Favourite 'wildcard' suspect?

[Observer]

Agreed.
Though some feel convinced that police interest in Doss houses suggests they believed the killer would be found therein.

On the contrary, the Doss house was a resource for the police to tap into the eyes and ears of the general population, that is why they called there.
Knocking door-to-door they may touch upon 10-20 people per household, but a lodging-house gave them a hit of 2-300 people at a time, all collected under one roof.

The lodging-house was like a town hall gathering of the populace who's daily travels & experiences ranged all over Whitechapel.
Police interest in lodging-houses was for the potential information they contained.

The victims lived in the Doss Houses, its logical that the police took an interest in them. When atrocities of the magnitude of the Whitechapel murders occur, a witch hunt follows. The police would have been inundated with data coming in from all around. Unfortunately, this can hinder an operation, as it did in the case of the Yorkshire Ripper.

[Observer]

Hello Jon,

Then one has the problem of what thinking is logically acceptable to be a possible.
Again..If the reasoning isn't accepted by the reader..is it because the reader has their own set ideas to start with?


Phil

That's what it's all about. Most posters in this forum are so set in their ways, the majority of these have a pet suspect of course, even sensible logical suggestion is rejected out of hand, they will not give an inch. Regarding the timings of the Whitechapel atrocities, they are written in stone. As I said the perpetrator, should he have been a family man was able to be absent from his home in the early hours of the morning and not arouse suspicion. If he did arouse suspicion and was reported by a family member then nothing came of this. The other alternative is he was a single man who came and went as he pleased. I know the above is stating the bleedin obvious but there you have it.

[Scott Nelson]

What I think is the main problem is, some theorists draw conclusions from assumptions.

Yes, I do it all the time. It's fun.

[Phil Carter]

Hi Phil.

What I think is the main problem is, some theorists draw conclusions from assumptions.

Speculations are a necessary first step in any investigation, though it is also necessary to remember, an assumption/speculation is only a question, it is never an answer.

Hello Jon,

Then one has the problem of what thinking is logically acceptable to be a possible.
Again..If the reasoning isn't accepted by the reader..is it because the reader has their own set ideas to start with?


Phil

[Wickerman]

... Of course the killer need not have been employed, and lived alone. I believe the police were correct in their assumption that he would not have been found in one of the doss houses of the area.

Agreed.
Though some feel convinced that police interest in Doss houses suggests they believed the killer would be found therein.

On the contrary, the Doss house was a resource for the police to tap into the eyes and ears of the general population, that is why they called there.
Knocking door-to-door they may touch upon 10-20 people per household, but a lodging-house gave them a hit of 2-300 people at a time, all collected under one roof.

The lodging-house was like a town hall gathering of the populace who's daily travels & experiences ranged all over Whitechapel.
Police interest in lodging-houses was for the potential information they contained.

[Wickerman]

One should never..ever..assume.

One can use logical reasoning..but in this game..that only gets accepted if it fits a personal way of thinking in another person's mind. Because for every logical reason..someone will think it a logical reason to counter it with.


Phil

Hi Phil.

What I think is the main problem is, some theorists draw conclusions from assumptions.

Speculations are a necessary first step in any investigation, though it is also necessary to remember, an assumption/speculation is only a question, it is never an answer.

[Phil Carter]

One should never..ever..assume.

One can use logical reasoning..but in this game..that only gets accepted if it fits a personal way of thinking in another person's mind. Because for every logical reason..someone will think it a logical reason to counter it with.


Phil

[Observer]

Furthermore, the timings of the murderers suggest that the killer was able to roam the streets in the early hours of the morning and not raise suspicion among family members. The police of the time realised this. One answer could be that the killer worked nights, and was in some way able to absent himself from his work. Of course the killer need not have been employed, and lived alone. I believe the police were correct in their assumption that he would not have been found in one of the doss houses of the area.

[Trevor Marriott]

Where have we read that the first victim is usually closest to the killers home?

That's another myth !

ww.trevormarriott.co.uk

[Harry D]

The murders had a pattern look at the dates if our killer lived locally he could quite easily nip out and return home very quickly there would have been more murders and there wouldn't have been two murders in one night either .someone visited Whitechapel to commit these murders this point has been forgotten about over the years also the fact that our killer lived alone is often forgotten about as well.

Some good points raised, and I can see what you're getting at, but I don't think a local man would've killed more frequently. You argue that the 'double event' wouldn't have been committed by a local, presumably because he could always kill again the next day or whenever? That's one way to look at it. Another would be that the killer was buzzing after his interruption with Stride and the urge to kill took hold, like an addict desperate for his next fix. Not to mention that the immediate aftermath would've made it difficult for him to find his next victim straight away.

[Wickerman]

And again criminals tend not to commit crime on their own doorstep for obvious reasons.

Where have we read that the first victim is usually closest to the killers home?

[Observer]

Hi Observer,

Of course it might be the case that his main residence was outside the area, but he just happened to have access to a convenient bolthole in Whitechapel, i.e. a place where he could clean himself up, and perhaps change his clothing and store trophies, without the risk of being disturbed or attracting attention to himself.

Hi John

Certainly a possibility. With the exception of Polly Nichols, the other members of the canon were all murdered at the weeks end, or preceding a Bank Holiday, and i'll include Martha Tabram, for I believe there is a strong possibility that she too fell victim to the Whitechapel murderer. This seems to rule out a place of work as a bolthole, unless the murderer worked week-ends, I 'd say he was returning home after his murderous deeds. Of course, he might well have worked at some small manufactory, shop, something of that ilk, and had access( having a set of keys) and was thus able to seek refuge there after comm iting the murders. Whatever the case he knew the East-End like the back of his hand I'd say.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi Trevor,

Yes, possibly. However, as I pointed out in my previous post, what was wrong with the other London districts? I mean, if he wasn't local, or had transport, I see no reason why he would exclusively confine his activities to such a small geographical area.

Perhaps because it had the largest number of prostitutes to be found in London and many to be found still out and about in the early hours of the morning. Add to that the dimly lit fog bound streets of Whitechapel. A perfect killing ground !

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

[John G]

There were prostitutes in plenty, in all areas of London. The Whitechapel murderer had the added pressure of having on his person the kidney and uterus of Catherine Eddowes, Chapman also had her uterus removed and taken. I doubt he had far to travel in order to get to his bolthole after murdering her.

Hi Observer,

Of course it might be the case that his main residence was outside the area, but he just happened to have access to a convenient bolthole in Whitechapel, i.e. a place where he could clean himself up, and perhaps change his clothing and store trophies, without the risk of being disturbed or attracting attention to himself.

[Observer]

Hi John

Perhaps the killer wanted to take advantage of the number of prostitutes in Whitechapel and or he felt safer murdering in Whitechapel as opposed to on his doorstep.

Cheers John

There were prostitutes in plenty, in all areas of London. The Whitechapel murderer had the added pressure of having on his person the kidney and uterus of Catherine Eddowes, Chapman also had her uterus removed and taken. I doubt he had far to travel in order to get to his bolthole after murdering her.