Rating The Suspects.

[The Rookie Detective]

I think the following article from 1896, and the fact it mentions Jack the Ripper, should be enough to confirm an authentic association/connection with Jack the Ripper and Feigenbaum...




The sheer mention of Feigenbaum in this context should allow him to be permitted into/remain on, the list of suspects on this thread.


Just my opinion of course.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think the following article from 1896, and the fact it mentions Jack the Ripper, should be enough to confirm an authentic association/connection with Jack the Ripper and Feigenbaum...




The sheer mention of Feigenbaum in this context should allow him to be permitted into/remain on, the list of suspects on this thread.


Just my opinion of course.

Then should we should call Ameer Ben Ali a ‘ripper suspect’ because he was actually convicted and sentenced for the murder of Carrie Brown, Chris?

If you read CJ Morley’s suspect book he has over 500 names most of whom are just men who claimed to have been the ripper or who accused by someone of being the ripper. I’m not going to remove Feigenbaum from the list because I’ll just get post after post accusing me of doing it just because it’s Trevor’s suspect but I’ll say this….we apply various criteria to suspects and the absolute ‘should go without saying one’ would have to be ‘proven to have been in the same country at the same time that the murders occurred.’ We can’t say this for Feigenbaum.

[Lewis C]

I could even accept something less than complete certainty that he was in England at the time if that's clearly the most likely scenario. However, if someone lived in the US but could have been in England because he was a seaman, that's not good enough for me. But again, I have just as much of a problem with Sickert, who we know was in France on 3 or 4 days during the period of the 1st 4 C5 murders, and I believe no evidence that he ever left France during that period.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I could even accept something less than complete certainty that he was in England at the time if that's clearly the most likely scenario. However, if someone lived in the US but could have been in England because he was a seaman, that's not good enough for me. But again, I have just as much of a problem with Sickert, who we know was in France on 3 or 4 days during the period of the 1st 4 C5 murders, and I believe no evidence that he ever left France during that period.

I’m the same with Sickert though to a much lesser extent Lewis.

[Lewis C]

I’m the same with Sickert though to a much lesser extent Lewis.

I guess the counter-argument would be that Sickert was in France, but Feigenbaum was in the US, which is much further?

[Herlock Sholmes]

I guess the counter-argument would be that Sickert was in France, but Feigenbaum was in the US, which is much further?

Yes and we know for a fact that Sickert did return to England but it looks like we just can’t pin down exactly when. The best that can be said about Feigenbaum is that it’s not physically impossible that he could have come to England but this is the same approach that Dale Larner takes with Van Gogh.

[Lewis C]

Yes and we know for a fact that Sickert did return to England but it looks like we just can’t pin down exactly when. The best that can be said about Feigenbaum is that it’s not physically impossible that he could have come to England but this is the same approach that Dale Larner takes with Van Gogh.

It looks to me that we do know that Sickert was in France before and after the Chapman murder, but I suppose that if we only have to account for one murder, there's an outside chance he could have gone to England and then back to France without us knowing it. And maybe someone would argue that maybe Chapman wasn't a Ripper murder, though that someone wouldn't be me.

[Herlock Sholmes]

It looks to me that we do know that Sickert was in France before and after the Chapman murder, but I suppose that if we only have to account for one murder, there's an outside chance he could have gone to England and then back to France without us knowing it. And maybe someone would argue that maybe Chapman wasn't a Ripper murder, though that someone wouldn't be me.

I remember it being discussed on here but I don’t recall the details tbh Lewis. I’d certainly love to see the case for Chapman not being a ripper victim but I guess that pretty much everything has been suggested at some point.

[Lewis C]

I remember it being discussed on here but I don’t recall the details tbh Lewis. I’d certainly love to see the case for Chapman not being a ripper victim but I guess that pretty much everything has been suggested at some point.

I know that some have suggested that there was no Ripper, meaning that every Whitechapel murder was committed by a different killer. Of those that think that there was a killer with multiple victims, I don't remember anyone saying that Chapman wasn't one of those victims.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I know that some have suggested that there was no Ripper, meaning that every Whitechapel murder was committed by a different killer. Of those that think that there was a killer with multiple victims, I don't remember anyone saying that Chapman wasn't one of those victims.

To be honest, neither do I Lewis.

[The Rookie Detective]

I know that some have suggested that there was no Ripper, meaning that every Whitechapel murder was committed by a different killer. Of those that think that there was a killer with multiple victims, I don't remember anyone saying that Chapman wasn't one of those victims.

I think in terms of comparing victims, the 2 most similar are Chapman and Eddowes.

The chances of 2 different men being responsible for the murders of Chapman and Eddowes respectively, is as close to zero as you can get.


In terms of matching up...

Chapman and Eddowes
or
Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly
or
Nichols and McKenzie
or
Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly
or
Canonical 5
or
Canonical 5 plus McKenzie
or
Canonical 5 plus McKenzie and Tabram
or
Canonical 4, minus Stride, plus McKenzie and Tabram
or
Canonical 4, minus Stride, plus McKenzie, Tabram and Coles
or
Canonical 5, plus McKenzie, Tabram and Coles.
or
All the above plus Smith
or
All the above, plus all the other victims listed in the official file.


All of the above are statistically more likely than 5 different individual killers.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I think in terms of comparing victims, the 2 most similar are Chapman and Eddowes.

The chances of 2 different men being responsible for the murders of Chapman and Eddowes respectively, is as close to zero as you can get.


In terms of matching up...

Chapman and Eddowes
or
Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly
or
Nichols and McKenzie
or
Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly
or
Canonical 5
or
Canonical 5 plus McKenzie
or
Canonical 5 plus McKenzie and Tabram
or
Canonical 4, minus Stride, plus McKenzie and Tabram
or
Canonical 4, minus Stride, plus McKenzie, Tabram and Coles
or
Canonical 5, plus McKenzie, Tabram and Coles.
or
All the above plus Smith
or
All the above, plus all the other victims listed in the official file.


All of the above are statistically more likely than 5 different individual killers.

That none of the above people ever existed is more likely than there being 5 different killers in my opinion Chris