Throat-slitting and Stride

[Starbuck27]

Cheers for the informative and understanding reply Phil, much appreciated. I'm only rarely impressed with conspiracy theories [though I do enjoy indulging them!] but I sometimes feel that there was the ability and motivation [and given the possible provenance of the letters maybe even action] to largely invent Jack The Ripper. Both as a means to increase media sales and as a cause to effect social change.

I've no doubt that it's entirely possible that there was a serial killer responsible for these women's deaths. A quick perusal of the suspect list demonstrates that there were a number of killers operating at or around the time...i've just always felt that the murders in this case arent neccessarily conclusively linked. At least in my own mind.

Thanks for reccomended reading I shall endeavour to get at least one of those books by the end of the week.

[Phil H]

I've given you my view Wickerman - if you don't agree fine. I disagree with most of what you think.

My view is she was not seen with three men - but one. The descriptions are pretty consistent.

Phil

[Phil H]

Welcome to Casebook, Starbuck27. I hope you enjoy the site and get as much out of it as I do.

There is a book about London murder s in 1888 (fairly recent in paperback) which I don't have to hand - it sets the Ripper murders in that year's context. (I think there is a digest of some of those murders in a current thread here - not sure which one.)

I'd be genuinely interested to know how much of an anomaly the Ripper's spree constitutes in the pattern or serious crime of the time period in question within London.

Certainly the press latched on to the JtR-related crimes. I believe tht at least some of them are connected.

From what I do know about the case there are a number of murders that look as if they were perpetrated by a serial killer. Certainly they would almost surely represent that today if transplanted to our period. I'm just not informed enough to onow if such a definitive case can be made in the 1890's.

AP Wolf - I think the book is available as a download on Casebook - deconstructed the murders - especially Stride's. I found it a very stimulating read. Peter Turnbull also wrote a book that argued that all the murders were separate and only linked by the press.

Simon Wood argues in articles in the last two issues of Ripperologist that Chapman was a murder by a separate hand to Nichols and Eddowes. I don't agree with him, but there you go.

I believe that Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were almost certainly by the same hand. These days I personally question Stride and Kelly - though many others would strongly disagree. I would increasingly add Mckenzie.

But I do think the atmosphere, the soubriquet (JtR) and the tension were created by the press for their own ends. (Simon makes some good points about this, IMHO.) I think there is a good case for the killer being the first "serial killer" - but I think the myth (stronger than the facts) is largely hype. Again, make your own mind up on the point, don't just accept what I or others say.

Given the discrepancies in eye witness statements [to an extent an entirely natural lack of clarity as i've discovered from experience] is it not possible that these were simply a number of seperate murders?

See what I have said above. To me the similarities between Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes are sufficient, and the possible learning curve clear enough, to say they may well be linked.

Or the work of a loose collection of pimps keeping their prostitutes in particuarly brutal check?

I started a thread - not well responded to by many - about the Controllers of Spitalfields, suggesting just such a thing.

As I've said already I appreciate that I may not know enough to realise that these are questions that have already been comprehensively answered and if so... I apologise in advance.

No need to apologise, I'm pleased to help so far as i can. I am largely in a minority here, so you may find others will give you a very different slant and answers.

If anything I have said doesn't make sense, please come back to me.

Again, a warm welcome.

Phil

[Wickerman]

Hi Lynn.

Hello Phil.

"I don't buy the scenario because I see not one iota of evidence that Liz was soliciting that night."

Well, the argument is:

1. She was female.

2. She may have talked to men.

3. She was out late.

4. Jack killed her, and he killed ONLY prostitutes.

Cheers.
LC

Does this include the three different men she was seen with in the space of 90 minutes?

[Starbuck27]

Evening Phil, this is my first post on Casebook so you'l have to forgive me at my lack of authority on the subject. I've always been interested in this question. I'd be genuinely interested to know how much of an anomaly the Ripper's spree constitutes in the pattern or serious crime of the time period in question within London.

From what I do know about the case there are a number of murders that look as if they were perpetrated by a serial killer. Certainly they would almost surely represent that today if transplanted to our period. I'm just not informed enough to onow if such a definitive case can be made in the 1890's.

Given the discrepancies in eye witness statements [to an extent an entirely natural lack of clarity as i've discovered from experience] is it not possible that these were simply a number of seperate murders? Or the work of a loose collection of pimps keeping their prostitutes in particuarly brutal check?

As i've said already I appreciate that I may not know enough to realise that these are questions that have already been comprehensively answered and if so... I apologise in advance.

[crberger]

Errata-could you please tell me more about "disengage" as in, "On of the things Jack had to have was the ability to disengage from a potential victim if the location didn't suit his needs."
Thanks

[Michael W Richards]

Hello Michael,

If a man is trying to grab a young girl on her way home from school and an adult appears and he runs off, did his motive somehow change?

A) Does this happen after a few incidents of successful abductions, (with specific injuries inflicted upon both of the previous victims), had recently occurred?

B) Does the 3rd abduction attempt have the same characteristics as the previous 2 in as much as can be determined? Were all 3 victims similar in any respects, were they engaged in certain activities at the time,... was the environment similar, the time of day, the approach?

C) Can we say, based solely on an abduction attempt, that we are likely looking at the same person who abducted and injured 2 victims in a very specific manner?

The killer I alluded to earlier cd did specific things, and did those things after the cuts that killed were made. In other words, he killed so he could continue. It was not merely death he sought.

In Liz Strides case, can you say the same?... again....based on evidence, not your beliefs or hunches or arguments that include interruptions that are not indicated in any physical evidence.

To Phil, I happen to believe that Liz Strides attendance in the passageway was more likely something social or employment oriented, based on her maid, nanny and housecleaning history. I believe as you stated that some physical evidence suggests those possibilities strongly. My point earlier was that it is still an unknown why she was there,.. despite our own beliefs.

Cheers

[lynn cates]

running away

Hello CD.

"If a man is trying to grab a young girl on her way home from school and an adult appears and he runs off, did his motive somehow change?"

Not at all.

Of course, if there were a serial paedophile out and about, and he grabbed girls and cut their throats twice--deeply--but a third one was cut shallowly, once, it might cause one to think a bit.

And then, too, there would be some evidence of running away, not just an ad hoc assumption to make a fit?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

argument

Hello Phil.

"I don't buy the scenario because I see not one iota of evidence that Liz was soliciting that night."

Well, the argument is:

1. She was female.

2. She may have talked to men.

3. She was out late.

4. Jack killed her, and he killed ONLY prostitutes.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

suspicious

Hello CD.

"Liz might have had her suspicions and may have felt more secure being close to the club. If Jack was intent upon killing her and she said it's here or not at all, what were his options?"

More to the point, IF she were suspicious, what were HER options?

Perhaps to leave?

And suspicious of what?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

secure

Hello Phil.

"Surely he would seek a MORE secure spot if possible, not a less?"

Precisely.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

restraint

Hello CD. Thanks.

"But if we accept the idea that Jack was a serial killer, is it really a leap to assume that his need to kill could be overpowering at times?"

Very well. But IF that is so, then how does one account for periodic inactivity? Surely it cannot be that he restrained himself for fear of being caught?

Cheers.
LC

[Phil H]

That is Stewart's view and no doubt he finds it convincing. I do not agree. I have given you the evidence as I see it - I could go on about flowers and grapes too.

Sorry, but even prostitutes can have, and are entitled to, a private life.

Phil

[c.d.]

Hello Michael,

If a man is trying to grab a young girl on her way home from school and an adult appears and he runs off, did his motive somehow change?

[c.d.]

The clothes brush, the care with her appearance, the piece of velvet - the fact she seems to have been seen with a single "clerkly" man that night pretty consistently. the fact that she had left Kidney - need I go on...?

Hello Phil,

Per Stewart Evans - "To just put in my take on the question of whether Stride was actually soliciting or not I would make the following observations. She was a known casual prostitute of the same type as the other victims, it was well after midnight and she was 'hanging about' on the street, and there are witness reports that seem to indicate she was soliciting. Not least of all the police stated that she was a prostitute. Common sense would seem to dictate that she was soliciting. I appreciate the arguments of others who try to say she wasn't soliciting but, to my mind, they don't hold any strength."

My apologies to Stewart if he doesn't like someone using what he wrote since I know he doesn't like to get involved in arguments. Just thought that this was way too good not to post.

c.d.