Geoprofiling

[Lewis C]

This I broadly agree with but I don't think it should stop us from trying to use the technique from educated hypotheses; i.e., we could make many maps based on different victims (the C5, C5+Tambram, C5+Tamrabm & McKenzie etc.) and see what comes up. As this case is unlikely to ever be solved I see no reason not to try it anyway, just to see what the results are and if some overlap. I think it would be an interesting exercise for its own sake, especially as it's not trying to find the Ripper's front door, but only anchor sites. One wouldn't necessarily have to assume a London address for this. I've seen some good attempts before.

Also I just find maps really fascinating and visualizing the murder spots etc. on a map makes it much easier for me to pinpoint and makes sense of stuff.

Hi Tani,

Just a quick note. I don't think that the question of whether or not Tabram or McKenzie are Ripper murders would affect the geoprofile much, because both of those murders occurred pretty much right in the middle of where the C5 murders occurred.

[Filby]

I think it's valuable as tool because most serial killers (which remember is only about 1% of homicides) reside somewhere and are often a part of their community - same as they were in JtR era. I think it's especially important for analyzing suspects in 1888. They don't really travel inter-state or internationally for the most part even today but as always, there are exceptions.

[erobitha]

I think it's valuable as tool because most serial killers (which remember is only about 1% of homicides) reside somewhere and are often a part of their community - same as they were in JtR era. I think it's especially important for analyzing suspects in 1888. They don't really travel inter-state or internationally for the most part even today but as always, there are exceptions.

Yet George Hutchison apparently told Mary Kelly that he was just back from Romford. A man we assume was not of wealth due to the fact he lived in a lodging house. Romford is roughly 12 miles from where Dorset Street was. A good 4 and a half hour walk.

Annie Chapman walked from Spitalfields to Windsor and back to collect money from her husband. 26 miles and easily the best part of a day's walk.

Whilst my candidate did have money, to suggest people of no money did not travel beyond their "neighborhood" is not borne by the data.

[Tani]

Yet George Hutchison apparently told Mary Kelly that he was just back from Romford. A man we assume was not of wealth due to the fact he lived in a lodging house. Romford is roughly 12 miles from where Dorset Street was. A good 4 and a half hour walk.

Annie Chapman walked from Spitalfields to Windsor and back to collect money from her husband. 26 miles and easily the best part of a day's walk.

Whilst my candidate did have money, to suggest people of no money did not travel beyond their "neighborhood" is not borne by the data.

This is true, but I wonder how common it would have been day to day?

Can we see someone doing this with the frequency the murderer would have had to? If so, that would work.

For myself I used to walk 10 odd miles just for fun and still would had I the place. An adult male could do twice that, no problem, surely. I just wonder if he would bother walking that far out to his killing field.

[Tani]

Hi Tani,

Just a quick note. I don't think that the question of whether or not Tabram or McKenzie are Ripper murders would affect the geoprofile much, because both of those murders occurred pretty much right in the middle of where the C5 murders occurred.

This is true, I was just trying to illustrate

[Tani]

I think it's valuable as tool because most serial killers (which remember is only about 1% of homicides) reside somewhere and are often a part of their community - same as they were in JtR era. I think it's especially important for analyzing suspects in 1888. They don't really travel inter-state or internationally for the most part even today but as always, there are exceptions.

His knowledge of the East End seems acute, although that's not to say he lived there; I do believe he must have had a bolt hole or several in Whitechapel.

[Darryl Kenyon]

One of the main reasons I believe he lived within his killing streets is because there are no murders which can definitely be attributed to him anywhere else. Simplistic I know but I do feel it is a valid point.

Regards Darryl

[FISHY1118]

I certainly have him as one of my top suspects, but if evidence to the contrary rules him out, we need to go with the evidence. Lechmere 'fans' have a bad reputation and in some cases I can see why; it seems to have become an ideology of sorts for people. I feel ambivalent towards every suspect as none will ever be proven. I'm not really invested in any as a hard 'he dunnit'. I think that would be rather strange for a 100+ year old case. I dislike ideologues of any stripe.

You want evidence that rules him ''out'' ? How about one piece of evidence that rules him in ? . Lechmerians continue with this obsession as do Druittist that somehow they are ''Top'' suspects because we cant rule them ''out'' as the evidence doesnt allow for it or show it . Imo Druitt , Lechmere , and Maybrick make the 3 worse suspects as there is no evidence they were the killer nor were they suspected by the police at the time of the murders .

[Tani]

You want evidence that rules him ''out'' ? How about one piece of evidence that rules him in ? . Lechmerians continue with this obsession as do Druittist that somehow they are ''Top'' suspects because we cant rule them ''out'' as the evidence doesnt allow for it or show it . Imo Druitt , Lechmere , and Maybrick make the 3 worse suspects as there is no evidence they were the killer nor were they suspected by the police at the time of the murders .

Sup.

This isn't a Lechmere thread. I gather he's a touchy subject here, but I can have my opinion, as can those who believe Druitt did it, Kosminski did it, and others. I come on this forum for good discussions and would ask politely that I not be badgered at for having Lechmere as a suspect. I'm not throwing it in anyone's way or trying to prove anything. I'm sorry this is touchy on here, but this thread is not about him anyway.

Thanks.

[FISHY1118]

Sup.

This isn't a Lechmere thread. I gather he's a touchy subject here, but I can have my opinion, as can those who believe Druitt did it, Kosminski did it, and others. I come on this forum for good discussions and would ask politely that I not be badgered at for having Lechmere as a suspect. I'm not throwing it in anyone's way or trying to prove anything. I'm sorry this is touchy on here, but this thread is not about him anyway.

Thanks.

You were not being being badgered just informed.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You want evidence that rules him ''out'' ? How about one piece of evidence that rules him in ? . Lechmerians continue with this obsession as do Druittist that somehow they are ''Top'' suspects because we cant rule them ''out'' as the evidence doesnt allow for it or show it . Imo Druitt , Lechmere , and Maybrick make the 3 worse suspects as there is no evidence they were the killer nor were they suspected by the police at the time of the murders .

You can’t seem to resist it can you Fishy? That in a subject where we have around 200 suspects named and the overwhelming majority of them for the flimsiest of reasons you can put Druitt in the ‘worse suspects’ category shows that you aren’t looking at the subject in an unbiased way. How can you casually cast aside a suspect who was mentioned as likeliest by the Chief Constable of the Metropolitan Police. That fact alone raises him head and shoulders above the crowd. And yet all that we have against him is ‘well Macnaghten must have just made it up.’ Could any rebuttal have a flimsier basis. Despite that anger that Druitt inexplicably creates in some people he remains near the top of any reasonable pile. Accepting that we can call that a very weak pile but he’s up there nonetheless.

And I won’t apologise for repeating this but it’s even more bizarre that you can repeatedly, and at every opportunity, dismiss Druitt and yet you are about the only person alive who supports the thoroughly descredited Stephen Knight Gull/Sickert theory. A theory that categorically should be in the ‘worse suspects’ category.

It’s like saying “I don’t think that Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac. I think that it was Doris Day.”

[FISHY1118]

You can’t seem to resist it can you Fishy? That in a subject where we have around 200 suspects named and the overwhelming majority of them for the flimsiest of reasons you can put Druitt in the ‘worse suspects’ category shows that you aren’t looking at the subject in an unbiased way. How can you casually cast aside a suspect who was mentioned as likeliest by the Chief Constable of the Metropolitan Police. That fact alone raises him head and shoulders above the crowd. And yet all that we have against him is ‘well Macnaghten must have just made it up.’ Could any rebuttal have a flimsier basis. Despite that anger that Druitt inexplicably creates in some people he remains near the top of any reasonable pile. Accepting that we can call that a very weak pile but he’s up there nonetheless.

And I won’t apologise for repeating this but it’s even more bizarre that you can repeatedly, and at every opportunity, dismiss Druitt and yet you are about the only person alive who supports the thoroughly descredited Stephen Knight Gull/Sickert theory. A theory that categorically should be in the ‘worse suspects’ category.

It’s like saying “I don’t think that Arthur Leigh Allen was the Zodiac. I think that it was Doris Day.”

I think your forgetting Herlock what Macnaghten actually said in his MM [were been there and done that tho ] ,you can jump up and down all you like, there is enough evidence to suggest they are the 3 worse suspects we have. Just my opinion based on the evidence herlock , remember where all aloud to have those .

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think your forgetting Herlock what Macnaghten actually said in his MM [were been there and done that tho ] ,you can jump up and down all you like, there is enough evidence to suggest they are the 3 worse suspects we have. Just my opinion based on the evidence herlock , remember where all aloud to have those .

There is no ‘evidence.’ Many people would say that they think Druitt a poor suspect and that’s fine but I seriously doubt that you’d find anyone that would put a man named by the Chief Constable as a likely suspect in the same bracket as Lewis Carroll, PAV and the Sickert theory. I don’t even think that you believe that he should be in the lowest category. I’ve always been convinced that you say it for reasons of provocation only.

[Lewis C]

There is no ‘evidence.’ Many people would say that they think Druitt a poor suspect and that’s fine but I seriously doubt that you’d find anyone that would put a man named by the Chief Constable as a likely suspect in the same bracket as Lewis Carroll, PAV and the Sickert theory. I don’t even think that you believe that he should be in the lowest category. I’ve always been convinced that you say it for reasons of provocation only.

Hi Herlock,

While Druitt isn't one of my top suspects, I do consider him a viable suspect, while many who have been names as suspects aren't viable. In fact, I wouldn't even include Lechmere among the 3 worst suspects. He's a very weak suspect, while people like Joseph Merrick, William Gladstone, Arthur Conan Doyle, and others are just plain ridiculous suspects.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock,

While Druitt isn't one of my top suspects, I do consider him a viable suspect, while many who have been names as suspects aren't viable. In fact, I wouldn't even include Lechmere among the 3 worst suspects. He's a very weak suspect, while people like Joseph Merrick, William Gladstone, Arthur Conan Doyle, and others are just plain ridiculous suspects.

Hi Lewis,

For some inexplicable reason Druitt gets some people pretty hot under the collar. I’ve seen people on here go to extraordinary lengths to try and knock down some imaginary league table as far as it’s even being suggested that we shouldn’t even use the word ‘suspect’ in regard to him. I’ve never understood it. Of all of the appalling suspects that have been named why not at least keep an open mind on one that was named by one of the most senior police officers in the Met?