Innocent, By George!

[DVV]

Hello David. That is correct--they deny Toppy was Hutch. But I was curious about why the Toppy=Hutch equation was so important to deny.

Personally, I don't think that a particular spanner would be thrown into the Hutch works--Toppy or no.

Cheers.
LC

Lynn, in my opinion it is important to know whether Toppy was Hutch or not, simply because Hutch is an important witness in the ripper story.

[DVV]

....and it is important because if Toppy was the witness - and then not the killer, as demonstrated by Garry imo - then Astrakhan Man has to be re-considered as a serious suspect.
But for all we know, Abberline himself had long forgotten Mr Astrakhan when he exposed his theory to the press.

[GregBaron]

Psychology 101

I do, however, feel that many fail to grasp the underlying psychopathology of the Ripper-like killer. The raging malevolence which fuelled this man's crime's would have been an intrinsic part of his personality. He would have been prone to violent outbursts, particularly where women were concerned, probably suffered periods of deep depression, and was almost certainly sexually dysfunctional under 'normal' romantic circumstances. As far as I'm aware, Toppy enjoyed decades of marital stability, was apparently a good father as well as a consistent and conscientious worker. So Toppy wasn't Jack the Ripper.

Well said Garry. Many on the boards seem to deny or marginalize the psychological traits of killers of this sort. It's as if since modern psychology was not yet discovered (as opposed to invented) then modern psychoses are also irrelevant for this period. But as many of us know, human nature hasn't changed much if any since Cro Magnon.

Many also think anyone (hit men, boyfriends, copycats) capable of such atrocities.

Certainly the jury is still out and I have no firm opinion but I appreciate your comments because I detect (with a few exceptions) an appalling lack of psychological knowledge on these boards.

Lest the jousting begin...


Greg

[lynn cates]

evidence

Hello Garry. Thanks.

No, no evidence to the contrary, just as there is no evidence that there was a sexual serial killer involved in the WCM.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

agreed

Hello David.

"Lynn, in my opinion it is important to know whether Toppy was Hutch or not, simply because Hutch is an important witness in the ripper story."

Completely agree.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

good suspect

Hello (again) David. Out of curiosity, what makes A-Man a good suspect, irrespective of any other factor? Is it that he was purported to be with Kelly near her TOD?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

sort of

Hello Greg.

"Many on the boards seem to deny or marginalize the psychological traits of killers of this sort"

Hmm, what sort would this be, then?

Cheers.
LC

[GregBaron]

Different specialties...

Hmm, what sort would this be, then?

Hi Lynn,

Not pointing any fingers and as I said, the jury is still out. You and the 2.1.1.1 reductionists may turn out to be right if the unsolvable ever miraculously became solvable...... I like your thinking but I struggle with the psychological incongruities in the multi-murderer scenario...

I simply think it refreshing to get an opinion from one who at least at one time was employed in the psychological profession. We seem to have a plethora of cops, a few Academics (heh-heh), a civil servant or two, and a boatload of ne'er-do-wells (myself included).........I think we could definitely use more Doctors etc.......just no lawyers please......!


Greg

[Garry Wroe]

....and it is important because if Toppy was the witness - and then not the killer, as demonstrated by Garry imo - then Astrakhan Man has to be re-considered as a serious suspect.

As far as I'm concerned, Dave, the Astrakhan story was a fiction irrespective of its source. If so, we're left with Blotchy. But would Jack the Ripper have allowed Mary Cox an unrestricted view of his face immediately prior to what was clearly a premeditated murder? Since this is highly unlikely, we must return to the man observed by Sarah Lewis who appeared to have been fixated with Miller's Court.

[lynn cates]

difficulties

Hello Greg. Thanks for that.

Could you elaborate on the psychological incongruities you see? The reason I ask is because, for several years, many theorists have had no difficulties with pulling McKenzie and Coles from the list. So I'm wondering about special difficulties with some of the others?

Completely agree about specialties. More doctors indeed!

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

As far as I'm concerned, Dave, the Astrakhan story was a fiction irrespective of its source. If so, we're left with Blotchy. But would Jack the Ripper have allowed Mary Cox an unrestricted view of his face immediately prior to what was clearly a premeditated murder? Since this is highly unlikely, we must return to the man observed by Sarah Lewis who appeared to have been fixated with Miller's Court.

Well, what can I say Garry ? You are misunderstanding me. Blotchy was gone and the Killer was the wideawake hat, this I very well know.

[Malcolm X]

.
Lest the jousting begin...


Greg

i dont think it can, i think we've taken GH as far as he can go, because the next stage of getting his signatures rechecked, will still only spawn endless debates that go around in circles... and how the hell can we trace the real GH, you tell me!

1.... Toppy is either telling the truth and saw JTR
2.... Toppy is someone else and thus JTR
3.... Toppy as himself, as said by many others too; is definitely not JTR

CONCLUSION:-
just prove that this GH isn't Toppy and then you've caught JTR, but dont expect miracles here either.

what do i think ?.....well GH is definitely a liar and an oddball for sure and he via his anti-semetic remarks/ description of LA DE DA, is linked too closely to the Eddowes graffiti/ Stride and Dutfields, he is highly suspicious, this i would say is very obvious indeed

JTR is either him, or that way too suspicious G.Chapman, take your pick, because i think that G.Chapman fits well as the torso killer

[DVV]

Rant'n'rave with the Stray Cats.
Something's wrong with my radio.

[GregBaron]

Incongruities and Aberrations...

Could you elaborate on the psychological incongruities you see? The reason I ask is because, for several years, many theorists have had no difficulties with pulling McKenzie and Coles from the list. So I'm wondering about special difficulties with some of the others?

Hi Lynn,

I don’t have any problem with Mckenzie being a ripper victim. I think Coles less likely, nor would I have a problem with Mckenzie being a copycat, we know such things exist, in fact, I believe William Bury to be an example.

My main problem is with MJK. I think whoever killed her was a very sick individual. I can’t see a copycat, hitman or boyfriend going to the extremes seen in that room. Incongruity.

Also, Eddowes and Kelly look very similar in situ. One simply exponentially more intensified. This usually indicates the same killer. So if we have your JI killing C1 and C2 and another mutilating serial murderer killing C4 and C5, we then have two mutilating serial killers roaming a small enclave simultaneously. Incongruity.

This is what I mean. Doesn’t mean I’m right.

To your point though, we almost definitely have multiple killers over the course of the 12 victims. Indeed Whitechapel was a very nasty place in that time period.


Greg

[Abby Normal]

Would not Toppy's age be more of a factor (22 at the time of the murders?) be more of a factor in ruling him out as the killer than his later family life?