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

[lynn cates]

today's lecture

Hello Malcolm. Thanks.

"it is a very violent attack, the attacker seems to be stronger and far more clumsy than JTR, he's in a rage too; well it definitely looks like it."

Well, when you compare to "JTR," which killing do you have in mind? MJK's killing looks clumsy to me--Dr. Bond as well.

"this is the end of Sept?"

Somewhat before.

"unfortunately this murder has been committed a wee bit out of the way, it's too far off the main train route from London"

JTR wasn't immobile, was he? (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

"it's like a one man version of the Tabram murder, but if this is JTR, why has he killed in this hard to get to location, rather than another Whitechapel murder, which is so easy!"

Well, could he not be visiting with friends and have a sudden urge? (Again, forgive me. I may have been on the boards too long.)

"why is there a large gap between 8th sept and the 30th sept, plus a larger gap from Eddowes to MJK."

Now you're talking!

"plus, why dont we have any other hideous murders up north around Durham, during this time frame...... 6 months either side"

JTR wasn't a robot, was he? (Oh, do forgive me. I'm an impertinent twit.)

"and also this bloke was never caught."

Well, neither were any of the other mysterious killers from 1888.

"is this JTR ?....."

Most certainly not--that, even if there WERE a JTR.

"but he hasn't gutted her and this is a quiet area compared to London......."

Even better so as not to get caught.

"yes, but Coles and Mackenzie weren't gutted either, Stride wasn't for other reasons so this doesn't count.... but does show you that JTR doesn't always mutilate!"

Better: it shows that one can die of a cut throat and not be ripped.

"the knife looks long and sharp, the neck has been cut with huge force, but also from an experienced hand, now dont confuse clumsy rage with inexperience, because this killer is upset about something, but he's also planned his attack in advance, what upset him ?...... no idea"

Ah, keep going!

"but she wasn't a prostitute"

How do we know that? Conversely, where is the solid evidence for Kate soliciting? It's 1 of the clock, she is getting off a drunk, likely has not eaten or had water, and her bladder is full. Stop off for a quick one to have money for her boyfriend? Ahem.

"1.....no other similar murders in this area"

Well, how many murders took place in Aldgate?

"2.....killer never caught"

Was the torso chap caught? What about Smith's assailants?

"3.....killed on the weekend and in the same time line as JTR"

Don't forget bank holidays and comp time. (heh-heh)

"4.....Similar almost severed head to MJK and Eddowes"

Kate's wound nicked the cartilage; Polly and Annie, the bone.

"so could this still be JTR ?......"

No. It was Waddell.

"I don't know what happened to her boyfriend Waddle"

If I recall properly, he was hanged.

Now, why did I bring all this up? Simply to show that the Leather Apron killings inspired one copy cat. But if one, why not two? And if in Durham, why not in Aldgate?

Cheers.
LC

[Malcolm X]

Hello Malcolm. Thanks.

.
"I don't know what happened to her boyfriend Waddle"

If I recall properly, he was hanged.

Now, why did I bring all this up? Simply to show that the Leather Apron killings inspired one copy cat. But if one, why not two? And if in Durham, why not in Aldgate?

Cheers.
LC

i was about to say why did you mention all of this if they hanged the bastard, you've just been winding me up havent you

no, but you do have a good point, i said yesterday that it would be easy to copycat these crimes, ( remember) but it's unlikely that another savage mutilator is doing this in the same locality.

if a copycat, this is more likely to be coles and Mackenzie, after all this woman you mention here wasn't mutilated was she, so this arguement holds true.... i dont think a ``lower grade`` of killer would fancy gutting someone just to copycat, it's too bloody disgusting.... he would do a Coles only.

but the really important thing is that these last C3 murders are almost definitely the same person, because these are all linked via Dutfields/ anti- semetism, plus the last two look the same anyway etc etc.

Eddowes?..... no, she looks like she was prostituting for sure, what the hell was she up to with a total stranger in such a dark locality... studing the Orion Nebula !!!!!!

the first C2 murders, forget about Tabram, could be an inexperienced JTR especially A.CHAPMAN, but the real problem here is that the killer looks foreign and around 35 to 42, these first 2 also have no face mutilations, but this might mean nothing.

this A.CHAPMAN sighting is massive, that is if she got her facts right and to be honest i just dont know what to think anymore.

[lynn cates]

lecture, cont.

Hello Malcolm.

"I was about to say why did you mention all of this if they hanged the bastard, you've just been winding me up haven't you?"

No, just talking copycat.

"no, but you do have a good point, i said yesterday that it would be easy to copycat these crimes, ( remember) but it's unlikely that another savage mutilator is doing this in the same locality."

Well, how far does "locality" extend? And "unlikely"? Wish that were not in the vocab. Also "safe bet", "you may wager that", etc.

"if a copycat, this is more likely to be Coles and Mackenzie"

See, this is what I have been bellyaching about for nearly two years. Few stick at the notion "copycat"; so why not Kate?

"after all this woman you mention here wasn't mutilated was she"

Actually, she was--if I recall properly.

"so he would do a Coles only.'

Why?

"But the really important thing is that these last C3 murders are almost definitely the same person, because these are all linked via Dutfields/ anti- semetism, plus the last two look the same anyway etc etc.'

I don't see a Dutfield's link. Anti-Semitism? Possibly. Depends on the GSG--and thereby hangs a tale. MJK? No, I think A-man was of Irish extraction, not Jewish.

"Eddowes?..... no, she looks like she was prostituting for sure, what the hell was she up to with a total stranger in such a dark locality"

How do you know he was a total stranger. Body english seems to show familiarity (hand on chest).

"A.CHAPMAN, but the real problem here is that the killer looks foreign and around 35 to 42"

Now read JI's description.

"these first 2 also have no face mutilations, but this might mean nothing."

Agreed.

"this A.CHAPMAN sighting is massive, that is if she got her facts right and to be honest I just dont know what to think anymore."

I know that feeling.

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Hello Tom,

The evidence of the medical experts means 'nothing' ??
And police evidence outweighs expert medical opinion on specific medical matters now!

These comments are ridiculous and you know it. You simply cannot argue with expert evidence we have been given. Ask Monty. He insists on it, but when presented with facts that goes against personal views on certain opiners, silence reigns. Your method is mockery.

Yes, your comments are ridiculous. I say 'your' because I have not seen anyone else make these arguments. What I said - and you can ask any doctor, police officer, past or present - is that when more concrete evidence is present that allows for the knowledge of time of death, any estimation made by doctors is irrelevant as evidence. At most it can corroborate, but not conflict. For instance, imagine if a man is shot today in a London alley and his body hid behind some boxes and he's not discovered for some days. If an esteemed doctor offered his opinion based on the medical evidence that the man had been murdered between 65-72 hours before, but a CCTV tape recorded the murder and hiding of the body down to the precise second it happened, which piece of evidence would you say should be presented in court as most reliable? That's what I'm arguing here.

Regarding the Mitre Square murder, we have real evidence that allows us to say that, within this 10 or so minute period, Eddowes was murdered. It would be beyond the powers of a medical doctor to get any more precise than that, would it not?

Keep in mind that Adam was saying that Dr. Phillips made a mistake in estimating Chapman's time of death and a mistake in suggesting that someone other than Chapman's killer killed Eddowes, and therefore anything he had to say about anything else was suspect. I pointed out that no doctor offers his estimated time of death as hard evidence, but someone of Dr. Phillips' experience could certainly look at a neck wound (as in Stride) and offer an opinion as to the killer's knowledge of the throat and his ability with a knife.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Scott Nelson]

Yes...it all fits the Isenschmid-as-killer of Nichols and Chapman all so well. Oh, Tabram too.

[lynn cates]

thanks

Hello Scott. If that remark is for me, then I thank you. If not, however, I still thank you.

Cheers.
LC

[Adam Went]

Tom:

What should also be borne in mind when considering the statements of Dr. Phillips throughout the case and beyond is that indeed no doctor can be perfectly accurate all the time, especially with the technology that was available to them in 1888 - but the first doctor to arrive on the scene, without the body having been tampered with, is always going to be in the best position to judge a time of death. The sooner they see it, the easier it is. This wasn't the case throughout the Ripper murders with Dr. Phillips, because Dr. Phillips wasn't always called first, it was the doctor nearest to the scene.....Llewellyn in Nichols' case, Blackwell in Stride's case, etc etc....all the more reason why Dr. Phillips' statements shouldn't be taken as law.

Cheers,
Adam.

[mariab]

the first doctor to arrive on the scene, without the body having been tampered with, is always going to be in the best position to judge a time of death. The sooner they see it, the easier it is.

Unless the first medical person at the scene is the one who (accidentally) disturbs it, as suspected with Stride and Dr. Johnston. :-)

[Debra A]

You can forget the torso murders they were never murders.

Oh yes they were Baron Figgypudding.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Monty,

As you can see by the hour, its 2 am here. first chance to reply and I am up again in 5 hours, so this time please accept my apologies.. I will reply later.. had an extremely heavy day at work followed by end of term parents meetings and class panto thingy. Plus a reaction from one of the children that took a while to sort out and I wasnt home before 11. Will reply later when the battery is a little more charged.

Phil

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Adam,

When...anywhere...have you seen me place emphasis on a doctor's estimated time of death in a Ripper case? The only time it's worthy of discussion is in the case of Kelly. Some find it necessary in light of my obliteration of the case against Michael Kidney to use the ETD by Black and Phillips to try and argue that Stride wasn't a Ripper victim, but unless this is your goal, or you're discussing Kelly, there's really no point in discussing these ETDs.

The medical opinion that matters is how they estimate the killer's skill and knowledge, and how long they estimate it would have taken to inflict the wounds.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Malcolm X]

Lynn, well to be honest all of these murders could indeed be copycats, but sooner or later you have to take a stand and favour one or the other, or have a fav suspect too.

i therefore can not argue against you and i dont think i am anyway, but for me the last C3 are definitely linked.

i can not argue much about GH either, it's not the right time to do so, simply because i have to direct my queries and doubts to Ben and he is not allowed to mention GH till Febuary.

[Malcolm X]

Hi Adam,

When...anywhere...have you seen me place emphasis on a doctor's estimated time of death in a Ripper case? The only time it's worthy of discussion is in the case of Kelly. Some find it necessary in light of my obliteration of the case against Michael Kidney to use the ETD by Black and Phillips to try and argue that Stride wasn't a Ripper victim, but unless this is your goal, or you're discussing Kelly, there's really no point in discussing these ETDs.

The medical opinion that matters is how they estimate the killer's skill and knowledge, and how long they estimate it would have taken to inflict the wounds.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Yes but none of this will identify JTR, because the only person that cant be JTR is someone on crutches, any member of the public is capable of doing this, he only needs a bit of common sense and a couple of medical books at home to tell him where the organs are situated.

it wouldn't be hard to realise that to access the kidneys/ other organs etc, that you need a long vertical cut, to remove the guts and then from what you've seen in a book, simply hunt for them, this would take no more than 3 mins, finally, it's bloody obvious that you need a long sharp knife, plus you need to cut the victims throat first or to strangle her instead, any idiot will know this.

but what sort of moron has a strong enough stomach to handle this repulsive deed and why is he removing organs, because this i dont think is a trophy, he's removing these for another reason, this type of monster is rare and i dont think that you'd have two of these in action at the same time in Whitechapel.

finally, why is a woman hater etc mutilating carefully, no he would attack her like Sutcliffe....SORRY NO, JTR is after something else and doing this for another reason, he's interested in organs only and ritualistically cutting up and marking his victims too

you can see that JTR is not attacking them in a violent rage, again i say, he's after something and while he's at it, he's also toying with his knife

[lynn cates]

inspiration

Hello Malcolm. Well, you may discuss anytime. More than delighted to have a meaningful exchange--as your posts certainly are.

Regarding copycats: in my view, the TRUE copycat killing was Kate. (Too much alliteration? heh-heh)

I note what you say, but consider this. Of all the letters that came pouring in to the police and news agencies in the autumn of terror, how many are today taken as possibly authentic? 3 at most? But how many were inspired by one of those three?

See what I mean?

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

i have to direct my queries and doubts to Ben and he is not allowed to mention GH till Febuary.

This is a new one on me. Please explain. PM me if you'd like to keep it off the thread.

Yes but none of this will identify JTR, because the only person that cant be JTR is someone on crutches, any member of the public is capable of doing this, he only needs a bit of common sense and a couple of medical books at home to tell him where the organs are situated.

Just so there's no misunderstanding, I'm sure you don't believe that just anyone is capable of committing such atrocities. At any given time, in any society, there would be very few individuals capable of committing the murders we see in 1888. This is too often forgotten by us today playing 'hunt the Ripper'. Whoever killed these women wanted it so bad they were willing to take strong risks. More to the point, they were able to not only murder, but to desecrate the corpses. Most murderers wouldn't have thought to do these things. Even amongst murderers, a Jack the Ripper is rare. This point alone, when appreciated, should give one pause in thinking that more than one man was capable of Chapman, Eddowes, and Kelly. The idea that three men were behind these murders must border on the absurd.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott