Diemschutz arrival

[c.d.]

Hello CD. Thanks.

"If Jack were her killer, do you think that he gave any thought whatsoever as to the deepness of the cut? Her killer did what was needed to kill her."

Very well. But why the stark similarity in Polly and Annie? Same depth, same twin cuts. Looks like the assailant read from a script. Now, I am to suppose that everything else is just random and by the same chap?

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

I agree that the dissimilarity in the knife cuts is something that needs to be addressed. However, I just can't give it a lot of weight. There are just too many factors that could account for it, i.e., a different knife, his grip on the knife, the angle of the attack, how his victim was struggling, clothes that might have gotten in the way, etc.

Plus we are only comparing cuts made to the C5. If there were 25 victims and 24 had exactly the same cuts and one was completely different, then it would be a different story.

As for my Tiger Woods analogy, if you had a video of him teeing off that disguised who was hitting the ball, you would say "oh yeah, that's Tiger, yep, that one was classic Tiger, that one too." "Wow, who the hell hit that one?" Well, guess what? That one was Tiger, too.

Tiger wants to be consistent but Jack doesn't give a damn about it. He just wants his victim dead.

c.d.

[Michael W Richards]

Just saw the scarf illustrations....I believe there is some ambiguity as to what kind of "scarf' we are talking about here. There are and were many styles of neckwear that could be described as a scarf,.... there were longer scarves that were made of wool and used for the warmth factor, and there were dressier silk scarves, shorter, patterned, used primarily as wardrobe accents, there were silk ribbons that were tied about the neck as an accessory, then there were cotton scarves, used to tie back a womans hair while doing housework, tied around the neck to absorb sweat, more utilitarian....,

Heres a couple of images of one of those styles;

[Colin Roberts]

... Thought experiment time. By chance, I was reading about the Brown murder in Westminster just today. As you must know, she died by having her throat cut about 2 hours before Liz and only 3 miles away.

Although her mentally disturbed husband readily confessed, suppose he had not.

I submit to you that we would have threads discussing the thesis that "Jack" killed Mrs. Brown, but was interrupted before mutilation began. Next, he went to Berner street and did for Liz. ANOTHER interruption. By now, he was in a frenzy and found Kate at Mitre Square. Success!

And I PROMISE you, someone would be counting the 3 miles from Westminster to Berner and demonstrating the plausibility of the 1-2 hour time frame.

Just as someone else would be laying the blame on Fenians or the Okhrana!

"And I PROMISE you, someone would be counting the 3 miles from Westminster to Berner and demonstrating the plausibility of the 1-2 hour time frame."

And doing so would be nothing less than prudent!

If you had rolled a pair of dice with the knowledge that the outcome had been something other than 'Seven', then the single most rational wager that I could make – in the absence of the knowledge that you possessed – would be that the outcome had been just that: 'Seven'. Any other wager on my part would be based purely on a hunch, even though the probability of 'Seven' in this particular instance would be a mere 16.67%.

~~~~~~~~~

Soliciting, … or not soliciting …

Interrupted specifically by Diemschitz, … or not interrupted at all …

I believe that a fundamental knowledge of the Yorkshire Ripper case should be an outright prerequisite for active membership to these forums!

[Michael W Richards]

As for my Tiger Woods analogy, if you had a video of him teeing off that disguised who was hitting the ball, you would say "oh yeah, that's Tiger, yep, that one was classic Tiger, that one too." "Wow, who the hell hit that one?" Well, guess what? That one was Tiger, too.

Tiger wants to be consistent but Jack doesn't give a damn about it. He just wants his victim dead.

c.d.

Having played some competitive golf in my lifetime cd I can tell you that if you were to look at images from the shoulders down of Tiger Woods as he does his pre-shot routine, the address, how he sets up at the ball....you would see virtually identical behavior and movement. What happens during the second the swing takes place is really what affects the shot outcome. The reason the repetition is so exact is a function partly of muscle memory, having addressed the ball and repeating that behavior thousands of times before. Its not a conscious thing...at least off the driving range.

My point being....if this was Jack, and if Israel told the truth... (making BSM the suspect most probably "Jack" based on the timing alone), then he approached the woman in a manner that drew attention to himself, and the spot chosen for the murder was not conducive to private mutilations.

Thats not Jacks pre-shot routine. The man that killed Polly then Annie repeated his process, showed consistent skills with respect to knife skill and knowledge, and he was more invasive when he had more privacy. Right in Bucks Row vs the backyard of a house on Hanbury to me shows a man that learned to get what he was after he couldnt do it on the street.

The man that killed Liz Stride struggled with her, based on the scarf and some kind of choking of the victim, cut her unlike any previous or forthcoming victims, and abandoned her on her side while she was incapacitated.

Cheers

[lynn cates]

close

Hello Jon. That's pretty close. I take it you have seen my re-enactment?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Polly

Hello CD. Thanks.

Of course, weight placed is solely up to you.

Again, if there were only 2 murders--Annie and Kate--I might regard them by the same hand, disregarding the differences.

But once Polly enters the mix . . .

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

pre reqs

Hello Colin. Thanks.

I would add a second prerequisite, a degree in logic.

Cheers.
LC

[Colin Roberts]

I would add a second prerequisite, a degree in logic.

Your arrogance is as contemptible as - I am sure - my own must be!

[Hunter]

Hello Cris.

"She had a record at Thames Magistrate Court for the previous 3 years that included being arrested for soliciting."

I have not seen this one--only the D & D's. Can you kindly point me to a link?

Hi Lynn,

Sorry for the tardy response. Am out at the farm this weekend. Both Neal Sheldon and Dave Yost cite the arrests in their books referencing the Thames Magistrate Court records. She apparently was arrested on 8 occasions for "drunk and disorderly" and on one the charge was "drunk and disorderly and soliciting."

[lynn cates]

listing

Hello Cris. Thanks.

If you were out on the farm, then I am truly envious.

Thanks for the listing. I must look for these.

I wonder, are you/they including the one with an alias? Not sure what the latest thought on that one is.

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

Interruptions

There is no "evidence" that an interruption happened at all...there are opinions one did, but no evidence,

That's fine as far as it goes. I don't seek to quarrel with that - however:

While there is no evidence that there was an interruption, there is also no evidence that there wasn't. Lack of evidence that there was an interruption cannot be construed as evidence that there wasn't, any more than lack of evidence that there wasn't such an interruption can be taken as evidence that there was. The killer may, or may not, have been interrupted. It's an unknown surely?

Regards, Bridewell. (Apologies for the interruption)

[lynn cates]

petitio principii

Hello Colin.

"Lack of evidence that there was an interruption cannot be construed as evidence that there wasn't"

Absolutely. But what I'm on about is, "Why bring up an interruption in the first place?"

And the answer is easily had.

1. Liz was killed by Jack.

2. Jack killed to mutilate.

3. Liz was not mutilated.

Therefore, he must have been interrupted.

The problem, I think, is with #1--seems a bit of a petitio principii to me.

Cheers.
LC

[Observer]

Hello Colin. Thanks.

I would add a second prerequisite, a degree in logic.

Cheers.
LC

Considering the evidence we have available, it's logical to assume that the Fennians/Ochrana were involved in the murder of Liz Stride, Catherine Eddowes, and Mary Kelly ? Well I'll be.

As Colin Roberts suggests read the material available regarding the Yorkshire Ripper series of murders. To this day the police are uncertain as to how many women Sutcliffe assaulted. Several assaults committed by Sutcliffe were ruled out of the enquiry because the police were of the opinion that the assaults in question did not fit the pattern. In reality Sutcliffe had been disturbed during those assaults, thus the ferocity, and damage meted out to the victims were greatly reduced, resulting in the police assigning the attacks to another hand.

[harry]

I do not know of a bow,when referred to a scarf,tie,or kerchief,that will not unravel when both ends are pulled simultaneously,so i'll go with a knot,and I would argue they are different means of support.

[lynn cates]

2 points

Hello Harry. Two quick points.

1. Why would both tails be pulled? What is wrong with asserting that her assailant grabbed and caught one tail?

2. What kind of knot? If it were merely an overhand knot grabbing it would neither tighten nor loosen it.

Cheers.
LC