Punishment

[DJA]

He has said more about his suspect than you have about yours.

Suspect Pierre maybea a Greek paratrooper

[Pierre]

Yep.

Hanbury Street was on his way home.

Berner Street was most likely mutually arranged by Eddowes,in conjunction with Stride.

Someone might have tipped Jack off about Barnett moving out.
Guess who?

Hi,

1) Hanbury Street was on many people´s way home.

2) "Was most likely" is not evidence. It is an indication that you would like to think in terms of likelyhood. But likelyhood can not be used in a proper way with qualitative data.

3) "Might have" is not evidence. It is only potentiality.

Is this really all you have?

I was hoping that you had evidence that the killer had been on at least two of the crime scenes, preferably more.

But you do not have one, single item?

The more findings at the crime scenes there are, pointing to one person, the harder it is to ignore them. The more reason we would have to research that person.

Regards, Pierre

[Elamarna]

Hi,

1) Hanbury Street was on many people´s way home.

2) "Was most likely" is not evidence. It is an indication that you would like to think in terms of likelyhood. But likelyhood can not be used in a proper way with qualitative data.

3) "Might have" is not evidence. It is only potentiality.

Is this really all you have?

I was hoping that you had evidence that the killer had been on at least two of the crime scenes, preferably more.

But you do not have one, single item?

The more findings at the crime scenes there are, pointing to one person, the harder it is to ignore them. The more reason we would have to research that person.

Regards, Pierre

Pierre

Do you have evidence that the person you think may have been the killer had been on at least two of the crime scenes, preferably more.?

Regards

[DJA]

Hi,

Is this really all you have?

Regards, Pierre

It's a damn sight more than you deserve.

There is much more.

[Michael W Richards]

[QUOTE=Pierre;373711]

The only Canonical that was treated with obvious anger was Mary Kelly,

So he was not angry when he cut the face of Eddowes? What do you mean?

the facial slashing is indicative of that emotion.

Do you have any research for that?



That is a rather common idea, isn´t it, but it does not explain the other murders.

Regards, Pierre

Hi Pierre,

Small semi precise cuts are far different than random slashing back and forth, and as to the issue of what that kind of injury most often reflects, you can refer to any statistical study of facial injuries on murder victims. Its like branding vs burning.

As to your last point, I am one of the old school that doesnt seek to answer questions about other murders based on victims injuries sustained in an individual murder. In other words, I, like the facts, have no evidence that definitively links any single Canonical, or general Unsolved East End murder of that period, with another. They are all unsolved murders assumed by many to have been a series.

Thought youd appreciate punctuating in your own fashion.

[Elamarna]

[QUOTE=Michael W Richards;373878]

Hi Pierre,

Small semi precise cuts are far different than random slashing back and forth, and as to the issue of what that kind of injury most often reflects, you can refer to any statistical study of facial injuries on murder victims. Its like branding vs burning.

As to your last point, I am one of the old school that doesnt seek to answer questions about other murders based on victims injuries sustained in an individual murder. In other words, I, like the facts, have no evidence that definitively links any single Canonical, or general Unsolved East End murder of that period, with another. They are all unsolved murders assumed by many to have been a series.

Thought youd appreciate punctuating in your own fashion.

Michael,

very much like that post, it does need to be pointed out sometimes, that there is nothing concrete to link any of the killings.

There are assumptions that they are linked based on the:

Similarity of some injuries.
Time scale (for the series of murders).
Limited area of killings.
Class and gender of victims (all poor, all women).
All apparently killed after dark.


While I personally believe there are links to between at least 3, probably 4 and possibly 5 or 6 this cannot be proved.
Indeed some do not accept the same hand for more than possibly 2 victims.

( I included Mackenzie, but not Tabram, and see Stride and Kelly as both possibles, but not certainties)

This should never be forgotten when assessing the murders

regards

Steve

[Abby Normal]

Pierre

Do you have evidence that the person you think may have been the killer had been on at least two of the crime scenes, preferably more.?

Regards

Hi El
what police man/official that meets all of Pierrs other criteria was at least one of the crime scenes?

someone, was it you? came up with a while back of about 6? police officials that fit all of piers previous hints.

If one of those were at any of the crime scenes, it might be pierres man.

[Elamarna]

Hi El
what police man/official that meets all of Pierrs other criteria was at least one of the crime scenes?

someone, was it you? came up with a while back of about 6? police officials that fit all of piers previous hints.

If one of those were at any of the crime scenes, it might be pierres man.

Hi Abby

Craigh is the man who did all the research, I was just helping him out. However I can say firmly that NO ONE official fitted all of Pierre's hints.




Using Craig's research a score chart was produced, matching officials against hints. Many scored around 50-60%. of those several had attended at least one murder site.

The Person who scored the highest(over 75%) did not as far as I am aware attend any of the sites at the time.

It will be of great interest to all i think if Pierre replies and if a positive answer , says which sites.

I wonder if he will say that he cannot reply Given that admin banned him from talking about his suspect?


regards

Steve

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby

Craigh is the man who did all the research, I was just helping him out. However I can say firmly that NO ONE official fitted all of Pierre's hints.

Using Craig's research a score chart was produced, matching officials against hints. Many scored around 50-60%. of those several had attended at least one murder site.

The Person who scored the highest(over 75%) did not as far as I am aware attend any of the sites at the time.


regards

Steve

Thanks El
It seems Pierre might be hinting (unknowingly) that his man has been to at least one or two of the crime scenes.

do you remember which ones of craigs has attended at least one crime scene?

[Elamarna]

Thanks El
It seems Pierre might be hinting (unknowingly) that his man has been to at least one or two of the crime scenes.

do you remember which ones of craigs has attended at least one crime scene?

Hi Abby

I will need to go and re read my notes for a full reply.

Craig, I hope you don’t mind me doing this, of course jump in if you feel I am saying anything wrong.


I can say that Bruce, while deputising for Anderson, when he was on sick leave, visited both Bucks Row and Hanbury Street.

He scored 7 on the score system putting him in the top quarter of officials looked at.

Positives in favour of him
Certainly may have lived in the right sort of housing Pierre suggested, could find no picture of him, did not live locally and was certainly unknown now, how well he was known in 1888 is hard to Judge.

Negatives
Could find No reason for a hatred/resentment of Police/Establishment,
No reason for killings to stop, nothing to suggest he had local knowledge, and no known link to the name Jack could be found.

This of course does not mean that such reasons/links did not exist.

However with out proof of motive it is hard to push him forward.
Pierre could of course solve this by just confirming or denying Bruce.

One finally thought here, even if someone attended 2, 3 or more sites, did they have a legitimate reason for doing so? For instance if it was required of their position/role does that count?

Regards

steve

[Abby Normal]

Hi Abby

I will need to go and re read my notes for a full reply.

Craig, I hope you don’t mind me doing this, of course jump in if you feel I am saying anything wrong.


I can say that Bruce, while deputising for Anderson, when he was on sick leave, visited both Bucks Row and Hanbury Street.

He scored 7 on the score system putting him in the top quarter of officials looked at.

Positives in favour of him
Certainly may have lived in the right sort of housing Pierre suggested, could find no picture of him, did not live locally and was certainly unknown now, how well he was known in 1888 is hard to Judge.

Negatives
Could find No reason for a hatred/resentment of Police/Establishment,
No reason for killings to stop, nothing to suggest he had local knowledge, and no known link to the name Jack could be found.

This of course does not mean that such reasons/links did not exist.

However with out proof of motive it is hard to push him forward.
Pierre could of course solve this by just confirming or denying Bruce.

One finally thought here, even if someone attended 2, 3 or more sites, did they have a legitimate reason for doing so? For instance if it was required of their position/role does that count?

Regards

steve

Thanks again el!

I don't know-that's a question for Pierre, I guess.

pierre?

[wigngown]

Hello DJA,
You may be correct about about the Met files, but I suspect that there's much more to their reluctance to release the files than they've said. Certainly Trevor Marriott, a former Detective with considerable policing experience and Author, vigorously Pursued their release and spent time & money in his endeavour. If I'm right one can assume that the files, even after all this time, contain something very injurious to someone/Family/Organisation. Best Regards.

[DJA]

If the files still exist,they will do enormous damage even today.

There was an enormous cover up.

Jack was well connected.

Really doubt it was a big secret in certain quarters.

[wigngown]

You mirror my thoughts entirely DJA. I think that when the Killers identity is revealed, as it will be, we will understand how he was able to escape the gallows and how he's remained an enigma for such a long time. I only hope that those who knew & kept the secret are damned for their actions.

Best regards.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=Michael W Richards;373878]

They are all unsolved murders assumed by many to have been a series.

Hi Michael,

Since you point out the fact the murders are assumed to be a series, do you know about any theory that has given connections between a single person and the whole series, that is, separate evidence at each murder site pointing towards one single person?


Or do you perhaps know any theory giving connections to one single person from two or three murder site findings?

For example, Fishermans theory gives only 1-3 connections för one murder site.

Or do you think that the assumption about a series is exclusively constructed from the perspective of victimology and MO?

Thought youd appreciate punctuating in your own fashion.

I did. Thanks. I gets more transparent.

Best wishes, Pierre