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

[Malcolm X]

Hello Malcolm. Out of curiosity, why must the "two killers" be on the loose? Why not one crazed killer/mutilator and a copy cat?

Are you familiar with the Beadmore case? It occurred during the autumn of terror, but outside London. A girl was killed and subsequently mutilated--the latter to deflect blame and implicate JTR.

Why could not Kate be the same type of thing?

Cheers.
LC

hi Lynn
a copy cat must be two people, but i dont go along with this theory simply because Stride and Eddowes are on the same night, plus strongly linked via Dutfields, i think this location was where he was intending to leave the graffiti, but he was unable to lure LIZ up the road, plus also; unable to kill anyone else close by instead, simply because she was still hanging around the yard, preventing him from leaving the graffiti there, plus part of a victim's clothing....... any part will do !

because there is no point leaving the graffiti on Dutfields for a normal style of murder that could have been committed by killer no 2 , it must be accompaning a hideaous mutilation only, this tells everyone that it's JTR and the graffiti links it back to Dutfields, he's saying, Eddowes is mine; plus that disaster earlier on is mine too.

it would be sheer fluke that both killers would be out on the street on the same night and at close times, plus also a very strong Jewish link to both murders..... no this is JTR only.

this anti-semetic link is repeated with MJK via GH and thus makes him look very guilty indeed, ( obviously) but i think something else is going on here but i just cant see the wood for the trees any more.

i definitely dont think that GH killed Annie Chapman, not a hope in hell, this looks like a downgraded version of his LA DE DA and slightly older too.

did GH blame this guy for his murder, just pretended that he was dressed a bit smarter for this ``grande finale``..... did GH target the last 3 only

well i dont know, but GH fails big time after 1889, because JTR is definitely not a ``stay at home family guy``

all the H fans have nothing much to say about GH after 1889, i've never seen any good reasons to explain this or a good suspect to fit him, they know my feelings, GH draws a blank after 1889, the case goes cold.

finally, only Eddowes and MJK had the face mutilations, why didn't JTR mutilate Stride's face.... i can understand not gutting her, but why not the face instead ?........maybe this location was so risky that it was only safe for a quick CUT-THROAT murder only, ok this seems to make sense

[lynn cates]

Kate

Hello Malcolm. I wasn't talking about Liz nor the other lady killed by knife that night. I referred ONLY to Kate Eddowes. Why could not her assailant try to emulate Polly and Annie's slayer?

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Are you familiar with the Beadmore case? It occurred during the autumn of terror, but outside London. A girl was killed and subsequently mutilated--the latter to deflect blame and implicate JTR.

Did the killer admit this as fact or is this assumption? Sorry, but it's been years since I've read on the Beadmore case.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[robhouse]

For those who seem to want to believe that Jack the Ripper never existed... i.e that all or some of the C5 were not killed by one lone serial killer, I would suggest providing some evidence to support the theory. To me, the evidence supporting the theory of one lone killer is overwhelming, and is based largely on similarities between the crimes, including victimology, time of attack, method of approach, m.o., location of attacks, and most important, a comparison of the specific wounds, crime scenes, and body positioning. I have posted a pretty extensive comparison of these in the past. It is inconceivable, in my opinion, that Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly were not murdered by the same person. Nichols likewise is almost certain, as is Stride based on the theory that the killer was interrupted and frightened away before doing any mutilation of the corpse. Also, given the nature of the crimes, a particular type of killer is clearly suggested (post-mortem mutilator), and this also in my opinion lessens the likelihood of two killers acting together. I realize this all seems very boring for the revisionists out there, but there is absolutely zero evidence that suggests that any of the C5 were killed by someone other than Jack the Ripper. And I would throw in Tabram to boot. The fact that people on these boards keep repeating (and agreeing with other people) the suggestion that the 5 were killed by different killers, does not make it a more plausible theory.

RH

[Steven Russell]

Agree 100%, Rob.

Best wishes,
Steve.

[lynn cates]

Beetmore

Hello Tom. Thanks for asking. It was SY's assumption.

Story from "Lloyd's" September 30, 1888. (I omit a paragraph about funeral.) (Continued in next post.)

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Beetmore conclusion

Hello Tom. Finis.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

nego

Hello Rob, Steven.

"For those who seem to want to believe that Jack the Ripper never existed... i.e that all or some of the C5 were not killed by one lone serial killer, I would suggest providing some evidence to support the theory."

Actually, this theory is a denial of the C5 theory. And since it is a DENIAL, argumentatively, according to rule, the onus is on the assertor of the POSITIVE theory. Those who deny a theory need observe no such strictures.

Cheers.
LC

[Monty]

QUOTE=robhouse;200880]For those who seem to want to believe that Jack the Ripper never existed... i.e that all or some of the C5 were not killed by one lone serial killer, I would suggest providing some evidence to support the theory. To me, the evidence supporting the theory of one lone killer is overwhelming, and is based largely on similarities between the crimes, including victimology, time of attack, method of approach, m.o., location of attacks, and most important, a comparison of the specific wounds, crime scenes, and body positioning. I have posted a pretty extensive comparison of these in the past. It is inconceivable, in my opinion, that Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly were not murdered by the same person. Nichols likewise is almost certain, as is Stride based on the theory that the killer was interrupted and frightened away before doing any mutilation of the corpse. Also, given the nature of the crimes, a particular type of killer is clearly suggested (post-mortem mutilator), and this also in my opinion lessens the likelihood of two killers acting together. I realize this all seems very boring for the revisionists out there, but there is absolutely zero evidence that suggests that any of the C5 were killed by someone other than Jack the Ripper. And I would throw in Tabram to boot. The fact that people on these boards keep repeating (and agreeing with other people) the suggestion that the 5 were killed by different killers, does not make it a more plausible theory.

RH[/QUOTE]

Steady Rob,

You run the gauntlet of being labelled a Luddite in a flat world.

However, you are perfectly correct.


Lynn,

The evidence is there for all to see, MO, signature, location, victimology, percentage....all support a lone murderer for at least 3 of these killings.

If you propose a theory on there being multiple killers then to be taken seriously you need to provide evidence. This has not happened. All we have had is cute comments about the dark ages and insinuations of an inability to think differently.

Just mere diversions from the fact the evidence is either non existant or flimsy at best.

So whilst you and others think of a smart reply (which I do enjoy I must confess) Rob, Steve and the majority, including myself, will wait with baited breath.

Monty

[lynn cates]

another convert

Hello Neil. Regretfully, not capable of a smart reply.

I am astonished, however, that you claim only 3. That is a major concession.

Welcome to the club; all fees waived.

Cheers.
LC

[Monty]

Oh I don't know Lynn,

You seem to do ok.

No, I stated at least 3, not only 3.....and have done so for these past 12 years so you shouldn't be surprised.

Monty

[lynn cates]

3 out of 5 ain't bad

Hello Neil. Thanks for that.

Yes, I am aware of your qualification. Actually, your position approximates that of Mr. Evans who has publicly declared that, based only on the signatures, he could feel confident of just 3.

My mission, then, is to separate Annie and Kate in your thinking.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

I'm no more comfortable with Monty's reductionist views of the case (three victims) than Monty is with Trevor/Lynn/Phil's reductionist views (no more than 2 kills by the same man).

Let's imagine that Evans had never published his book, we didn't know who he was, and he showed up on Casebook going 'Hey, I've got a great theory. i think Jack the Ripper was a 6'4" flamboyant gay man who only killed Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes. Stride and Kelly were domestic homicides!' How long, I wonder, before he'd be chased away? But timing is everything, and he published and became a bestseller before the internet Ripper community existed. Not picking on Stewart at all here, just adding a little perspective.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Monty]

Your comfort was never a concern of mine Tom,

It wasn't timing, it was the fact Stewart obtained a letter from a major mover in Special Branch who would have had knowledge of the case.

Whatever you think of Tumblety, Stewart and Paul presented their views and supported with evidence.

They provided something. Which is more than others have done.

Monty

[Phil Carter]

Hello Tom,

For the record, I have opined (for the C5) a 2-1-2 (3 killers) or perhaps a 2-1-1-1. Which means that if one takes the 3 killer scenario, could, with statistical adjustment, agree with Monty and SPE. I.E. That two of the C5 were individual killings (example Stride and Kelly) and the other 3 by the same hand.
The only difference being that I personajly have doubts that the person who killed Eddowes being the same person as who killed Kelly. The inference has been that The Kelly murder MAY have Irish connections. (note..this has been thought of long before We were around)
Given that-IF Kelly and Eddowes were killed by the same hand- and there was some sort of Irish connection-I would want to find a common link between the two women themselves.

I would like to ask Monty a direct question. Which two of the C5 are NOT, in his opinion- if his "at least 3 by the same hand- would he separate form the rest? I presume Stride and Kelly? If so- what reasons does he have for these two being of a different hand?

Reductionist eh Tom? Better than a multiplicicist. Where is the evidence that one and the SAME person was at all 5 murder sites according to witness testimony of descriptions of men seen? There is NO evidence of the same man purportedly seen at both the Chapman site and the Eddowes or even Kelly site- or vicinity.
Your favourite suspects connection, Le Grande, has only, as far as we know, a connection to Strides location.

Rob, your favourite suspect cannot be matched with physical observations by witnesses at all 5 sites either, plus he, like others, has no known knowledge of the insides of the anatomy of a human being- plus the police were still looking for JTR after he was incarcerated.

Likewise Druitt for many of the above points.

We are all entitled to have our opinion, and as things stand atm we all fall down on evidence..in one way or the other.

Simon stated earlier that 12 women the 12 months stated died by knife attacks by unknown hand. He makes a good point. What were the police doing wrong? 12 unsolved murders?

So how many of THOSE killerd were of the same hand? If 3 or more- is THIS a "Jack the Ripper" too?

All respect and zero animosity toward all of the persons above. The efforts of Rob and Tom to catch JTR with their suspects is duly acknowledged.

And incase anyone thinks that I have just jumped on the bandwagon re 2-1-2 or 2-1-1-1, I have thought the former since about 1976 or so, the latter since around 2000. i am far from certain of either- but am certain it wasnt a C5- for the reasons above and much more besides.

I am not out to change people's minds. They are entitled to their opinion, as am I.

Merry Xmas to one and all. Let us all hope for 2012 that new evidence emerges.

Best wishes, Phil