Where does Joseph Fleming fit into the equation?

[Ben]

That's nice, Fisherman, but it's important to get the meter right, like this:

There's a Ripper enthusiast Swede
Whose posts are exhausting to read
Now we might all revile
His bombastic style
But his angling efforts succeed!

Just tweaking yer bum, Fisherman. Chill out.

[curious4]

Copycat

However the broad consensus

There was more, much more than a consensus in 1888, and among researchers as well.

Other than as a description of a current situation, a snapshot (if you will) of the conventional wisdom - when has a concensus ever meant anything?

if the concesus is WRONG it is valueless.

If the concensus declines to think freely or consider new ideas it is an obstruction.

If new facts emerge then the concensus has to change.

Lechmere - you still miss my point. I couldn't care less whether Barnett satisfied Abberline or the Archangel Gabriel - from the information available to me I consider it entirely possible that an intimate killed Kelly. Barnett was such an intimate, as were Flemming and now perhaps Morgenstern, maybe others. We do not have the file and thus we must draw our own conclusions. I differ from you, as on so much.

The copycat notion, basically at all, but specifically right now, to " MJK" is almost completely ridiculous.

If you say so, Digalittledeeperwatson. I disagree.

The notion of someone, not being "the ripper" and trying to make it look like a killing of said individual is assenine.

Well, there are plenty of such people around. I don't consider myself one of them.

Sorry, but killing someone then being like, "damn, I don't wanna get caught. I know! I'll stay here and deconstruct this body to cover my tracks!" is just ludicrous.

Your opinion.

I emplore anyone who buys into the copycat notion to go back and stare at that picture for one full hour.

A HOUR! I have been studying and looking at that picture for decades.

My view has not changed.

I'll therefore keep assuming MJK was a Ripper victim without carefully chosen phrases.

I cannot do anything to help closed minds, DVV.
Phil

Hello Phil,

I have to agree with DALDWatson here. Mary Kelly was literally cut to pieces. Although the other victims were mutilated, none of them was as badly cut up as Mary. Why go so much further with her body if the aim was just to make her look like a Ripper victim?

Cheers,
C4

[DVV]

Yes, he did die at the infirmary - but does it say from what?
Fisherman

From good health, I'm sure.

[Phil H]

Why go so much further with her body if the aim was just to make her look like a Ripper victim?

Obvious - they were working from WRITTEN accounts in the press.

They had not seen the actual bodies of victims, they knew they were supposed to be horrendous, so they imitated what they thought had happened.

Phil

[DVV]

Excellent !

And the papers did tell "them" that the Ripper favourite preys were prostitutes in their twenties, working indoor.

[Phil H]

I am not going to debate with you DVV - . I have said what I have said, and it is clear.

If you disagree... well, that won't be unusual.

Phil

[Sally]

OR...

Kelly's killer - the same killer responsible for the deaths of several other women before her - had more time and was possibly carrying out his deeds in familiar surroundings - more of a comfort zone than a few snatched minutes on a darkened street?

Where did Fleming go in all this?

[Phil H]

carrying out his deeds in familiar surroundings

Familiar - why, Sally?

Phil

[DVV]

Sally, are you seriously suggesting that the Ripper killed Mary Kelly ?

How outlandish.

I'm surprised at you.

Was Charles Crossmere on sick leave in November ?

[Sally]

Sally, are you seriously suggesting that the Ripper killed Mary Kelly ?

How outlandish.

I'm surprised at you.

Was Charles Crossmere on sick leave in November ?

I'm afraid so, David - Outlandish or no.

As for Crossmere's sick leave - probably. All that murdering had tired him, no doubt.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Phil H, and anyone else.

Can I have your opinion on this? Are you in favour, as it pertains to the notion of a copycat, of it being an in the moment decision or a premeditated type thing? I respect it as a possibility, but not much further than that. And it's not the old conventional wisdom thing. I'm not saying that "MJK" had to have been murdered by "JTR". I'm not even saying that there was a "JTR", although it isn't the most unreasonable explanation. Many thanks. And don't take my earlier post as an attack, as it was not. If anything it was more of a tactic.

[Phil H]

My own ideas are based on the known fact that Barnett read reports from the newspapers about the murders to MJK. Thus we know he (at least) knew some of the details as reported in the press.

IF (big if and there are other possibilities) Barnett killed MJK in an unpremeditated fit of rage, or something similar, I think he might have fastened on the idea of disguising the killing as a "Ripper"-job. He thus tried to emulate, but exceeded, the read "Jack's" mutilations and disembowellment. Momentary hatred of the victim and a desire to destroy her identity may also have driven some of his work.

But Barnett - the example here - is just one of several intimates who might have done the dee.

Phil

[Fisherman]

That's nice, Fisherman, but it's important to get the meter right, like this:

There's a Ripper enthusiast Swede
Whose posts are exhausting to read
Now we might all revile
His bombastic style
But his angling efforts succeed!

Just tweaking yer bum, Fisherman. Chill out.

I see! Well, let´s try again then:

Two guys from the butcher´s boutique
found a method that was quite unique
for cutting people short;
they would simply distort
The record of where Evans would peak!

How´s that? No? So how about this one:

A galloping, dangerous disease
is disturbing Ripperology´s peace,
reads the evidence backwards
and moves the discipline towards
silly Ripperology à la John Cleese!

Surely you must find at least one of them to your taste?

I hope you got the fishing thing right, at any rate - Norway coming up next week. Salmon and halibut, God willing. Or willing cod.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

From good health, I'm sure.

Yes, you normally ARE sure - when no sure deduction can be made. That´s just you - and preconception.

A ruptured aorta, a sudden heart failure? Who knows? He was taken to the infirmary as a lunatic, so it could have been anything - but very sick people do not walk very fast.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Fisherman]

I'm afraid so, David - Outlandish or no.

As for Crossmere's sick leave - probably. All that murdering had tired him, no doubt.

That could well be right, Sally. Think MacKenzie.

The best,
Fisherman