Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Diemschutz arrival

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

  • #16
    conflation

    Hello Miakaal. Thanks.

    "Well Lynn I was supposing that it was a JtR attack."

    Very well--no problem. But of those who believe in "JTR" not all agree that he was a violent maniac. Some see him as cunning and stealthy.

    "Given that there are strong suspects of being Jack, who were considered violently insane . . ."

    It would be helpful to name names here. I have never seen a strong suspect for "JTR," let alone, one one was also violently insane.

    ". . . I was wondering if this control, hiding, not striking out, would be possible for those people."

    Ah! Now I see what you are on about. You are asking if a violently insane criminal--as some believe "JTR" to have been--could also be the cunning, stealthy lad--whom others believe in?

    From my point of view the answer is the same as for the following question. "Can a substance composed chiefly of calcium carbonate and whose main purpose is to leave a white mark upon slate also emit a tart flavour due to its being made out of fermented mild parts?"

    The answer is "Yes"--provided, of course, that one conflates chalk and cheese.

    Cheers.
    LC

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by DVV View Post
      Phil, I don't know if keeping Stride into the frame is a hallmark of traditionalism (almost a swearword in our world), but I have an idea that her decanonization could well be nothing but mere iddle deconstruction.
      Hey, we finally have a term for the 2 + 2 + 1 theory! "Ripperological deconstructionism". (Seeing this, Lynn? Cough.) Thanks David.

      PS.: Lynn must have read by mind, as he posted here a min. ago...
      Best regards,
      Maria

      Comment


      • #18
        Lynn I laughed my head off, thanks for that, i loved the tart eg.
        I thought, Kosminski, Druitt, and Ostrog were all mad women hating violent types? I have seen someone who I know to be very aggressive, lose it, and be unable to stop the attack, and when we tried to intervene he attacked us too! Okay we didn't catch him, in that sense but we did try to interupt him, if you get my meaning. I am inclined to believe that the killer was thoughtful, planning and not a genius but not stupid either. he was also very lucky.

        Comment


        • #19
          violent

          Hello Miakaal. Thanks.

          1. Kosminski does not have "violent" indicated on his chart.

          2. Druitt, so far as we know, was a mild mannered school teacher.

          3. Ostrog was a silly billy con artist.

          But, as the saying goes, anything is possible.

          Regarding the violently insane, one may wish to make heavy weather out of Martin Fido's Kaminski/Cohen character. May have to give up on cunning, though.

          Cheers.
          LC

          Comment


          • #20
            It is most likely Strides killer was not disturbed by Diemshitz, and that mutilations were not on the killer agenda.

            And due to that, the idea Nichols and Chapmans killer did for Stride is doubtful.

            Oops, theres me....being all negative again.

            Monty
            Monty

            https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

            Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

            http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

            Comment


            • #21
              Don't be negative.

              Hello Neil. Negative? One should NOT be negative--not ever. (heh-heh)

              Actually, this makes good sense. If, however, one needs an interruption for a theory to fly, what about the side door? Seems much more likely than Dimshits.

              Cheers.
              LC

              Comment


              • #22
                Ok,

                Well if an interruption did occur the interupters timing was spot on.

                Monty
                Monty

                https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

                Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                Comment


                • #23
                  How many of the suspects listed on this board are actually suspects? Lynn you have got me all confused now!

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Suspects, always lookin' for suspects.

                    Hello Miakaal. Thanks.

                    Suspected of what and by whom?

                    Cheers.
                    LC

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Hi Lynn,
                      Suspected of being the killer. It seems that most of the suspects on the Casebook suspect list have all more or less been cleared for some reason or another. If the "definately could not have done it" suspects were taken out of the ring, how many would that leave?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by miakaal4 View Post
                        The Casebook notes on Stride, discuss the idea that upon the arrival of Diemschutz, the Ripper took fright and hid, until the startled man left to get help, and then made off into the night. This is all very plausible and I do not doubt that is what happened. My question here is, would have someone in the middle of an uncontrolled and frenzied attack, been able to check themselves, refrain from attacking whoever disturbed them, (as pehaps a mad dog would) and leave? Does this not in fact point to a controlled mind who's determination not to be caught out weighs continuing his homicidal careering?
                        I feel his thought processes and methods of not being caught could say much about who he was.
                        Hi Mia
                        Good questions. (I preface my response that IMHO JtR was probably Strides killer)
                        First of all, if the attack on Liz could be considered "uncontrolled and frenzied" then i think it could possibly be in so much that with Israel Schwartz
                        story(I beleive his story is probably accurate for the most part and he saw the Ripper attacking Stride initially), we have the ripper who momentarily loses his temper because of the time and perhaps money he had spent on Stride(note the large amount of witnesses- and the long time frames- that may have seen stride and the ripper) in trying to convince her to accompany him to a secluded spot and as a result assaults her in a more public spot in an act of anger.

                        Secondly
                        The ripper may have been interupted by Diemshitz arrival and hid in the shadows until Diemshitz went into the house to find help and then fled. In my mind a more likely scenario is that the ripper after cutting strides throat, fled before he did any mutilations, because he was "spooked" by Schwartz and the scene it caused, and bolted before Diemshitz arrived.

                        Finally
                        All the evidence seems to point that the ripper was a very cunning, perceptive and street wise killer that was smart and aware enough to always avoid (barely it seems) being caught in the act as well as staying one step ahead of the police. And as the case with the double event and Stride, besides the momentary loss of temper where he assaults stride in the open, again exemplifies this by realizing that Scwartz or pipeman may be returning with help shortly so he better skiddadle. Eventhough he has not fullfilled his true desires with being able to mutilate Stride, he realizes the risk and runs away to "fight another day". Unfortunately for Eddowes another day was only an hour away.

                        And thus only a short time after attacking Stride, he is able to compose himself enough, so that when Lawende and co see him and Eddowes, she is comfortable enough to be speaking close to him with her hand gently upon his chest.

                        Hardly the actions of an unintelligent, out of control or "crazy" killer.
                        "Is all that we see or seem
                        but a dream within a dream?"

                        -Edgar Allan Poe


                        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                        -Frederick G. Abberline

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          C5

                          Hello Miakaal. Thanks.

                          Killer of? If you mean the C5, I am inclined to say that the list is close to zero.

                          Cheers.
                          LC

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Hello hello hello, what's going on 'ere then?
                            Monty engaging in speculation - mere conjecture?

                            For what it's worth I largely go along with Abbey's construction although I take as a starting point that ALL witness statements relating to so-called Ripper sightings (or 'hearings') are inaccurate, totally false, relate to someone else, Are subject to recreated memory, are influenced by hysteria, or driven by a desire to 'be involved' and are hence useless in helping to build a case or determine what happened. One or two may be broadly accurate but working out which Ones they are is impossible.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Hi Lynn.
                              C5, of course. Maybrick only killed 5. A pity when compared to Sickert.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Lechmere View Post
                                Hello hello hello, what's going on 'ere then?
                                Monty engaging in speculation - mere conjecture?

                                For what it's worth I largely go along with Abbey's construction although I take as a starting point that ALL witness statements relating to so-called Ripper sightings (or 'hearings') are inaccurate, totally false, relate to someone else, Are subject to recreated memory, are influenced by hysteria, or driven by a desire to 'be involved' and are hence useless in helping to build a case or determine what happened. One or two may be broadly accurate but working out which Ones they are is impossible.
                                Indeed Ed,

                                Close your mouth, you look like a Goldfish.

                                Monty
                                Monty

                                https://forum.casebook.org/core/imag...t/evilgrin.gif

                                Author of Capturing Jack the Ripper.

                                http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1445621622

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X