Lipski

[Michael W Richards]

"Mary Kelly was at home in bed and was destroyed, not soliciting on the street, and no trace of skill full cutting."

Hello Michael,

So are you suggesting that in the Fall of 1888 there were two different killers walking the streets of Whitechapel one of whom preferred cutting the throats of prostitutes and taking out their internal organs on the street while the other one had a preference for cutting the throats of prostitutes and ripping out their internal organs while safely ensconced inside?

c.d.

I can say with great confidence that I never said anything like that.

[Michael W Richards]

[QUOTE=Harry D;409027]Why are you excluding the extent of the post-mortem injuries when that is one of the cornerstones you use to dissociate the other victims?

Again with the mirespresentations...abdominal mutilations. Didint realize you envision facial slashes as being in the abdominal region.

Stride is a grey area, but she is the only one who doesn't match the pattern of throat-cutting + post-mortem mutilation.

Stride is an obvious deviation, once you use the grey matter.

And Patricia Atkinson was murdered indoors, whereas before Peter Sutcliffe's other victims had been killed outside. He had the opportunity to kill her before they entered her flat but chose not to on this occasion. Serial killers aren't bound to use the same approach every time.

I could care less what modern theory about serial killers is, as I said.. once again... I believe we are talking about 2 murders by one man, maybe 3, and that is just barely within the serial killer definition.

Because she was killed indoors, no?

No. Because she was killed indoors in bed...location...., because she was half the age of any other Canonical...victimology...., because she was taken apart without any focus on any specific region of her body...signature/pattern..., because she had injuries that are more consistent with a killer that was known to her than with any previous "Ripper" murder, because we have evidence there were circumstances that suggest possible motive.....random act...., and because he took an organ that also symbolically can be linked with someone known by her. Polly and Annie....outdoors actively soliciting, middle aged, both physical compromised, double throat cuts, clothing adjusted to allow pm abdominal mutilation.

Isn't there evidence to suggest that Mary Kelly was soliciting that night?

There is a statement by witness that is later discredited that suggests that. It appears though she was out drinking and came home drunk with someone from the bar, the either slept with the man or by herself.

Astrakhan Man was seen picking her up on the street, and if you don't want to buy Hutchinson's account,....(I dont)..... there's the Blotchy man that MJK was seen entertaining. Both potential punters, both potential murderers.

Blotchy man is a good suspect, if his name was Joe, he is a very good suspect. Issacs is also a good possibility...Joe Isaacs.

Perhaps the killer worked better under pressure? After all, he wasn't on the tight schedule of a snatch n' grab in the middle of the street. He had the specimen all to himself, and if destruction was the goal this time, why would we necessarily need to see evidence of skill?

Maybe because he had possibly an hour or more...he may have had 5-8 minutes with Kate if she is another victim, and possibly 10-20 minutes with Polly and Annie...and the first 2 convinced authorities they were looking for trained knifesman. Not just butchers. They sought out medically trained people in September. People dont show less skill with more time available....Im surprised I should have to even say that.

Strawman.



How many murders were there in Whitechapel before 1888? There was plenty of petty violence but how many murders and how many of this type? You have to ask yourself what caused this massive spike in murders, some 'convergence of evil' or was there a psychotic serial killer at large? Which of these explanations takes the least number of assumptions?

You have Torsos that precede the Fall of Terror, and you have terrorist killings going back to the early 1880's. You also have a number of known killers in London at that time, possibly one who killed prostitutes in Paris using a knife.

I'm not the one trying to reinvent the wheel with some crackpot multi-killer hypothesis. At least you aren't quite on the Peter Turnbull level of wackiness, who believed every single murder was by a different hand. I guess there's still hope for you yet.

Id like say that I share the sentiments, but its simply a matter of using ONLY what is there...instead of trying to explain Liz Strides obvious lack of injuries and pattern, or Marys deconstruction in her bed in her underwear, in order for it to fit modern serial killer theory. Polly and Annie were killed by one man...they were almost identical murders, they were cut skillfully, and their adbomens were the focus of the mutilations. If anything, Alice might match that more closely. Not the rest of the Canonicals.

Its getting exhausting being one of the few here who is trying to use reason and logic decifering what happened, instead of being so anxious for answers that grouping Liz Stride into the mix seems sensible.

Dont have a suspect, dont need one. My goal is to obtain an accurate total.

[Harry D]

As per usual you either misunderstood or misrepresent what I said...what I said was that the first 2 murders, which were virtually identical in almost every aspect excluding the extent of the post mortem injuries

Why are you excluding the extent of the post-mortem injuries when that is one of the cornerstones you use to dissociate the other victims?

The ones that do not match that pattern, like Liz Strides, cannot be assumed to have been done by the same individual.

Stride is a grey area, but she is the only one who doesn't match the pattern of throat-cutting + post-mortem mutilation.

Mary Kelly was at home in bed

And Patricia Atkinson was murdered indoors, whereas before Peter Sutcliffe's other victims had been killed outside. He had the opportunity to kill her before they entered her flat but chose not to on this occasion. Serial killers aren't bound to use the same approach every time.

and was destroyed

Because she was killed indoors, no?

not soliciting on the street

Isn't there evidence to suggest that Mary Kelly was soliciting that night? Astrakhan Man was seen picking her up on the street, and if you don't want to buy Hutchinson's account, there's the Blotchy man that MJK was seen entertaining. Both potential punters, both potential murderers.

and no trace of skill full cutting.

Perhaps the killer worked better under pressure? After all, he wasn't on the tight schedule of a snatch n' grab in the middle of the street. He had the specimen all to himself, and if destruction was the goal this time, why would we necessarily need to see evidence of skill?

Although you would like to see any knife crime in 188 or 1889 linked to the mythical Jack the Ripper

Strawman.

For example, why you would choose to believe that all of these other individuals would suddenly cease activities during that Fall when we have, blatantly obviously, other cases that do not fit the profile created by the first 2 murders..like Torsos.

How many murders were there in Whitechapel before 1888? There was plenty of petty violence but how many murders and how many of this type? You have to ask yourself what caused this massive spike in murders, some 'convergence of evil' or was there a psychotic serial killer at large? Which of these explanations takes the least number of assumptions?

Your smart aleck approach to defeating logical arguments is well noted.

I'm not the one trying to reinvent the wheel with some crackpot multi-killer hypothesis. At least you aren't quite on the Peter Turnbull level of wackiness, who believed every single murder was by a different hand. I guess there's still hope for you yet.

[Fisherman]

There is also the point that both of these killers had a flair for cutting the abdominal walls away from their victims, as per Chapman and Kelly.

And not only that, there was also a THIRD killer with this rather odd penchant!!

[Abby Normal]

"Mary Kelly was at home in bed and was destroyed, not soliciting on the street, and no trace of skill full cutting."

Hello Michael,

So are you suggesting that in the Fall of 1888 there were two different killers walking the streets of Whitechapel one of whom preferred cutting the throats of prostitutes and taking out their internal organs on the street while the other one had a preference for cutting the throats of prostitutes and ripping out their internal organs while safely ensconced inside?

c.d.

Exactly
It's absurd how far some people go on here to see minor differences in major similarities. I mean you could say there are 5 different serial killers based on the minor differences in c5.

Polly. No organs taken
Chapman. Uterus taken
Eddowes. Kidney taken
Stride. Cut throat only
Kelly. Heart taken

[c.d.]

"Mary Kelly was at home in bed and was destroyed, not soliciting on the street, and no trace of skill full cutting."

Hello Michael,

So are you suggesting that in the Fall of 1888 there were two different killers walking the streets of Whitechapel one of whom preferred cutting the throats of prostitutes and taking out their internal organs on the street while the other one had a preference for cutting the throats of prostitutes and ripping out their internal organs while safely ensconced inside?

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

I was referring more to Michael's faulty argument that because the murders weren't identical they were therefore unconnected.

As per usual you either misunderstood or misrepresent what I said...what I said was that the first 2 murders, which were virtually identical in almost every aspect excluding the extent of the post mortem injuries, can be grouped under 1 killer without any real obstacles. The ones that do not match that pattern, like Liz Strides, cannot be assumed to have been done by the same individual. Mary Kelly was at home in bed and was destroyed, not soliciting on the street, and no trace of skill full cutting. Although you would like to see any knife crime in 188 or 1889 linked to the mythical Jack the Ripper, that's not a pragmatic nor reasonable assumption. Since of course we know that may violent criminals existed in that same time and place.

For example, why you would choose to believe that all of these other individuals would suddenly cease activities during that Fall when we have, blatantly obviously, other cases that do not fit the profile created by the first 2 murders..like Torsos.

Your smart aleck approach to defeating logical arguments is well noted.

[Harry D]

Agreed, but it's not nitpicking to distinguish between more "conventional" mutilations and the extreme eviscertations, or clear intent to eviscerate, exhibited in the cases of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly.

I was referring more to Michael's faulty argument that because the murders weren't identical they were therefore unconnected.

[Michael W Richards]

Im returning back to the thread premise...Since its been impossible to verify that Israel Schwartz had anything important to do with the investigation, based on his obvious absence from the Inquest, I believe that the "Lipski" feature of his story is intended to highlight the prejudice felt in the East End....which I believe is also the intention of the GSG. Whether this was to misdirect attention to Jews in the case of the GSG, or whether it was intended by Schwartz to highlight the ever present prejudice, I don't know.

But when it comes to Israel Schwartz in general, I believe it a mistake to put to much credence into anything he said. Fanny Mortimer was at her door off and on throughout that half hour, we know she was because she saw Goldstein at 12:55, and she said the street was deserted and quiet, It was only Israel who claims to have seen Liz on the street during that period between 12:35 and 1. Fanny also said she heard footsteps while not at the door, which raises a question as to why she didn't also hear a scream, or Lipski being called out.

Its also important to remember that the estimated time of the cut may have been as early as 12:46, by professional medical opinion.

[S.Brett]

Good Morning!

I´m on the way to work... here briefly...

Wolek Ljab Kozminski- Marriage certificate of Woolf and Betsy, May 1881.

I´m German and I would pronounce the name of Lajb as "Lieb". If I would have a brother or friend called "Lieb" I would call him "Liebski".

See you later.

[Pcdunn]

So perhaps he was calling his brother(?) for help... Interesting idea. Could explain why "Pipeman" pursued Schwartz.

[Paddy]

Transferred from Kosminski thread

I have mentioned this before but there are other words that BS man could have shouted to Schwartz.
If you put in the word Nosey into Google Translate English to Polish, you get the word
wścibski...
meaning
nosy, meddlesome, inquisitive, interfering, pragmatical, pragmatic
If you turn the volume up and click on the speaker you can hear how like Lipski this sounds...
Also I think Lipski is a connected word to a person from Leipzig ?

Heres another Man living at 31 Dunk Street Mile End New Town with his wife Sarah and children in the 1891 census.
Lewis Lipski Head Male 29 Born 1862 Poland Tailor

Also Baruch Meyer Lipski naturalised in 1890 A Provision merchant born in Kutno
living with his family at 47 Leman street (at that time) 5 children.
Seems like there were Lipskis about.....I wonder if the police checked all these out?
The police thought that BS man shouted Lipski in a connected way to the murder in Batty street. It would seem that they may have thought he was the murderer of Liz Stride.... ?

The following is from Karsten also regarding Lipski. Hope you dont mind my transferring this with mine Karsten?
It is interesting that Aaron Kozminski´s brother was born under the name of Wolek Lajb Kozminski (Woolf Abrahams). I have a polish friend and I asked her about the meaning of "Lajb". If a person would know someone with the name of "Lajb", in certain situation he could name him as Lajbski or Libski (German Speaking Area). In such a case they would know each other. That would happen "for fun" or if someone thinks that he has "power" over an individual. Schwartz described "Pipeman" as 5 years older compared to BS Man. Woolf was 5 years older than Aaron and he lived around the corner, 25 Providence Street.

[Sam Flynn]

Nitpicking the inconsistencies of each murder instead of focusing on the glaring similarities, and extrapolating that into a multi-killer hypothesis is absolutely barmy.

Agreed, but it's not nitpicking to distinguish between more "conventional" mutilations and the extreme eviscertations, or clear intent to eviscerate, exhibited in the cases of Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly.

[Sam Flynn]

We also have to take into account the fact that the killer had more time with Kelly than the other victims. So it is not unreasonable to assume that the act of cutting produced more desire to continue cutting.

Quite so, CD.

[Harry D]

Does it really matter? Whether it was abdominal mutilation, organ removal, or complete butchery, these types of murders weren't a common occurrence before and after 1888. Throw in the fact that all of the victims were dispatched with the same MO, the victimology was the same, there was no discernible motive or clear suspect in any of these cases, and everything points to the work of a serial killer or even dare I say a conspiracy. Nitpicking the inconsistencies of each murder instead of focusing on the glaring similarities, and extrapolating that into a multi-killer hypothesis is absolutely barmy. It's unbelievable that people even have to point this stuff out!