a theory on the Stride murder

[Steven Russell]

Douglas

Dear Tom,

Thank you for your thoughts. With respect, a few things puzzle me, viz:

1) Isn't David Canter's speciality geographical rather than psychological profiling and therefore of very limited use in the debate of whether or not Stride was a Ripper victim?

2) "Serial killer profiling at this stage is virtually useless" seems a rather bold statement. Why do you believe that this is the case?

3) If Douglas's track record was so poor, why did he remain in employment for so many years, and why was he paid by foreign police forces (inc. UK) to give lecture tours etc?

4) If he was "truly gifted at catching rapists...", why should these gifts be regarded as non-transferrable when it comes to murderers?

Best wishes,

Steve.

P.S. I do not insist that Mr. Douglas be considered infallible - far from it. But nor do I feel his ideas should be rubbished out of hand.

[Tom_Wescott]

2) "Serial killer profiling at this stage is virtually useless" seems a rather bold statement. Why do you believe that this is the case?

To date not not a single 'Serial Killer Task Force' captured their killer. At best the killer was captured many years after the task force disbanded, at worst an innocent man was charged and/or convicted, or no arrest was ever made. Profiling has a very, very low success rate when it comes specifically to serial killers.

3) If Douglas's track record was so poor, why did he remain in employment for so many years, and why was he paid by foreign police forces (inc. UK) to give lecture tours etc?

Douglas' track record overall is great, but it's very poor when it comes to the cases that actually made him famous. He was fortunate enough to publish books that sold millions. His popularity doesn't make him any more of a successful serial killer hunter than Dan Brown's popularity makes him an excellent historian. Trevor Marriott is paid for his Ripper lectures, if that says anything.

4) If he was "truly gifted at catching rapists...", why should these gifts be regarded as non-transferrable when it comes to murderers?

We're not talking 'murderers', we're talking serial killers. Totally different animal, and you'd have to ask Douglas that questions. What I've posted here is a matter of historical fact. His profiles for GRK and his estimate of the Ramsey's, as well as the controversy surrounding the Atlanta Child Murder case, are a matter of public record and easy to research, but you certainly won't find this information between the covers of a John Douglas book.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

P.S. I mentioned Canter simply to illustrate that all of the well-known 'profilers' seem to miss the mark when it comes to the Ripper case.

[Tom_Wescott]

P.S. I do not insist that Mr. Douglas be considered infallible - far from it. But nor do I feel his ideas should be rubbished out of hand.

I haven't read Douglas in many years, so perhaps you can help me here, but I don't remember him offering any insights into the Ripper case that were particularly new or revelatory. I'm not 'rubbishing his ideas out', but an idea either rises or falls on its own merits, not because a guy has a title or a best-selling book. I do recall that his write-up on Lizzie Borden was excellent.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Steven Russell]

Douglas

Hello, Tom, and thanks for the info.

You are right in that his ideas on the Ripper are not particularly revelatory. He likes Cohen "or someone very much like him". He does quote Martin Fido a lot and I found myself wondering if Douglas had prepared his profile from the raw data or read the Fido and Rumbelow books first before he formed his opinion. I feel that this is a very important question.

Also, I understand that he was actually hired by the Ramseys which perhaps calls his objectivity into question on that case.

All that aside, he is, thankfully, much more au fait with violent crime than me so I feel compelled to give his opinions some respect.

Anyway, I don't understand what you mean about Dan Brown. He dares to speak the truth where others doubt. My cigarette lighter just ran out and if the masons aren't to blame, I'm a Dutchman.

Yours,

Kees van der Waals.

[Tom_Wescott]

Also, I understand that he was actually hired by the Ramseys which perhaps calls his objectivity into question on that case.

In fairness to Douglas, he did meet them first and satisfied himself to their innocence before going under their employ. At least that's how I understand it.

Anyway, I don't understand what you mean about Dan Brown. He dares to speak the truth where others doubt. My cigarette lighter just ran out and if the masons aren't to blame, I'm a Dutchman.

LOL. You had me going for a second until I read the last sentence.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Adam Went]

Jon:

Well if you're going to believe all the original evidence from the medics then you already have a dilemma and must be confused, because they quite often contradicted each other as well. You don't have to look very far to see that.

Tom:

If someone corrects an error of yours he's automatically playing "I got him" games? That's a rather defensive stance. Incidentally, I did read your entire post before responding, and nowhere in your post did you mention that the 'Pipeman was known' theory originated with Begg, which was the question; instead you again cited that news report which was not the genesis of the theory.

No, you're right, nor did I claim that the news article was specifically referring to Pipeman being the one that was arrested. However, it could have been, particularly since the comment about this bloke being arrested comes directly after Schwartz's description of Pipeman in the article. No way of being able to tell for sure - but just for you Tom, we'll give the credit to Paul Begg.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Hunter]

I have the Douglas book and he does not discount Stride as a Ripper victim. In fact, in discussing Stride's murder he goes into the comparison of a killer's MO and his signature. The MO of course being his choice of victims and method of dispatching them. The signature, in the Ripper's case was the mutilations. He adheres to the theory that the murderer was interrupted; thus the MO was the same but he was not able to post his signature.
That was Douglas' opinion on Stride, for whatever its worth.

[The Good Michael]

Hunter,

I read that book. If I remember correctly, Douglas was basing his opinion on several of the JTR books he read and the suspects mentioned in these books. I don't think he came into it all cold, and was likely swayed by The Facts and others. I'm not suggesting he's wrong, only that it wasn't exactly a fresh look. I believe he sort of says that he's kind of going off the cuff when he says what he thinks.

It's been years, so I could be misremembering.

Cheers,

Mike

[Steven Russell]

Hunter and Michael

Hunter,
You are absolutely correct.

Michael,
I don't think Douglas came into it cold either. His book predates The Facts but not Begg's earlier work The Uncensored Facts. Douglas acknowledges Rumbelow and especially Fido who he says he now considers a friend so it is more than likely that these two are his main sources.

Best wishes,

Steve.

[Rubyretro]

I'm 5'9 and I would struggle to tell the difference between 6'2 and 6'4.....to me they're both tall....and I'd bet my house that my estimation would be out. I mean.....what would I use as a benchmark? All I know is.....they're tall....and it's not like Schwartz was stood right up next to them and produced a tape measure.[/QUOTE]

It is incredibly difficult to give any sort of accurate description of someone
whom you have not deliberately memorised :
my stepdaughters became mixed up in a murder enquiry in Poland, and had to give a detailed description of a couple of guys with whom they had been drinking in a bar, and who had then walked them home...it turned out out that the resulting 'robot portraits' looked nothing like the guys at all (one of them turned out to have a whispy blond moustache that they hadn't noticed at all in dim lighting).
I once falsly accused a guy of shoplifting in my shop...mistaking for another bloke who turned out to be at least ten years older..
Height looks totally different at night, and can depend on whether one is slouching..but also on such things as the cut of your clothes..
I certainly wouldn't take any description as 'gospel', and it's only the murderer
who could know how accurate the description was.

[Stewart P Evans]

Speculative

Just love these circular speculative debates. Come back Red Demon, all is forgiven.

[Rubyretro]

I've just reread this interesting Post by Pontius, and would like to go back to the first premise of whether Jtr always planned to kill two Prostitutes that night, to divert attention, and whether he was cool and calculating or an opportunist, and whether he planned the venues or not.

I see that all discussions of Stride's murder degenerate into arguments on whether she even WAS a Ripper victim or not -but we can always just consider the hypothetical idea that she was murdered by JtR, and for the sake of debate consider the question.

I really think that truths can be muliple -there often isn't often one 'black or white' solution -so Jack can be cool, cunning and plan, yet an opportunist at the same time. That is to say that he could plan the venues, but if the opportunity wasn't there, he could just move onto another venue that he'd also 'planned'.

I've always thought that he chose the Club as his target site -yet, although I'm satisfied that Dutfield's Yard was a quiet, dark
spot to kill in -a) he couldn't guarantee that he'd find a prostitute there, and b) the yard was so very dark that it would not allow him free reign with mutilations c) although it was private enough to easily slit someone's throat unseen, it wasn't private enough to be sure that he wouldn't be interrupted.

So (from the opportunist angle) -was Dutfield's his first choice anyway ?..or did he just move on there from another, more preferential site, because the opportunity didn't present itself at his first choice? I was very interested to read Nathan Shine's patently fabricated account of witnessing the murders, for one reason (apart from the 'anti semitic gangs' quote), bacause he said that he was coming from yet another Club meeting in Commercial Street..could JtR simply have come from there ? What Club would that be, and what was the address ?

Next -do we believe in the Dear Boss letter, supposedly predicting a Double Event (see Thread) ?

Believing in the letter, or not, do we believe that the Double Event and The Autumn Double, at this exact time of year, have any significance at all -beyond a journalist making the link in hindsight ? Could this be part of Jack's plan ?

So, DID JtR plan to kill two prostitutes that night, in the proximity of Jewish clubs, and always know that Mitre Square would be quiet enough, and lit enough, for mutilation and that he would have a certainty of finding a prostitute (at St Botophs) willing to go there ? Was Diemshitz arriving a mere extra fillip -but not an interference with his plan ?

Was he very much something to do with BSM and Pipeman -but not either of them ?

Did he go to Dutfield's with BSM and Pipeman , but have no intention of killing there (Mitre Square always being the target-and a rdv with kate possibly (or not) being planned) -and Liz just being opportunist ?

?????...??...?

[Diddles]

Regarding the OP: There were two police men patroling the area surrounding Mitre Square, which gave the Ripper a very small window in executing the Eddowes murder, regardless of the Stride murder.
But it's still an interesting theory; The Ripper being set on killing two prostitutes that night and therefore chosing less mutilation on Stride. However, we don't know if the Ripper really planned on killing two victims on the night of the double event, since that bit of 'fact' is based on the highly dubious letters.

[corey123]

Hello All,

My opinion on this matter has always been that Eddowes wouldn't have been murdered if not for the failure with Stride. I beleive he intened to kill Elizabeth in Dutfields Yar and then mutilate her. I also think the Gouston Street Grafitto was ment for those gates.

[Rubyretro]

.

I also think the Gouston Street Grafitto was ment for those gates.

[/QUOTE]

That's an interesting idea, Corey..it very well be.

I don't necessarily think that he took the time to write the GSG after Eddowe's murder, but either wrote it earlier, or knew it was there and chose to leave the apron piece under it...but you might be right..