Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is Eddowes demise the key?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    necking

    Hello Errata. Whilst I agree with almost all your post, I'm not so sure about:

    "Nichols and Eddowes have their throats cut the same way, Stride and Kelly a different way, and Chapman a third way."

    Nichols and Chapman were the same--except the two neck cuts differed by 1/2 half inch. Eddowes' second neck cut was superficial--just a scratch.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Errata View Post
      I'm a smoker. A very addicted one. ........ I don't want to smoke all the time, but I want to smoke when I want to smoke.
      And I remember that well. When I first tried to quit, it was for a bet, I found it helped to carry a pack in my top pocket.
      Then it was my choice, I was in control, and it worked.

      I went 9 months without having a smoke, then someone offered me a cigar at a celebration, .....and, there we go....

      The second time I tried, I succeeded, well, for 26 years, so far so good.

      Then again, I'm not a big believer in the C5, and I don't think Kelly was killed by the same man as Eddowes, so clearly I am biased.
      Purely relying on contemporary evidence alone, devoid of modern opinions, I tend to think only Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes fell victim to the same hand.
      All the other victims might be included, but by differing degrees of probability.
      There are some reasonable arguments against their inclusion.

      Regards, Jon S.
      Regards, Jon S.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
        Hello Errata. Whilst I agree with almost all your post, I'm not so sure about:

        "Nichols and Eddowes have their throats cut the same way, Stride and Kelly a different way, and Chapman a third way."

        Nichols and Chapman were the same--except the two neck cuts differed by 1/2 half inch. Eddowes' second neck cut was superficial--just a scratch.

        Cheers.
        LC
        Yeah. Switch Chapman and Eddowes. Unless of course you want to put Chapman and Stride together for having neckerchiefs not severed by a throat cut. Or put Stride all by herself by having the most efficient and professional throat cut, while all the rest were false starts or inconsistent pressure.
        Unless of course you believe in attempted decapitations instead of hash jobs at throat cutting, where the grouping would be entirely different.
        Its not really math, like a train heads east at 40 kph and another heads west a 60 kph. It's more like a train heads east at 40 kph, it's about to start raining, so what color is my underwear? You might be right, and your reasoning may make sense, but you didn't get there through adding, you know?
        The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

        Comment


        • #64
          I'm distracted now...what colour is your underwear?

          Comment


          • #65
            'It's more like a train heads east at 40 kph, it's about to start raining, so what color is my underwear?'

            That's beautiful. As well as being deeply evocative (the train, the rain, etc) it really does make us think. What colour is the underwear? Are you even on the train? How long is the journey? Will the underwear be the same colour at the close of the journey as it was at the beginning (40 kph is quite slow, after all, and the toilet amenities on public transport are often appalling). East... heading east...

            I think that's a clue. East....

            Is your underwear puce?

            No, I'm plumping for pistachio. Yes.

            Comment


            • #66
              Divisive remarks.

              Hello Errata. Adding? You are right--this case does not add up. And I hope that does not subtract from your remarks. Whoever begins the research merely multiples his sorrows. But perhaps, someday, we will get to the root of it--if that's not a radical remark.

              OK, shutting up.

              Cheers.
              LC

              Comment


              • #67
                Lionel Twain

                Hello Henry.

                "Are you even on the train?"

                Possibly not--given you are searching for one chap only.

                Cheers.
                LC

                Comment


                • #68
                  Hi Lynn, you're not quite right. I'm happy to argue the toss on the boards now and then, but the truth is I'm not especially wedded to the C5. I don't feel that the great Whitechapel Murders are diminished in any way by not having one mysterious monster at their core. I'm not even particularly interested in the person/s who committed the crimes. I'm interested in the LVP, in Whitechapel and Spitalfields, and in the general insanity of that autumn. If it turned out there were two or even three hands behind the killings it would simply add to the glorious mess of the puzzle that was Whitechapel 1888. When I first became interested as a teenager I believed that in fact JTR may have started his career as part of one of those appalling gangs like the Hoxton High Rips, before launching himself - like a knife-wielding Sting or Robbie Williams - on a highly successful solo career once his talents became evidently too large for the band.

                  So I may be on the train - whether or not Errata's underwear is. The biggest conundrum for me: if Errata's underwear train derails, will there be visible skidmarks?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    solutions

                    Hello Henry. Thanks. Wasn't sure--that's why I couched it in subjunctive mood.

                    I still think about the Baker and Berman movie where Sir David was crushed under the lift. Those were the days. Secretly, I still wish for Dr. Stanley to have been Jack. Much more fun.

                    Cheers.
                    LC

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                      Purely relying on contemporary evidence alone, devoid of modern opinions, I tend to think only Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes fell victim to the same hand.
                      All the other victims might be included, but by differing degrees of probability.
                      There are some reasonable arguments against their inclusion.

                      Regards, Jon S.
                      All of the C5 could be included. But it's one of those scenarios where the more you add, the harder it is to explain. Which is not Occam's razor, since I have noticed that most people use that analogy wrong for some reason.

                      For example, when I was about 16, I woke up after a night of storms and there was a four foot snapping turtle in the pool. Which I'm told happens sometimes. But I lived on the top of a steep hill, with a fenced yard, 30 degree grade on the yard and driveway, and exactly 3.5 miles from the nearest fresh water source. So clearly a mystery, but one in the end that had only two solutions. A: someone put it there, B: one of the tornadoes during the night picked it up and dropped it in the pool. Now, had there been two snapping turtles, that would not be twice as hard to explain, but about ten times harder. They don't live together. They kill each other. So if you find a snapping turtle, you are almost guaranteed not to find another one, because they are solitary critters. So that meant that not only would some guy have to find a snapping turtle to put in our pool, he would have to find another one in another body of fresh water, and these things aren't easy to spot (unless they are sitting on bright blue linoleum.) Now say there were THREE snapping turtles... the explanation now pretty much requires a guy spending a week or so hunting up snapping turtles to put in the pool. So it's no longer a loser friend of mine finding a snapping turtle and playing a prank, it's a full blown vendetta involving dangerous wildlife. Like a cross between Hamas and Caddyshack.
                      It's easy when you have a really unusual series of cases. There is an unsolved serial in my area where someone was beating and raping young male prostitutes, strangling them, and then shooting them in the anus. You can have any number of killers who use combinations of beatings rapings and stranglings, but inserting a gun in the anus and pulling the trigger is unique. So it's it's safe to put anyone shot in the anus into this killer's jacket. But the only thing remotely like that in this case is the removal of the uterus. That is unique. But that is two people. And a half if you count Kelly where the killer removed it but didn't take it. Putting in any other victim of a murder who retained her uterus makes the scenario very complicated. And even with just two it's complicated. You now have to account for why these women kept their uteruses when the other two didn't, or explain why he only chose to take two instead of five, or six, or eleven... and that's besides all the other normal discrepancies that have to be explained. Could it be true? Could he have killed six women in three or four different ways and only taken two uteruses, a kidney and a heart? Sure. But the odds are similar to a tornado letting loose a small herd of snapping turtles in my pool. And let's face it, we don't even buy that a tornado deposited one turtle into my pool.

                      But I'll tell you something else. No one ever copped to putting that turtle in the pool, and I'm the only person I know who isn't afraid to handle them. So who knows?
                      The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Lynn, you sound like a true romantic! Well, as romantic as one can be concerning the throat-cutting and disembowelment of 3/4/5/7/16 innocent Victorian prostitutes.

                        My preferred suspects have always been Toulouse-Lautrec, Nicolas Lyndhurst, and the Earl of Oxford Edward deVere. Also, I believe the murders stopped because of Chuck Norris.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          I know for a fact that Phil Carter put that turtle in your pool, but he has never shot anyone in the anus.

                          Are we not in danger of getting too hung-up on minor variations? Someone in Whitechapel at that time liked to kill women by cutting their throats then enjoyed pulling their insides open. What are the odds that two such freaks were at large in that small geographic and temporal window?

                          Killers can have broad M.O.s. Not every attack is identical. Souvenirs are commonly taken - not always the same type from every victim.

                          Oh hell. I dunno. Am I wrong about all of that? I'm too tired...

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
                            Hello Jon.

                            "And yet, how many victims of "throat slashing", had been strangled first?"

                            Exactly two that we are sure of--Polly Nichols and Annie Chapman.

                            Cheers.
                            LC
                            We can't ignore the ecchymosis noted on Kelly's neck. What it means?, applied pressure?
                            Possibly an indication of her being strangled first?

                            Regards, Jon S.
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Errata View Post
                              All of the C5 could be included. But it's one of those scenarios where the more you add, the harder it is to explain.
                              Quite true, you have to make allowances outside your initial focus. Which leaves you open to bias, what you choose to accept is not subject to the same criteria, which only weakens your argument.

                              But I'll tell you something else. No one ever copped to putting that turtle in the pool, and I'm the only person I know who isn't afraid to handle them. So who knows?
                              You can pick up a 4 foot turtle? , ...thats the span of the shell, isn't it?

                              How much do them things weigh?
                              Regards, Jon S.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                carnage

                                Hello Jon. Could be. Of course, with that carnage it would be difficult to tell.

                                Cheers.
                                LC

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X