Did Jack the Ripper even exist?

[The Grave Maurice]

Do we really believe that particular tattoo refers to Thomas Conway?

Well...yes.

[Supe]

AP,

Clearly, you know nothing about probability and statistics. I'd suggest you stop making a fool of yourself, but since you enjoy doing so carry on.

Don.

[Cap'n Jack]

So, Chris, you are clearly saying that the sudden arrival of a spree driven serial killer who kills at least five women in a very short time period will have no influence on the murder statistics of a small town?
Do you know any of the officers who investigated the Ipswich prostitute murders?
Would it be your studied opinion that they might have been busier than usual during the month of December 2006, or less busy then December 2005 or December 2007.
I should opinion that were ******* busy, and the statistics will reflect this.
They don't in Whitechapel.

[truebluedub]

The statistical variation is so small that no significance can be read into them. Also just because the statistical increase is five we cannot correlate this to the c5.
In other words the statistics cannot help us come to a conclusion as to whether there was a Jack the Ripper.

Chris Lowe

[Cap'n Jack]

And you, Sam, remind of someone I know called Sam, who when he doesn't have a decent answer to a serious question posts a joke instead.
I don't want to know about cats and turkeys, Sam, I want to know why a prolific serial killer operating in a restricted area, with a specific victim type, and a restricted time span does not influence the statistics at all.

[Sam Flynn]

So, Sam, if 5 prostitutes were murdered in Ipswich in 2005, and then 5 in 2007, the arrival of a spree serial killer who murders five prostitutes in very short time in 2006 should increase that to 10?
Or would it be five?
I personally don't have a difficulty with this, for my base line is that a prolific serial killer should surface as a blimp on the statistics, otherwise he wouldn't be a prolific serial killer would he?
It would be just the day to day murder and mayhem of the LVP.
So where is he?

Reminds me of an Irish joke:

Paddy and Murphy had bought a 7lb turkey for their Christmas dinner, and left it out on the draining board overnight to defrost. When they awoke on the Big Day, the turkey had vanished. Says Paddy, "Bejasus! Where's the turkey got to? It was there last night!". Murphy chipped in, "I bet the cat's had it... where is the greedy little bugger?". "Here he is", says Paddy, holding up the cat. "Right", says Murphy, "Stick him on the kitchen scales!". Paddy does so, and remarks "Seven pounds exactly! That's our turkey there!". "To be sure", says Murphy, "we've found our turkey alright. The problem we've got now is - where's the bloody cat?".

[Cap'n Jack]

Mostly by tattoos, Robert. I have found several cases from the LVP where prostitutes carried the tattoo of their controlling gang, simple initials, like TC as a for example. Do we really believe that particular tattoo refers to Thomas Conway?
I like to play with these peculiar concepts, as you know, so could the awesome destruction that was visited upon Mary Kelly have been a simple attempt to remove a tattoo after her death so that the Irish gang on her doorstep were not implicated in her death?
And of course Jack the Ripper did it, didn't he?

[Robert]

But AP, how would the gangs have recognised who didn't belong to them?

[Cap'n Jack]

So, Sam, if 5 prostitutes were murdered in Ipswich in 2005, and then 5 in 2007, the arrival of a spree serial killer who murders five prostitutes in very short time in 2006 should increase that to 10?
Or would it be five?
I personally don't have a difficulty with this, for my base line is that a prolific serial killer should surface as a blimp on the statistics, otherwise he wouldn't be a prolific serial killer would he?
It would be just the day to day murder and mayhem of the LVP.
So where is he?

[Sam Flynn]

Sorry, Sam, forgive my useless eyes at the mo. I, of course, meant Ipswich in Suffolk and the serial killer, Wright, who murdered five prostitutes there in December of 2006.
I think what I'm being asked to believe on this thread is that this sudden spree - just as in the Whitechapel sudden spree of 1888 - would not have influenced the statistics for the murder of women in Ipswich for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007.
Is that right?

As I said, AP - it would depend on the baseline. Ipswich, being a somewhat sleepy town, would I dare say see a bit of a blip following the 5 Wright murders, as I'd assume that the murder baseline would be rather low. Not sure that would be the same for Victorian Whitechapel, if its baseline were higher to start with.

[Cap'n Jack]

Robert, it's worth remembering that it was in fact mostly gangs, rather than individuals, who controlled and monitored the activities of prostitutes on their particular patch.
In patch the prostitutes would have been relatively safe, but to stray out of patch would have been considered poaching; and it strikes me that Smith, Tabram, Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were peregrinating well off patch when they died.

[Cap'n Jack]

Sorry, Sam, forgive my useless eyes at the mo. I, of course, meant Ipswich in Suffolk and the serial killer, Wright, who murdered five prostitutes there in December of 2006.
I think what I'm being asked to believe on this thread is that this sudden spree - just as in the Whitechapel sudden spree of 1888 - would not have influenced the statistics for the murder of women in Ipswich for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007.
Is that right?

[Robert]

How, I'm not arguing that the victims had pimps, just that if they did., the pimps would have been unlikely to do that to them. The only murders I can think of that might have been by pimps (in a fit of anger) are Stride and Coles.

Also I doubt if a pimp would have randomly killed just any woman, on the principle of "keep the women frightened." It would have been counter-productive. And how could the pimp be sure that the message would have been understood by the other prostitutes? It's not as though disembowelment was a pimp signature.

[Mitch Rowe]

Crimes are "connected" when the perpetrator is unknown by "common detective sense" and a list of "statistics" of wich I have never seen! Im sure theres a list its just that after experience with many different cases one gets a sense of how common something is going to be at a murder scene.

Example: How many murders have members of your team seen where the head was nearly chopped off? One out of ten? 1 out of 100? Or one out of 1000?

But its not only that. Its very helpful to understand the criminal mind. Not only the differences but more importantly the similarities with normal law abiding folk.

In short.. Macnaghten isnt pulling victims out of his hat when he sets the C5 in motion. He is using the same practical techniques and skills any modern detective would use.

[Sam Flynn]

I think you will find that the murder statistics for a small town in Norfolk over the last few years will certainly reflect the fact that a serial killer was on the rampage there.

That would depend on what the baseline was to start with, AP. Seen against the criminal statistics for the whole of the UK, Harold Shipman's tally of hundreds barely registered as a blip. Seen against the statistics for Hyde, Greater Manchester, they'd have gone off the scale.