What basis is there for a conspiracy theory?

[Michael W Richards]

Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes seem to be definite victims of this killer, with Tabram as a possible, and Stride and Kelly as probables.

As I suggested before, that's essentially supporting the long held belief of a Canonical Group, with the addition of a stabbing victim.

Tabram was stabbed, with two weapons indicating two killers or one killer with two weapons. Both possibilities seem improbable, but one must be true. It seems more unlikely that two men would try to inflict that amount of stabbing, so one killer seems more likely. There are differences between her killing and those of the others, but also similarities. That could mean a separate killer or it could mean a first killing by the Ripper, who advanced to cutting open his later victims. Thus I rate Tabram as a possible.

The 2 weapons overwhelmingly point to 2 killers when considering how and when the larger weapon was used. The killing also has nothing at all to do with a man being intent on opening the abdomens after the killing cuts, despite the huge risk to him, something clearly demonstrated in 2 consecutive murders shortly after Marthas.

Stride was killed in a similar manner to the other victims, but not mutilated. That could mean another killer, or it could mean the Ripper was interrupted, as he appears to have been with Chapman. Consensus at the time seems to have been that Stride was a Ripper victim, so I rate her a probable.

No evidence she was soliciting at the time,....dissimilar, dressed nicely and not carrying all of her belongings with her...dissimilar, throat cut while standing or falling, ...dissimilar....throat cut once....dissimilar,...body untouched after throat cut, dissimilar, no abdominal mutilations, dissimilar, ...there is more.


Kelly was killed indoors, a significant change from the Rippers previous killings, but the method of killing and organ removals match. Consensus at the time also seems to have been that Kelly was a Ripper victim, so I rate her a probable.

The only thing he ever sought from more than one victim, the only truly repetitive action, in the taking of the uterus. Full or partial. Where is Marys uterus?

Ill skip commenting on the rest, because when the speculated series goes beyond 3 I kind of lose interest.

[Abby Normal]

As I think you saw on the other thread, I strongly disagree with the idea that the Torso killer and the Ripper were the same person.

* The Ripper killings had a strong emotional content based on the excessive mutilations. The Torso Killer's cutting up the bodies appears to be functional, not emotional, done to reduce the bodies into pieces small enough to carry.
* The Ripper liked to pose the bodies of his victims and sometimes their personal effects. The Torso Killer did not.
* The Ripper killed his victims on the spot, as testified to by several police detectives and surgeons. The Torso Killer transported the bodies, or more correctly the parts of bodies to where they were found. This frequently included throwing them in the river.
* The Torso Killer disposed of his victims heads in a way they usually were never found, probably in an attempt to conceal their identities. The Ripper made no attempt to hide his victims' identities.
* Based on period surgeons' observations, the Torso Killer probably had knowledge of anatomy comparable to a butcher, while the Ripper did not even have that much skill.
* The Torso Killer appears to have operated over a significantly wider area and over a much longer time than the Ripper.
* The Ripper was much more of a risk taker because of the far more public locations of his killings and the time the Ripper was willing to spend at those locations doing more mutilations, taking organs, and posing the victims. Further evidence of risk taking is the Ripper appears to have been interrupted twice, appears to have killed twice in one night, and his continued killing in spite of the increased wariness of the general population, as well as increased patrolling by the police and the Whitechapel vigilance Committee.
* The Ripper liked taking internal organs as trophies. The Torso Killer took heads, and probably not as trophies.

Annie Millwood seems unlikely, but not impossible, as a Ripper victim. The failure to render Millwood unconscious or dead before the stabbing seems to me to be a strong point against her being a Ripper victim.

Alice McKenzie also seems unlikely but not impossible, as a Ripper victim. Eddowes and Kelly's bodies had been subjected to far worse, while the police surgeon described the wounds (other than to the neck) as being superficial. That's not the same thing as being interrupted - there was a lot less force behind the wounds than the Ripper had shown. That might be the Ripper weakened by injury or disease, but it it seems more likely to me that it was a separate killer - either a copycat or someone trying to disguise there actions as the work of the Ripper.

hi fiver
no need to cut and paste your bullets on torso/ ripper again here i saw them on the other thread and responded there.

i should have left that last parenthsis about torsos out of it. my bad.

re millwood and mckenzie. starting with millwood its a natural progression and escalation through the series ending with mckenzie who was interupted.

millwood was probably his first clumsy attempt at a public attack. amd mckenzie he was probably interupted. same victimology, time and place, cut throat, vertical gash to midsection and as you said...skirt raised. shes a ripper victim.

[Fiver]

hi fiver
i am! milllwood. attacked by an unidentified man close to where tabram was. stabbed with a small knife in the lower part of her body. survived but died later.

then tabram with both a smaller knife and a larger knife

then nichols with with just a larger knife

then chapman larger knife and the rippers mature MO organ removel

stride hes interupted

eddowes same as chapman and facial mutilation escalation

mary kelly all of the above

mckenzie interupted

series ends

c8 as far as im concerned ( excluding the torsos which he probably did also)

As I think you saw on the other thread, I strongly disagree with the idea that the Torso killer and the Ripper were the same person.

* The Ripper killings had a strong emotional content based on the excessive mutilations. The Torso Killer's cutting up the bodies appears to be functional, not emotional, done to reduce the bodies into pieces small enough to carry.
* The Ripper liked to pose the bodies of his victims and sometimes their personal effects. The Torso Killer did not.
* The Ripper killed his victims on the spot, as testified to by several police detectives and surgeons. The Torso Killer transported the bodies, or more correctly the parts of bodies to where they were found. This frequently included throwing them in the river.
* The Torso Killer disposed of his victims heads in a way they usually were never found, probably in an attempt to conceal their identities. The Ripper made no attempt to hide his victims' identities.
* Based on period surgeons' observations, the Torso Killer probably had knowledge of anatomy comparable to a butcher, while the Ripper did not even have that much skill.
* The Torso Killer appears to have operated over a significantly wider area and over a much longer time than the Ripper.
* The Ripper was much more of a risk taker because of the far more public locations of his killings and the time the Ripper was willing to spend at those locations doing more mutilations, taking organs, and posing the victims. Further evidence of risk taking is the Ripper appears to have been interrupted twice, appears to have killed twice in one night, and his continued killing in spite of the increased wariness of the general population, as well as increased patrolling by the police and the Whitechapel vigilance Committee.
* The Ripper liked taking internal organs as trophies. The Torso Killer took heads, and probably not as trophies.

Annie Millwood seems unlikely, but not impossible, as a Ripper victim. The failure to render Millwood unconscious or dead before the stabbing seems to me to be a strong point against her being a Ripper victim.

Alice McKenzie also seems unlikely but not impossible, as a Ripper victim. Eddowes and Kelly's bodies had been subjected to far worse, while the police surgeon described the wounds (other than to the neck) as being superficial. That's not the same thing as being interrupted - there was a lot less force behind the wounds than the Ripper had shown. That might be the Ripper weakened by injury or disease, but it it seems more likely to me that it was a separate killer - either a copycat or someone trying to disguise there actions as the work of the Ripper.

[Fiver]

I can see that you'd like a long list by one man like many others, maybe including Emma, and Torsos, and Ada, but the facts are that within the Canonical Group alone there are very good arguments to exclude some victims.

You are seeing something I never said. Of course this is not the first time you have done so.

So youre only telling us that you accept the Canonical Group premise, maybe plus one. Since that's the take for most everyone in Ripperology...so, not new. It would be so refreshing to see new people here question what is obviously unproven that to accept it.

Since you seem to have missed what I said twice, misinterpreting it differently both times, let me repeat my views a third time, expanding then slightly.

Nichols, Chapman, and Eddowes seem to be definite victims of this killer, with Tabram as a possible, and Stride and Kelly as probables.

Tabram was stabbed, with two weapons indicating two killers or one killer with two weapons. Both possibilities seem improbable, but one must be true. It seems more unlikely that two men would try to inflict that amount of stabbing, so one killer seems more likely. There are differences between her killing and those of the others, but also similarities. That could mean a separate killer or it could mean a first killing by the Ripper, who advanced to cutting open his later victims. Thus I rate Tabram as a possible.

Stride was killed in a similar manner to the other victims, but not mutilated. That could mean another killer, or it could mean the Ripper was interrupted, as he appears to have been with Chapman. Consensus at the time seems to have been that Stride was a Ripper victim, so I rate her a probable.

Kelly was killed indoors, a significant change from the Rippers previous killings, but the method of killing and organ removals match. Consensus at the time also seems to have been that Kelly was a Ripper victim, so I rate her a probable.

Which means I would have no problems with reasonable theories about there being other killers for Stride and/or Kelly. I won't just blindly accept those theories, either, though.

I also would be open to the possibility of other attacks pre-dating Nichols might be the Ripper working himself up his later levels of violence, though I am unaware of any that would match that. The Torso murders do not match the Ripper's MO. They are clearly the work of another killer, as I have said on anther thread. You brought up Ada Wilson, who I had never mentioned. Her attacker was clearly not the Ripper - his goal was theft, not mutilation. You brought up Emma Smith, who I also had never mentioned. Her attacker was clearly not the Ripper - it was a group who raped and robbed her, they appear to have attacked her with fists and some sort of blunt instrument, not a knife.

[Michael W Richards]

He used that shawl didn't he? That's how he got so much DNA on it for future generations to analyse. Case closed.

This is a study rife with bs isn't it?

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

There is specific reference to the fact that there was no blood found on the front of her clothing DJA, so Im with you on suffocation. Her throat cut(s) must have been done while she was prone. Strides murder, which also gives evidence of strangling, with her own scarf , I think shows us something. If Kate was strangled, what was used? In Strides case it was handy for her killer, did Kates killer plan to do this? The reason I differentiate is premeditation obviously. Liz's killer was spur of the moment, was Kates?

He used that shawl didn't he? That's how he got so much DNA on it for future generations to analyse. Case closed.

[Michael W Richards]

Yep.

Where and with whom was Eddowes during her missing 20 minutes?

No mention of wet clothing or blood spray,so it seems she was strangled.

There is specific reference to the fact that there was no blood found on the front of her clothing DJA, so Im with you on suffocation. Her throat cut(s) must have been done while she was prone. Strides murder, which also gives evidence of strangling, with her own scarf , I think shows us something. If Kate was strangled, what was used? In Strides case it was handy for her killer, did Kates killer plan to do this? The reason I differentiate is premeditation obviously. Liz's killer was spur of the moment, was Kates?

[Michael W Richards]

Now you're arguing semantics. What you call pointing out facts and suggesting "some possible meanings based on those" most people would call theorizing on your part.



I would agree, but I would also apply the same standard to those alternate answers. For example, your "suggested possible meanings' about the aliases used by Catherine Eddowes and whether she was trying to blackmail someone are "alternative answers". As you may have noted, most people weighing in on that thread have examined your "alternative answers" and rejected them because there are less probable than the common views, not because they are alternatives to the common views.

Ill only say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and because people think some of the ideas are "less probable" doesn't dissuade me from my position at all. Remember, Im the guy that thinks believing in a Canonical Group under this one Jack fellow is a highly improbable solution to these mysteries, if only for one case within that presumption that is most probably not by that same fellow.

The irony. Getting flak for theories that some dont see the basis for right there in the evidence, by people who believe in a serial mutilator group of victims that includes a woman with a single cut. The recent suggestions that even more should be added to that one mans roster are just as preposterous.

[JeffHamm]

Yep.

Where and with whom was Eddowes during her missing 20 minutes?

No mention of wet clothing or blood spray,so it seems she was strangled.

Well, nobody knows of course, but here's a not entirely unreasonable suggestion. We know Eddowes turned left when exiting the police station, and we know that she ends up in Mitre Square. So, left from the police station takes her towards Houndsditch, and heading down Houndsditch she ends up at St. Boltolph's Church, otherwise known at the time as the "prostitute's Church", as ladies would walk around it to avoid loitering charges, and presumably there could be shelter as well? (This information about St.B. Church is found her on casebook, forget exactly where though). Anyway, it's just under a 7 minute walk from the station to the church, so she would arrive there somewhere around 1:07ish. She's possibly spotted at 1:33-1:35 at the end of Church Passage, in the company of a man. which is 430 ft (about 2 minute walk). We know from Lawende and friends that at 1:30 it was raining very heavily, and they waited for it to let up, which it did around 1:33-1:35 (based upon testimony by Levy and Lawende, respectively). So, it's reasonable to suggest (I think) that the couple were not walking between 1:30 and 1:33, so if they arrived at Church Passage at 1:30, they left St. B's Church around 1:28. So, to the extent one accepts that sighting as legit (and I recognize that is not a hard and fast fact, but to be fair, even if it's not Eddowes and JtR, the notion they are sheltering until the rain stops before entering Mitre Square would still apply, but they would have to travel further to get to either of the other two entrances), it would suggest that somewhere between 1:07 and say 1:28, Eddowes was at St. B's church, soliciting, and at some point during that time, JtR came along. They may have chatted a few minutes at the Church, then went off to find a secluded spot to conduct business.

Indications tend to point to her soliciting, and St. B's church was a known location to do that, and her exit from the police station gives her a direct route to it. She was also found drunk earlier in the day near the same location.

Anyway, no, I'm' not suggesting this is a fact, as clearly it's not. But I think it is certainly a reasonable hypothesis given the information we do know.

[DJA]

Yep.

Where and with whom was Eddowes during her missing 20 minutes?

No mention of wet clothing or blood spray,so it seems she was strangled.

[Trapperologist]

Kindly excuse the edit.

Eddowes gave Kelly's real name,Mary Ann Kelly who was 29 years of age, along with the address of the soup kitchen behind Stride's residential building that was freely accessible through an archway of that building.

If it’s an edit, shouldn’t there be an extortion possibility at play between MAK and Dr. Sutton?

Excuse me but I only see one with MJW and EHV.

[DJA]

An alias that was, as far as we can tell, only known to a police officer at the cells from which she was released within an hour of her death.

But,but ..... then the men from Jewry Street would be the ones to blame for nothing

[DJA]

John Wilding’s version sounds like it would make sense here: Mary Kelly is the ringleader recruiting the other girls with her scheme. Mary didn’t want to risk her life unnecessarily so Catherine Eddowes was chosen to pick up the extortion money. It was only Kate’s mistake to be using the name Mary Kelly and that got her killed.

Kindly excuse the edit.

Eddowes gave Kelly's real name,Mary Ann Kelly who was 29 years of age, along with the address of the soup kitchen behind Stride's residential building that was freely accessible through an archway of that building.

[Trapperologist]

“Hi I’m here to collect the money from Mr. X.”

”What’s you name?”

”Mary Kelly.”

The End

[Sam Flynn]

It was only Kate's mistake to be using the name Mary Kelly and that got her killed.

An alias that was, as far as we can tell, only known to a police officer at the cells from which she was released within an hour of her death.