Suspect battle: Cross/Lechmere vs. Hutchinson

[Rainbow]

No Bury was dead at that point. Mackenzie is regarded by most as not being a Ripper victim.

by most ?! who are those most ?! do those most know who Jack the ripper was or exactly his MO before they say she is not ?

when one of the two doctors who examinded Mackenzie said it was by the same hand, forthermore , the MO in Mackenzie murder is more as that of Jack than alines murder.....

but I think you know that... you just don't want to admit it

...

[drstrange169]

Hello Fisherman,

Spero vi sia piaciuto Milano.


>> I will gladly pick a few examples from his recent posts that go to show what he stands for.<<

Truth, justice and the Australian way.

[John Wheat]

by most ?! who are those most ?! do those most know who Jack the ripper was or exactly his MO before they say she is not ?

when one of the two doctors who examinded Mackenzie said it was by the same hand, forthermore , the MO in Mackenzie murder is more as that of Jack than alines murder.....

but I think you know that... you just don't want to admit it

...

Well MacKenzie is not in the C5. It's debatable which murder out of Ellen's and Mackenzie's murder is closer to the C5.

[Fisherman]

Hello Fisherman,

Spero vi sia piaciuto Milano.


>> I will gladly pick a few examples from his recent posts that go to show what he stands for.<<

Truth, justice and the Australian way.

So do you want me to or not? Not, I take it?

[Fisherman]

Well MacKenzie is not in the C5. It's debatable which murder out of Ellen's and Mackenzie's murder is closer to the C5.

I can take care of part of that debate:

MacKenzie:
Active prostitute - typical
Killed in the open street - typical
Cut neck - typical
Abdomen opened up - typical
Medical view (Phillips) that there were anatomical insights with the killer - typical
Nobody came forward and reported the murder - typical
No effort to hide the victim - typical

Ellen Bury:
No active prostitute - atypical
Not killed in the open street - atypical
No cut neck - atypical
Abdomen opened up - typical
No medical view that there were anatomical insights with the killer - atypical
The killer came forward and reported the murder - atypical
The victim stuffed inside a box - atypical

[John Wheat]

I can take care of part of that debate:

MacKenzie:
Active prostitute - typical
Killed in the open street - typical
Cut neck - typical
Abdomen opened up - typical
Medical view (Phillips) that there were anatomical insights with the killer - typical
Nobody came forward and reported the murder - typical
No effort to hide the victim - typical

Ellen Bury:
No active prostitute - atypical
Not killed in the open street - atypical
No cut neck - atypical
Abdomen opened up - typical
No medical view that there were anatomical insights with the killer - atypical
The killer came forward and reported the murder - atypical
The victim stuffed inside a box - atypical

But why the gap of over eight months? Completely and utterly atypical of the killer. Unless of course as is common consensus that Alice McKenzie wasn't a Ripper victim.

[John Wheat]

On the combination of the two gentlemen John Wheat and Dusty, all that needs to be said is that one calls the Lechmere theory bullshit and supports that take on bullshit only, whereas the other one claims that I am twisting and distorting the facts, and he does so against a backdrop of being a twister and distorter.

That really does not make for a reassuring companionship, but no doubt, these posters will have a lot to discuss and agree on! I have seen many companionships formed out here on the same type of grounds.

If Dusty thinks it is a good idea to try and peddle his distorsions on this thread, I will gladly pick a few examples from his recent posts that go to show what he stands for.

John Wheat? Not a chance.

I took the not a chance to mean you were no longer answering my posts Fisherman. Or was that another one of your twisting's of the truth?

[Fisherman]

But why the gap of over eight months? Completely and utterly atypical of the killer. Unless of course as is common consensus that Alice McKenzie wasn't a Ripper victim.

Since there are no gaps in the recorded murders of Bury (he was only ever accused of one murder), there can be no comparison. What remains is that there are many, many more likenesses between the C5 and MacKenzie than between the C5 and Ellen Bury. And that was what the debate was supposed to be about. You´ve had my contribution.

[Fisherman]

I took the not a chance to mean you were no longer answering my posts Fisherman. Or was that another one of your twisting's of the truth?

On a general level, I have little or nothing to say to you, but I reserve myself the right to do as I please. Otherwise, we could be faced with a situation where you misinformed and I was unable to correct you, like in the case of the comparison between MacKenzie, Bury and the C5.
Or like when you say that I twist the truth. Compare this, if you will, in your discussion with Henry Flower. Henry first:

"The evidence and arguments about times, routes, statements and lies have been done to death. Clearly, some people find them compelling, others merely interesting, while others seem strangely angered by the very notion that the man found alongside the only Ripper victim who may even have been technically alive at the time of her discovery, and who gave his usually unused alternative name in his testimony, should be considered a person of interest."


...to which you replied:

"I disagree with the anger point. Personally what angers me is the pompous attitude from some Lechmere Theory supporters."

That is a formidably daft answer - you first deny that there is anger involved, and then you say that you are personally angered. Whoops!

Of course, pointing this inconsistency out for what it is will only make me look pompous. Which apparently equates to saying that you are wrong and factually proving it. But there you are.

Now, until you try to spread more disinformation, I will thoroughly enjoy NOT debating with you.

[Harry D]

Bury moved to Dundee at the time that the canonical murders ended.

Whitechapel had to wait seven months for its next "Ripper-like" victim, and even longer for the next one. The murders never reoccurred with anything like the same fervour that they did in 1888.

This glaring coincidence cannot be ignored.

[John Wheat]

Since there are no gaps in the recorded murders of Bury (he was only ever accused of one murder), there can be no comparison. What remains is that there are many, many more likenesses between the C5 and MacKenzie than between the C5 and Ellen Bury. And that was what the debate was supposed to be about. You´ve had my contribution.

I take it your not going to answer why the gap then? I'm assuming because you can't.

[John Wheat]

On a general level, I have little or nothing to say to you, but I reserve myself the right to do as I please. Otherwise, we could be faced with a situation where you misinformed and I was unable to correct you, like in the case of the comparison between MacKenzie, Bury and the C5.
Or like when you say that I twist the truth. Compare this, if you will, in your discussion with Henry Flower. Henry first:

"The evidence and arguments about times, routes, statements and lies have been done to death. Clearly, some people find them compelling, others merely interesting, while others seem strangely angered by the very notion that the man found alongside the only Ripper victim who may even have been technically alive at the time of her discovery, and who gave his usually unused alternative name in his testimony, should be considered a person of interest."


...to which you replied:

"I disagree with the anger point. Personally what angers me is the pompous attitude from some Lechmere Theory supporters."

That is a formidably daft answer - you first deny that there is anger involved, and then you say that you are personally angered. Whoops!

Of course, pointing this inconsistency out for what it is will only make me look pompous. Which apparently equates to saying that you are wrong and factually proving it. But there you are.

Now, until you try to spread more disinformation, I will thoroughly enjoy NOT debating with you.

You really are full of it. I was attempting to say the anger at is aimed at the Lechmere theorists who have a pompous attitude. But that obviously went over you're head. I'm glad you don't enjoy debating with me but the more bullshit you post about the crappy Lechmere theory the more I times I will post pointing that out. I suggest you deal with it or make you're posts more balanced.

[John Wheat]

Bury moved to Dundee at the time that the canonical murders ended.

Whitechapel had to wait seven months for its next "Ripper-like" victim, and even longer for the next one. The murders never reoccurred with anything like the same fervour that they did in 1888.

This glaring coincidence cannot be ignored.

Absolutely Harry. But many will ignore it for various reasons.

[Fisherman]

You really are full of it. I was attempting to say the anger at is aimed at the Lechmere theorists who have a pompous attitude. But that obviously went over you're head. I'm glad you don't enjoy debating with me but the more bullshit you post about the crappy Lechmere theory the more I times I will post pointing that out. I suggest you deal with it or make you're posts more balanced.

How does that detract from the fact that you are angered in your exchanges with me? How is Henry Flower to know where your anger emanates from? I suspect to him, all he sees is your raving on about how I am "full of it" and how the theory is "bullshit" and "crappy" and so on and so forth.
You see, those of us who are not familiar with how your psyche works (and don´t take that as an invitation to tell us) will see what you produce, not why you produce it.

It all comes across as a bit primitive, John.

[Elamarna]

Absolutely Harry. But many will ignore it for various reasons.

Hi John,

I will not ignore the gap.

Possible reasons for:


He died- and Alice is not a victim of the same hand---Druitt.


He moved away- and Alice is not a victim of the same hand--Bury, Tumblety.



He was moved away and came back to continue-- Pierre's man.



He was "locked up", during the period after Kelly but released before Mackenzie-- which could fit a Kosminski type, if one thinks there is something in the reports of Cox and Sagar.


He stopped for a period- does happen. this it seems would fit Lechmere theory.



Mackenzie is not by the same killer.


Basically you pays your money and makes a choice.


Steve