Only a 0.000003 chance the Ripper murderer was not a religious fanatic

[Richard Patterson]

What??

Most people believe that JtR was Maybrick, on what Planet? I think that I can count on one hand the number of posters here who accept that he was.

But as for leads, of which you have the only one in 127 years the diary was most certainly a lead, just it turned out to not be a very good one. In my opinion anyway.

But please answer the question why accept Macnaghten's C5 but reject his three suspects.

Macnaghten's C5 does not have to be accepted to see the remarkable fact that 4 dates in a row are covered by patron saint days for suspected occupations. So even though I believe in the importance of the C5, its truth or not does little to change the importance of my find, so it doesn't serve me one way or the other to get into an argument over it. As to leads, I'm talking about real leads. A handful of Maybrick supporters? Are we on the same sight? I’ve counted 9874 on the popular suspect polls.

http://www.casebook.org/suspects/suspect_av.html

[Richard Patterson]

Oh another lead that comes to mind might be the discovery that Littlechild's Dr T was in all probability Tumblety, but of course this is the only lead in the last 127 years.

And no I'm not a Tumblety fan either, but it was a pretty major lead.

Oh Tumblety. The 2nd most popular suspect on the polls. The American quack doctor. Let me just check... Yep I wrote 'real' lead.

[GUT]

Read my post again I said a handful of posters.

This site as at now has 2211 members many many of whom have less than 10 posts and even more who haven't posted in the last 2 or 3 three years, so yep I stand by my claim that a handful of posters believe Maybrick was JtR.

[GUT]

Oh Tumblety. The 2nd most popular suspect on the polls. The American quack doctor. Let me just check... Yep I wrote 'real' lead.

Yep and the name of a suspect by a contemporary police officer isn't a "real lead", but your claim that all the murders were on saint days of jobe that the police suspected is, even though one of those saint days [at least] wasn't ever considered. Another was, as far as I can find, only considered for a victim who wasn't killed on one of the magical days.

[Richard Patterson]

Read my post again I said a handful of posters.

This site as at now has 2211 members many many of whom have less than 10 posts and even more who haven't posted in the last 2 or 3 three years, so yep I stand by my claim that a handful of posters believe Maybrick was JtR.

In an attempt to include Martha as a victim you said that 'a cursory look at this site and JtR shows that more accept her as a ripper victim than some of the C5' You seemed to be using the weight of numbers here. I was simply pointing out that a majority does not make a fact. I will let you be right when you say a handful of posters, because how many posters can fit in a hand is as difficult to argue as how many angels can stand on the head of a pin.

[Richard Patterson]

As a cradle Catholic who has read many lives of the saints, my thought is that just about any day is a Saint's day. The difference, apparently, is limiting your selected saints by the occupations they are patrons of, which is limited further by association with sharp blades and death.
It is a bit contrived, rather like the man who tried to assert that people's astrological signs predicted what careers they would excel at, athletes and so forth.

I limit the patron saints occupation to to those who carried sharp blades and death, because that is what the police did when choosing suspects for the Ripper crimes. I also limit them to the dates of four murders in a row and the fact that patron saints of those occupations included doctors, butchers, soldiers and midwives, which were the same jobs the police though the ripper had.

[Ausgirl]

I limit the patron saints occupation to to those who carried sharp blades and death, because that is what the police did when choosing suspects for the Ripper crimes. I also limit them to the dates of four murders in a row and the fact that patron saints of those occupations included doctors, butchers, soldiers and midwives, which were the same jobs the police though the ripper had.

Which police suspected a midwife - and for which murders?

eta: and what about sailors? that was all over the papers- and every good sailor has a knife handy!

[GUT]

In an attempt to include Martha as a victim you said that 'a cursory look at this site and JtR shows that more accept her as a ripper victim than some of the C5' You seemed to be using the weight of numbers here. I was simply pointing out that a majority does not make a fact. I will let you be right when you say a handful of posters, because how many posters can fit in a hand is as difficult to argue as how many angels can stand on the head of a pin.

[Richard Patterson]

Stretching supporting evidence incredibly thin, over-reaching, or using straw man statistics do not necessarily make a person a liar.

Which police genuinely thought midwives a viable suspect pool, and for which murders?

Aha! and the name calling has begun....

Here I quote from this site:
The notion that Jack the Ripper might not in fact be a man at all, but rather a woman, was one postulated by Inspector Abberline himself at the time of the killings. According to Donald McCormick, author of The Identity of Jack the Ripper published in 1959, Abberline raised the theory in a conversation with his mentor, Dr. Thomas Dutton after the murder of Mary Kelly...Dutton answered that he believed it was doubtful, but that if it were a woman committing the crimes, the only kind capable of doing so would be a midwife.'

http://www.casebook.org/suspects/jill.html

[GUT]

I limit the patron saints occupation to to those who carried sharp blades and death, because that is what the police did when choosing suspects for the Ripper crimes. I also limit them to the dates of four murders in a row and the fact that patron saints of those occupations included doctors, butchers, soldiers and midwives, which were the same jobs the police though the ripper had.

Which mid wives carried blades, my gran was one from about the 1890s and yep carried scissors but not a knife.

When and where did the police either limit their, searches or inquiries to people who carried knives as a part of their jobs or mention saints days.

[Richard Patterson]

Oh and when was a soldier the suspect, that's right Martha, but no saints day there. Not even in the magical 31 Aug to 9 Nov.

John Leary, a soldier picked out by Constable Thomas Barrett after the murder of Mary Ann Nichols, was able to show that he had been out drinking with Private Law at the time of the murder.

[Ausgirl]

Here I quote from this site:
The notion that Jack the Ripper might not in fact be a man at all, but rather a woman, was one postulated by Inspector Abberline himself at the time of the killings. According to Donald McCormick, author of The Identity of Jack the Ripper published in 1959, Abberline raised the theory in a conversation with his mentor, Dr. Thomas Dutton after the murder of Mary Kelly...Dutton answered that he believed it was doubtful, but that if it were a woman committing the crimes, the only kind capable of doing so would be a midwife.'

http://www.casebook.org/suspects/jill.html

So rather than "police" we have "A policeman", whose notion of a midwife is non-existent, immediately pooh-poohed by his mentor who is the one loosely suggesting midwives - who knows, perhaps to be kind. And was this in the papers at the time of the murders? How could Thompson know about that conversation?

Does "one policeman" pondering a midwife outweigh "many policemen" looking for a sailor, as per witness descriptions of persons seen near murder sites?

So why not sailors?

[Richard Patterson]

So is your theory that he was disguising himself as these types of people, or how else do you make the connection between the police looking for this type of person and the dates, I am honestly puzzled.

Also where and when were the police looking for a mid-wife?

No my theory is he was killed on 4 dates in a row which Catholics honoured to saints who were the protectors of the very professions the police believed the murderer held, doctors, butchers, soldiers and midwives.

As to the midwife, apart from suggestions in the press, I answered this for Ausgirl, but:

Here I quote from this site:
The notion that Jack the Ripper might not in fact be a man at all, but rather a woman, was one postulated by Inspector Abberline himself at the time of the killings. According to Donald McCormick, author of The Identity of Jack the Ripper published in 1959, Abberline raised the theory in a conversation with his mentor, Dr. Thomas Dutton after the murder of Mary Kelly...Dutton answered that he believed it was doubtful, but that if it were a woman committing the crimes, the only kind capable of doing so would be a midwife.'

http://www.casebook.org/suspects/jill.html

[Richard Patterson]

Yep and the name of a suspect by a contemporary police officer isn't a "real lead", but your claim that all the murders were on saint days of jobe that the police suspected is, even though one of those saint days [at least] wasn't ever considered. Another was, as far as I can find, only considered for a victim who wasn't killed on one of the magical days.

I'm not a Catholic so I sure am not going to use the word 'magical'. A lead is as real as it leads to an arrest.

[GUT]

John Leary, a soldier picked out by Constable Thomas Barrett after the murder of Mary Ann Nichols, was able to show that he had been out drinking with Private Law at the time of the murder.

But looking at one soldier is different to suspecting soldiers as a group.