The Berner Street Con(spiracy)

Taking ALL things into consideration, Mary Kelly's murder has less in common with the rest than Stride's, but I wouldn't exclude any of them offhand.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I agree, and disagree,...I believe some can be discarded, and perhaps one or more added in their place....for example Alice Mckenzie has more in common with Polly, Annie and Kate than either Ms C3 or Ms C5.

Cheers Tom

[Malcolm X]

yes Sudgen is the main man, but i wonder what he'd be writing today; if he was to update his book from 2002

i wonder if he'd still favour Chapman as the ripper and state ``not proven``

[c.d.]

Yes, I highjacked. I stand quilty as charged. I shall immediately throw myself on my sword...uh..wait...I don't have a sword. How about my Swiss Army Knife? Hope I don't land on that reamer thing. OOOh that would hurt.

c.d.

[Roy Corduroy]

It's very interesting, Thanks for the quote, c.d. But it doesn't address the thread - Con(spiracy). It addresses the generic debate had many times already - "was Stride a Ripper victim." *

Likewise Mal X, your hunch that Hutch was JtR doesn't address the thread either.

So far, three possible conspiracies have been raised on this thread. Club members, Packer, and the authorities. And for any of those to be a conspiracy, someone had to know the identity of the killer, and withhold it, or lie to protect the killer.

Roy

*(who hijacked it, was it Simon? gonna send Klebb after him)

[Sam Flynn]

Thanks, CD. Sugden's opinion is always interesting - although what he says on this occasion does not preclude the scenario whereby "nothing more than" a brawl can be a prelude to manslaughter, or even murder.

[c.d.]

I reread Sugden last night. Here is what he has to say with regards to Liz being a Ripper victim -- "On the evidence as it now stands, however, it seems probable that she was struck down by the slayer of Polly Nichols and Annie Chapman. The case for discounting Elizabeth as a Ripper victim is not as weighty as it first appears...In many respects the Stride murder was very much like its predecessors."

"The Complete History of Jack the Ripper" by Philip Sugden, pages 210-11.

With respect to the BS man being her killer, Sugden has this to say -- "Before considering the implications of Schwartz's evidence we had best remind ourselves that there is a real possibility that his sighting had nothing to do with the murder." (p. 213)

"We do not know that he (Schwartz) was mistaken but it will always be on the cards that he was witness to nothing more than a street brawl." (p. 214)

His opinion is interesting is it not?

c.d.

[Malcolm X]

The Con(spiracy).

If IWMEC club members lied to protect the killer, whose identity they knew, that would be a conspiracy. But if they simply fudged the details a little, without knowing the identity of the killer, that is not a conspiracy.

If someone, such as La Grand, got Packer to lie to protect the killer, that would be a conspiracy. But if Packer simply made up extra stories in hoping for reward money, that would not be a conspiracy.

If Liz Stride was not a victim of the serial murderer, and if the police misread the signals and clues, that would not constitute a conspiracy on the part of the police, simply a mistake. The police didn't do conspiracies.

Roy

yes, whatever the case, this murder is a right mess, but i think my theory makes sense too, i guess we all think our theories are correct....hence we cant agree on anything.............i dont think Stride is a ripper victim.

[Roy Corduroy]

The Con(spiracy).

If IWMEC club members lied to protect the killer, whose identity they knew, that would be a conspiracy. But if they simply fudged the details a little, without knowing the identity of the killer, that is not a conspiracy.

If someone, such as La Grand, got Packer to lie to protect the killer, that would be a conspiracy. But if Packer simply made up extra stories in hoping for reward money, that would not be a conspiracy.

If Liz Stride was not a victim of the serial murderer, and if the police misread the signals and clues, that would not constitute a conspiracy on the part of the police, simply a mistake. The police didn't do conspiracies.

Roy

[Malcolm X]

Yep, I posted that.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

well ok........there's not a lot more i can say, unless you want to start another thread

[Tom_Wescott]

Yep, I posted that.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Malcolm X]

Taking ALL things into consideration, Mary Kelly's murder has less in common with the rest than Stride's, but I wouldn't exclude any of them offhand.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

you what ! ..........run that by me again Tom, did you really post that in

because Stride is the odd one out and Kelly is simply an indoors version of Eddowes.......and you dont need me to explain why, it's common knowledge

[Sam Flynn]

Taking ALL things into consideration, Mary Kelly's murder has less in common with the rest than Stride's

I find that rather baffling, Tom, but let's move on...

[Tom_Wescott]

Taking ALL things into consideration, Mary Kelly's murder has less in common with the rest than Stride's, but I wouldn't exclude any of them offhand.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Sam Flynn]

Liz Strides murder and Mary Janes murder have little in common with Pollys murder, Annies, or Kates.

Not wishing to launch this off-thread, Mike, but you really can't go on bracketing Mary Kelly in the same "little in common with the rest" category as Liz Stride. Kelly's murder had arguably much more in common with Eddowes' and Chapman's than with that of Nichols, yet most people wouldn't exclude the latter.

How do you know that Jack knew how to kill like that? He had his way, with a backup. You're quite right. Jack strangled, then slashed. It worked for him. No one got up and ran after Jack had killed them. Stride was no exception.

What the evidence is in the first 2 Canonical victims is that the women were soliciting, they were likely picked up by the murderer, he got them lying on the ground with little or no obvious struggle...(strangulation is probable in Annies case, but the method used is unclear...we assume they were unconscious or semi so), they are placed flat on their back, legs opened..he cuts the throats almost to the point of decapitation, then proceeds to the part for which he killed in the first place, abdominal mutilations and organ theft.......(see Coroner comments at Polly Nichols Inquest).

We do not know Liz was soliciting, or whether her killer met her or just jumped her from the dark,... but she was choked with her scarf, possibly cut while falling, and lay on her side untouched from that point on. No physical evidence exists that suggests an interruption, nor an incomplete action.

The assumptive flexibility that this killer had, envisioned by some, is a product of the inclusion of dissimilar murders and opinion, not demonstrated style variations by one killer.

Liz Strides murder and Mary Janes murder have little in common with Pollys murder, Annies, or Kates. To suggest they were all just one man implies flexibility on his part...and since the only proof that they are linked to one man are authority guesses,...there is no evidence that demands that conclusion.

Best regards