Is Eddowes demise the key?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ChrisGeorge
    replied
    Originally posted by lynn cates View Post
    Hello David. Permit me.

    It seems obvious that Kate is the person designated in the "Dear Boss." It is also clear that a different hand slew her--when compared to Annie.

    So, clear up Kate, case solv-ed'--as Clouseau says.

    Cheers.
    LC
    Hi Lynn

    Perhaps you can explain why it is "clear" that a different hand slew Annie Chapman and Kate Eddowes. In both cases the women were disemboweled and the uteruses taken. That tells me it was the same person not a different person. What is your argument for saying it was not the same man?

    Best regares

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi All,

    Ear ear, what's all this about Van Gogh?

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Henry Flower
    replied
    Why do people keep dragging Jews in to this? There's only circumcisional evidence against any of the Jewish suspects.

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Originally posted by Cogidubnus View Post
    Now I'm really confused...I didn't think the Juwes were allowed bacon?

    Dave
    Thanks Simon

    And nice one Cog

    Regards

    Observer

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Hi Henry

    Re Van Gogh. You might have something, and I think I know why he stopped killing. His incontinent friend, fellow artist, and part time amateur detective Too Loose La Tec, sussed him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cogidubnus
    replied
    Now I'm really confused...I didn't think the Juwes were allowed bacon?

    Dave

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Observer,

    Wonderful. Just wonderful.

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Phil Carter
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hello Phil,

    The Royal Family married anyone who wasn't nailed down.

    Who's this VanDergraf Generator geezer?

    Was he one of Abberline's many dubious suspects?

    Regards,

    Simon

    Hello Simon,

    Le Grande- a hair raising suspect indeed.

    Princess Maud md a Danish
    Royal Prince. They then moved to Norway, where he became Haakon Vii. Their only child, Olav V became King in 1957 until the early 1990's, when his son, Harald, b,1937 took over. He is still King of Norway today.

    Best wishes

    Phil

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Hi Simon

    Don't know about the Danish connection but a tale was told the following winter that two "gentlemen" from Verona on holiday at the time, had met some merry wives of Windsor on their twelth night in London and were hoping for some good times, but their loves labour was lost as the wives would not come out onto the London streets due to the tempest that was abound with the Ripper at large, who was obviously after his pound of flesh.

    They later spoke with a merchant of Venice with their story of the police's comedy of errors in attempting to capture the Ripper and thought it was much ado about nothing. However, the wives were heard to comment that at least it got a lot of whores off the streets and so all was well that ended well.

    Regards

    Observer

    Leave a comment:


  • Sally
    replied
    Golden Cornwell

    ME VNGH I WILL GNIVE A CONT - which, when you allow for his thick Dutch accent, translates as 'Me Van Gogh, I will knife a lady's part'.

    The chances of such a message being found so unequivocally in someone's name are approximately ten million to one, I imagine, but the chances of such a message being found embedded in the name of someone who admired a painter who admired a painter who painted some females being stabbed with knives - we've left the realm of calculable numbers, we've entered the realm of cast-iron proof.
    By GOD I think you've got it Henry! But consider - I believe that only one Evil Genius Artist had enough Evil Genius to leave an anagrammatical clue with which to taunt us through the ages, and that Artist is - DA VINCI! Yes!

    As we all know, he is responisble for most, if not all historico-mystery-secret burying, and I take this to be conclusive proof that he invented a time machine - a triflingly simple task for one such as he - and posed as a mental Dutchman for an idle distraction one Sunday just for jolly.

    Either that, or it was Colonel Churchill, in the Stairwell, with the Dagger (possibly but not impossibly a bayonet)

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hello Phil,

    The Royal Family married anyone who wasn't nailed down.

    Who's this VanDergraf Generator geezer?

    Was he one of Abberline's many dubious suspects?

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Phil Carter
    replied
    Originally posted by Simon Wood View Post
    Hi Observer,

    If I remember my UK TV commercials correctly, "Good bacon has Danish written all over it."

    Regards,

    Simon
    Hello Simon,

    Oh heck- Danish? - Sickerts family background is Danish- and next in line is the VanDergraf generator himself- Le Grande. PAV,s sister married a Dane too.

    Best wishes

    Phil

    Leave a comment:


  • Simon Wood
    replied
    Hi Observer,

    If I remember my UK TV commercials correctly, "Good bacon has Danish written all over it."

    Regards,

    Simon

    Leave a comment:


  • Observer
    replied
    Hi Henry

    That's it ! Shakespeare.

    If Eddowe's killer saved Stride's killer's bacon

    Did Hamlet save Shakespeare's bacon.

    Leave a comment:


  • Errata
    replied
    Originally posted by DVV View Post
    Not to be compared, Errata. The woman that shot her husband had a motive, I presume ? (like all wives have.. ) There must be a motive also in the other shooting. Different victimology, different murderers.
    I know coincidences happen, I know this as well as anybody else, but the idea of two different killers on 30 September is beyond me, and will ever.
    After decades of hair-splitting, people forget how implausible it is.
    Well, the woman who shot her husband had been having fights with him we could hear a couple hundred meters away, the guy in the mall I think was robbed and the dead kid was gang member.

    I mean, we don't know the motives of any of these murders, but clearly whoever killed Eddowes and Chapman had some business they needed to attend to in these poor women's abdomens. Nichols is odd as well. But Stride just had her throat cut. And for all we know that all her killer was ever going to do to her. I mean, if we knew that Stride's killer intended to rummage about in her bits, and if we knew that her murderer was interrupted, then yes. It is vanishingly unlikely that two killers were at play that night.

    But we don't know that. For all we know she turned down a John who took it very very poorly. Or some drunk thought she was his wife and he killed her for whoring. Or space aliens came down and killed her to retrieve their anal probe. I mean, who knows? Granted, we will never know what Jack the Ripper's intent was. I mean, if he could pick anyone and had unlimited time and resources, we don't know what he would have done and to whom. But we do know that he was desperately interested in the abdominal cavity, and we know that by what he did to abdominal cavities. But nothing was done to Stride's body. We can't say that it is more likely that JtR killed her and was interrupted than that she was killed by someone else entirely. Had she been garotted or shot we could say with reasonable certainty, or if there had been the beginning of an incision, or even if she had been laid out with her skirts hiked up. But evidently someone jerked her back by her neck scarf, cut her throat quite expertly, dropped her and left her to die.

    And while the law of averages would state that only one killer was abroad that night, the throat cut of Liz Stride would lead me to believe otherwise. It's perfect. It's clean and precise. No ragged edges, no hacking or sawing away at the neck, no overly powerful strokes. Severs the important structures in one smooth motion. He doesn't nearly decapitate her, he makes no false starts, one stroke, one clean kill. Now, if through practice Jack the Ripper had gotten that good at throat cutting, why does he continue to make such a hash of it? I mean, my opinion, no more or less valid than anyone elses, but despite the fact it would be very unusual for more than one killer to have been out there, that's what it looks like to me.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X