.d.

[c.d.]

You try so hard to imagine a monster that you tend to forget how many evil violent men there were in the East End in 1888.

The Unsolved murder File contained women just like the ones in the Five cd, occasional or full time prostitutes. You want to pretend that only Jack killed cruelly, that's your thing, but I have no such pretense myself.

And to put things in context...yes, 3 women had organs removed from the scene, and they were all different organs.....the first was a complete uterus and partial bladder, then a complete kidney and a partial uterus, and finally a heart. The organs that were taken complete would in my estimation be the ones that were sought, and they were different. Why? My guess would be that some of the murderers didn't know why they they would want any organ at all...only that one at least should be taken.

Because they had extractions is enough to assume they were all motivated by the same objective? Clearly, the objective wasn't a single organ. As it appears it may have been with Polly and Annie....if Pollys murder hadn't been interrupted.

Cheers

Hello Michael,

A quick quiz -- which of these five things is different from the rest? Uterus, kidney, heart, bladder, pencil.

If you said pencil, you are correct. The others are ALL ORGANS.

c.d.

[Batman]

I don't think there was a shortage. There where just many more without. Ada Wilson had a room for example. So did Mary Cox in Miller's Court.

[Harry D]

You try so hard to imagine a monster that you tend to forget how many evil violent men there were in the East End in 1888.

The Unsolved murder File contained women just like the ones in the Five cd, occasional or full time prostitutes. You want to pretend that only Jack killed cruelly, that's your thing, but I have no such pretense myself.

And to put things in context...yes, 3 women had organs removed from the scene, and they were all different organs.....the first was a complete uterus and partial bladder, then a complete kidney and a partial uterus, and finally a heart. The organs that were taken complete would in my estimation be the ones that were sought, and they were different. Why? My guess would be that some of the murderers didn't know why they they would want any organ at all...only that one at least should be taken.

Because they had extractions is enough to assume they were all motivated by the same objective? Clearly, the objective wasn't a single organ. As it appears it may have been with Polly and Annie....if Pollys murder hadn't been interrupted.

Cheers

You're right, Michael. There was no shortage of unsavoury types with a potential for violence living in the East End around the time of the Ripper. However, of all the Whitechapel murders, only a handful of the victims involved abdominal mutilations and the evisceration of organs. If Stride had been slashed on another night, then maybe she wouldn't have been accepted into the canon, the salient point of course being that she was killed less than hour before a Ripper-esque murder. I've no problem with people ruling Stride out, coincidences can and do indeed happen. However, the evidence and timing of the murder has more to link it to a unfinished Ripper job than not, in my unprofessional opinion. As for the other murders in the Whitechapel files, they were quite rightly not attributed to the Ripper because none of them portrayed the same degree of sado-sexual violence that we saw from C1 to C5, with the possible exception of Alice Mackenzie, but she has the timing against her (would the killer cool-off for eight months?) and the de-escalation, although this could be another interruption. At any rate, I'd throw Mackenzie on the 'maybe' pile.

I don't know about anyone else, but I find it extraordinary that you're nitpicking over what organs the killer(s) took, rather than the fact they were taken in the first place! Different organs mean different killers? Perhaps the killer fancied a slightly different trophy as the murders progressed? I'll repeat, no argument there were plenty of wrong'uns on the streets capable of murdering women, but how many of them were willing and able to disembowel them on the street, and how come they all happened to come crawling out of the woodwork a few weeks within each other? Why invent a multi-killer theory when you don't need to? Occam has a razor you can borrow.

[The Good Michael]

Despite your insistence that other women within the Group were actively soliciting when they met their killer...(something that is not within the known evidence), I believe you did point out the crux here.....just 2 women within the Canonical Group were soliciting to get money for their bed that same night. They both admitted as much. That evidence isn't present in then 3 later deaths, its assumed. Even though one clearly didnt need to do so.

What does this have to do with the question re: Why not always indoors? I say that these poor prostitutes, and I didn't mention anyone in particular, didn't take men indoors because they didn't have their own room or house to take them to. So how does your cryptic response fit with my answer?

Mike

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Michael,

I am afraid that you are comparing apples and oranges here. We are not talking about a group consisting solely of women who were killed in London at the time. We are talking about a specific group of women who appear to have been prostitutes, if only on occasion (no need to chime in here, Lynn), who had their throats cut and 3 of the 5 had organs removed and a fourth had her abdomen cut in what would seem preparation for organ removal. They were all residents of Whitechapel and in addition, the C5 were killed with no apparent motive.

You look so hard at the trees, Michael you can't see the forest.

c.d.

You try so hard to imagine a monster that you tend to forget how many evil violent men there were in the East End in 1888.

The Unsolved murder File contained women just like the ones in the Five cd, occasional or full time prostitutes. You want to pretend that only Jack killed cruelly, that's your thing, but I have no such pretense myself.

And to put things in context...yes, 3 women had organs removed from the scene, and they were all different organs.....the first was a complete uterus and partial bladder, then a complete kidney and a partial uterus, and finally a heart. The organs that were taken complete would in my estimation be the ones that were sought, and they were different. Why? My guess would be that some of the murderers didn't know why they they would want any organ at all...only that one at least should be taken.

Because they had extractions is enough to assume they were all motivated by the same objective? Clearly, the objective wasn't a single organ. As it appears it may have been with Polly and Annie....if Pollys murder hadn't been interrupted.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

The definitive answer to the OP question is this: Women who were in dire situations did not typically have a private room to take their johns to. It's quite simple.


Mike

Despite your insistence that other women within the Group were actively soliciting when they met their killer...(something that is not within the known evidence), I believe you did point out the crux here.....just 2 women within the Canonical Group were soliciting to get money for their bed that same night. They both admitted as much. That evidence isn't present in then 3 later deaths, its assumed. Even though one clearly didnt need to do so.

Victim Vulnerability is Im sure a key factor in the C1 and C2 murders.

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

The policemen working on the case believed in a serial killer known as 'Jack the Ripper', even if they quibbled over the total number of victims. e.g. Macnaghten believed in five victims, Robert Anderson believed there were six. Like I said, they had access to all the "ample evidence" we have and more. What do you think led them to draw those conclusions, Michael?

I think Harry that what we have been told by those investigators needs to be put into context,...a force that was generally despised by the East Enders needed to try and explain what was happening, even if they didn't know themselves. Just to keep the area stable. This is the same area that fought police with clubs in Trafalgar Square a year earlier, and suddenly a year later the forgotten women of the area were being murdered. I believe a position like "we have no idea who is doing this or what is going on" would have caused riots myself.

Its also imperative to remember that these same officials were in the business of collecting intelligence, using double agents, putting out false information, withholding information, all as part of their primary mandates in Intelligence work.

What professional liars said isn't what I would assume to be the empirical truth.

Cheers

[GUT]

The definitive answer to the OP question is this: Women who were in dire situations did not typically have a private room to take their johns to. It's quite simple.


Mike

Yep, or he couldn't get the few who did to take him there.

[The Good Michael]

The definitive answer to the OP question is this: Women who were in dire situations did not typically have a private room to take their johns to. It's quite simple.


Mike

[c.d.]

Question: How many victims were in the unsolved murder file for the period when this Ripper fellow was thought to be about?
Answer: Well, Its certainly more than just 5. Its more than 10 and less than 15 by the by.
Question: How many involved knife attacks?
Answer: I believe it was almost all of them.
Question: Was there any connection offered by officials between the assumed Canonical Group Killer and the person who was making Torso's before and during that 2 1/2 month period?
Answer: No

That's your evidence Harry..its not only obvious by the wounds made on the Canonicals but also by the size and nature of the Unsolved murders file of the period. Its not debatable, no matter how you and others believe...there were other killers than this mythical Jack fellow killing women in and around that area at the same time....the idea that every murderous act was suddenly suspended so that a single individual could have the streets to himself isn't just an odd idea...its ludicrous.

There were ample amounts of men that could and did kill in that area, at that time. Again, Not debatable.

Cheers

Hello Michael,

I am afraid that you are comparing apples and oranges here. We are not talking about a group consisting solely of women who were killed in London at the time. We are talking about a specific group of women who appear to have been prostitutes, if only on occasion (no need to chime in here, Lynn), who had their throats cut and 3 of the 5 had organs removed and a fourth had her abdomen cut in what would seem preparation for organ removal. They were all residents of Whitechapel and in addition, the C5 were killed with no apparent motive.

You look so hard at the trees, Michael you can't see the forest.

c.d.

[Wickerman]

No police official shared his personal suspicions about any particular suspect at the time of the murders.
Except, perhaps Anderson, in late October when he wrote "..without our having the slightest clue".

Memoirs do not always reflect reality.

[RockySullivan]

I think the time frame indicates Tabram & Emma smith could be ripper victims. What's more, the whitehall torso had pieces of the aug 24 newspaper on top of it. The date the Tabram inquests conclusion was printed. Probably an indicator Torso & Tabrams killer were one and the same. If not what else would it mean?