Coincidences, possibilities and probabilities

[Pierre]

In my opinion, this mystery will never be solved by recourse to probability theory: there are far too many variables to account for.

Hi John,

Variables can not be used methodologically for solving the case, since there is no way to test correlations. OK, we could make data sets from newspapers for example but that would not be useful for solving the case.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

The evidential standards are twice as high since you first have to analyse rather old primary historical sources and then connect a killer in the past to the contents of them.

I think you must be trying to say that it's twice as difficult to solve a 127 year old murder. It's bizarre to say that the evidential standards are "twice as high". They are not, you just need to make a compelling case which convinces your readers.

With the greatest respect, you are never going to make a compelling case by referring to "source criticism" and various academic papers etc.

[Pierre]

[QUOTE=David Orsam;374084]

I think you must be trying to say that it's twice as difficult to solve a 127 year old murder. It's bizarre to say that the evidential standards are "twice as high". They are not, you just need to make a compelling case which convinces your readers

No, David. It might be "bizarre", but in the past they had living witnesses they could go back and talk to and they could visit suspects and murder sites - we have only sources made of paper!

With the greatest respect, you are never going to make a compelling case by referring to "source criticism" and various academic papers etc.

With the greatest respect for the past, it is the only way to do it.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

I am not, and since you will not explain your motivations, I think that you are not able to argue for your idea.

This raises an interesting question as to whether argument simply involves taking up a contrary position. Some people say that argument can be contradiction. Other say that it is an intellectual process involving a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition whereas contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says. Some say it is, others say it isn't.

Anyway, I'm sorry, your five minutes is up and I'm not allowed to argue any more.

[David Orsam]

No, David. It might be "bizarre", but in the past they had living witnesses they could go back and talk to and they could visit suspects and murder sites - we have only sources made of paper!

That is precisely why I'm saying it might be twice as difficult and provides a good example as to why the evidential standards cannot possibly be twice as high.

[Pierre]

This raises an interesting question as to whether argument simply involves taking up a contrary position. Some people say that argument can be contradiction. Other say that it is an intellectual process involving a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition whereas contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says. Some say it is, others say it isn't.

Anyway, I'm sorry, your five minutes is up and I'm not allowed to argue any more.

Trying to mend what is broken.

Kind regards, Pierre

[Pierre]

That is precisely why I'm saying it might be twice as difficult and provides a good example as to why the evidential standards cannot possibly be twice as high.

Source criticism is not difficult when you know how to do it.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

With the greatest respect for the past, it is the only way to do it.

In saying this, you demonstrate with great clarity that you don't understand other human beings nor how to make a compelling and convincing argument for other human beings to read and understand.

[Pierre]

In saying this, you demonstrate with great clarity that you don't understand other human beings nor how to make a compelling and convincing argument for other human beings to read and understand.

How very interesting. Are you claiming to be a psychologist now?

Some people like to hear the "truth", and some like fairy tales.

Regards, Pierre

[David Orsam]

Source criticism is not difficult when you know how to do it.

Oh that's good to know.

[David Orsam]

Some people like to hear the "truth", and some like fairy tales.

Like the GOGMAG letter predicting the identity of the next murder victim and her exact address?

What category would you include that particular story in? "Truth" or fairy tale?

[Michael W Richards]

Hi,

That sounds interesting, could you please elaborate a bit on it?

Kind regards, Pierre

I believe that some circumstantial evidence exists which provides for a motive for the 4th Canonical murder, which would make it coincidence that she was killed during a period when a madman was believed to be ruling the streets, and the "coincidental" factors regarding Kates choice of an alias when juxtaposed with the subsequent alledged Ripper murder seem to suggest that Kate perhaps had some knowledge of the next victim in the "series". Perhaps this indicates a link by motive.

The main arguments for a Jack the Ripper series of Five has always been based on statistics, the alledged series itself was created by just that kind of thinking, which does not allow for any coincidental occurances. Ive maintained that there were ample reasons, or motives, for people to have wanted to kill others during this particular place in time, self preservation high among them. I believe in the study of the Ripper crimes there is an absence of recognition of the extremely dangerous, and lucrative, espionage business, that was "coincidentally" being exposed before packed crowds that same Fall.

If people restricted the likely list of single killer victims to women whose attacks and injuries were very, very similar, we would have only a 2, perhaps 3, person series.

[John G]

The C5 and Tabram can be linked by a number of factors, entirely unrelated to "statistics", as demonstrated by Keppel et al 2005, in their signature analysis.

What, however, is remarkable in my opinion is the plethora of fanciful theories that have been proposed as an alternative to the single killer argument: grand conspiracies; Chapman murdered by an army officer disguised as the pensioner Ted Stanley...

[richardnunweek]

Hi.
This is when I should remind folk on Casebook of my ''39 theory''.
Martha Tabram aged 39 , stabbed 39 times.
Polly Nichols killed 31st August,
Annie Chapman 8th Sept.=39
Eddowes and Stride killed 30th October.
Kelly 9th November =39
August is the 8th month Nichols killed 31st=39
September is the 9th month Eddowes killed 30th=39
Kelly rented Room 13, at 26 Dorset street=39
Barnett moved out 30th , Kelly was killed on the 9th=39.
A letter posted''I live at number 39 Cutler street''
Pure Numerology but full of possibilities.
Regards Richard.

[Errata]

This raises an interesting question as to whether argument simply involves taking up a contrary position. Some people say that argument can be contradiction. Other say that it is an intellectual process involving a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition whereas contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says. Some say it is, others say it isn't.

Anyway, I'm sorry, your five minutes is up and I'm not allowed to argue any more.

*snort*