Have Ripperologists Been Polled As To Who They Think Jack Really Was?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • lynn cates
    replied
    problem

    Hello Caroline. Thanks for that.

    I suppose that aspect of the case has never once bothered me. If I recall properly, both Polly and Annie had bruises apparently marking where digits were inserted as part of their strangulation. That would take, I suppose, 2-5 minutes. Time seems not to be a factor in their deaths.

    Time, however, would be a BIG factor in Kate's death--given, of course, the usual timeline suggested by Gareth Williams in his excellent dissertation.

    So perhaps her assailant was the only one with that problem AND the right knowledge to circumvent it?

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
    Suggesting 'that', does not make it so.

    Regards, Jon S.
    I even believe it's absurd, Jon, hence the oxymoron.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by DVV View Post
    Eddowes has been disfigured by a creative copycat, hasn't she ?
    Suggesting 'that', does not make it so.

    Regards, Jon S.

    Leave a comment:


  • DVV
    replied
    Eddowes has been disfigured by a creative copycat, hasn't she ?

    Leave a comment:


  • Rubyretro
    replied
    very good point, Caz..

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Hi Lynn,

    Loosely related to the question of who we think Jack really was...

    ...a question for you about the various copycat theories, if I may:

    The papers may have been full of details about the shocking murders, but many details were either missing, inaccurate or invented. There was also a common theme running through: the police, the press, even the doctors, were all at a loss to explain how the victims were initially subdued, so effectively, so quickly and with so little fuss. We still ask the question today, and we have access to far more detailed and accurate information than anyone on the street in 1888.

    So my question is how would your copycat killer(s) have guessed, or discovered, what this highly mysterious trick was, when no expert in the land could apparently work it out? And what were the chances of putting the trick into practice and getting it perfect first time, either by accident or design?

    As you know, I already struggle with the idea that 'Jack' was really several killers, all with their own reasons for snuffing out an unfortunate life or two at the same time and place. I really struggle with all these extras making a reasonably decent job of coming together as one Jack and fooling so many, in an age long before 'repeat offender' tripped off the tongue.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Saucy jack

    Hello Jon. Have another go at the "Saucy Jack" and my reasoning should become clear.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Wickerman
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    That's very nearly correct, in my opinion.

    Been at the xmas spirits have we Lynn?

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    close

    Hello Tom.

    "It should be obvious that Le Grand killed Eddowes and spent the next week or so stirring things up in Berner Street to get at the guy who stole part of his thunder."

    That's very nearly correct, in my opinion.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Tom_Wescott
    replied
    Scott,

    Your research and deductive reasoning have clearly gone south. It should be obvious that Le Grand killed Eddowes and spent the next week or so stirring things up in Berner Street to get at the guy who stole part of his thunder. Fanny Mortimer killed Stride. Where have you been?

    Yours truly,

    Tom Wescott

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    and then . . .

    Hello Scott. I don't see Liz and Kate together.

    Fleming is an attractive choice for whomever died in Miller's Court. But there are many questions to be answered--as I'm sure you know. In particular, what do we know about Sir Ed's "Miss Worth" and Alice Carroll?

    Before any case gets closed, MUCH more evidence must be presented.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • Scott Nelson
    replied
    OK, so the mad pork butcher killed Nichols and Chapman. Le Grand killed Stride and Eddowes. And I guess that leaves Fleming as Kelly's killer.

    Newland Smith killed MacKenzie and Sadler killed Coles. Mystery solved.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    Druitt

    Hello Maria. Murder, perhaps; mutilation?

    Of course, we are just beginning to get a "feel" for Druitt.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:


  • mariab
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    But my point is that astute gentleman like Jonathan Hainsworth, John Ruffles and Andrew Spallek would beg to differ.
    There were obviously several individuals in Autumn, 1888 capable of murder
    I'm very interested in the aforementioned gentlemen's research on Druitt, but I don't consider him as capable of murder.

    Leave a comment:


  • lynn cates
    replied
    parallels

    Hello Tom. Well spoke.

    Drawing a parallel with the Phoenix Park murders, once the case was solved, all the seeming contradictory evidence came together and fit like a hand in a glove. The lone report of a car going east, not west? Turns out there were 2 cars. 3 different reports of car colour? Some were poor witnesses. There were even 2 sets of surgical instruments--and Mallon had the wrong set.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X