What's the compelling feature?

[Ally]

Eddowes was killed in a square, in a corner, immediately next to an exit, with windows overlooking. Close enough for you?

And Kelly was killed in a room and nichols was killed in the street. Pointing out two victims who share a similar kill locale when it is not shared by the rest of the victims is useless.

In Ripperology, we call that 'professional medical opinion'.

And yet the key word is still "opinion". And if you think that "professional medical" types can't get it wrong, here's a wake-up call for you:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/2286875.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/jan/30/ukcrime.claredyer

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/apr/25/ukcrime.stevenmorris

The relative skill or lack of skill with a knife is based on the idea that a person would have problems slicing the throat of another human being and would hesitate. This is a fallacy.

The bottom line is that Liz Stride was killed in precisely a manner and in precisely a place that the killer of Chapman and Eddowes would have chosen.

But not in the place that the killer of Kelly and the killer of Nichols would have chosen. So by that logic, Stride, Chapman and Eddowes were killed by one man, and Nichols and Kelly were each killed by a different man. I guess Jack the Myth is right?

She was killed with someone who possessed skill with a knife, and a very sharp knife.

The first part is speculation and the second part is blatant duh. It's hardly worth killing someone with a very dull knife. You'd be sawing for days.

She was killed within 45 minutes of time and 10 minutes of walking distance of a woman we consider a bonafide Ripper victim.

Which would beg the question: he flees for fear of being caught. Knowing the police are all around, he then chooses to kill a ten minute walk away? Conflicting ideas again.

Two identical killers in the same neighborhood at the same time killing middle-aged prostitutes or just one?

Actually NOT identical. The whole lack of mutilation thing. But once again, this is irrelvant. As has already been pointed out: two teenage students shot to death within a mile of each other one Friday night. Two identical killers or just one? NOt compelling arguments.

[perrymason]

It seems that the Pro Canon arguments for Liz Stride are unconcerned about a reported "assault witnessed" just prior to her death involving her, not a potential dispute overheard,......nor the medical data, part of which as I suggested was well within Blackwells abilities due to the overall time between his arrival and her cut being less than 30 minutes prior...which therefore doesn't negate Schwartz's account. And it also includes the fact that the killer didnt sever both arteries completely. It also includes the possibility she was falling as she was cut. Perhaps just the type of fall witnessed by Schwartz.

So I am to take it that two of the compelling reasons as to why to include Liz in the Canon are ... a likely disruption, or last minute abandonment by the killer...and secondly, that she was a part time street whore in the general area, and in similar environments to the ones most directly associated as other alleged Ripper killings. And the fact the time between killings makes the second site reachable within the allotted period I would imagine as well?

For future reference Tom you can refer to me as Perry or Michael, but I am hardly part of a multinational Conspiracy to discredit Strides inclusion. If you mean to say I share some opinions with other members in this regard, that would be a more accurate representation of the facts.

Im afraid to suggest there is only one man at that time cutting women is inaccurate, and the most basic proof is in the the fact that Three women are killed by knife in the East End on Double Event Night by men, Jack the Ripper is not credited with all the knife killings... some with abdominal mutilations, of East End whores during 88/89, (some 10 or eleven unsolved attacks or murders), and a Torso, the victim killed earlier that Fall, is discovered that same week.

I would think that the commonality of knife attacks and killings in the area would preclude anyone from assuming only Jack kills a certain way with a knife.

Best regards.

[Sam Flynn]

Hi Tom,

She was killed with someone who possessed skill with a knife, and a very sharp knife.

It strikes me that it might not have been all that sharp, or its operator all that skilled, if its trajectory through the tissues of the throat was capable of being interrupted... by the arrival of a pony and cart.

[c.d.]

Hi Michael,

There are assaults and then there are assaults. We really don't know what took place. A drunken customer pushing a prostitute to the ground would probably not have been that uncommon an ocurrence. Perhaps Liz fell. It seems to me that the BS man's claim to fame is that he was there in close proximity to her time of death and not really because of his actions. Had Schwartz testified that he had a knife in his hand at the time, I would give his testimony a lot more weight.

c.d.

[Tom_Wescott]

And Kelly was killed in a room and nichols was killed in the street. Pointing out two victims who share a similar kill locale when it is not shared by the rest of the victims is useless.

Three out of five. And it's not useless at all.

And yet the key word is still "opinion". And if you think that "professional medical" types can't get it wrong, here's a wake-up call for you:

Did I say Phillips was infallible? No, but his opinion is evidence. Phillips wasn't being paid to give a forgone conclusion, nor did any doctor of equal standing step forward to challenge Phillips' conclusions. And it's safe to say given his experience and position that Phillips examined more knife wounds than any living doctor in the US or UK.

But not in the place that the killer of Kelly and the killer of Nichols would have chosen. So by that logic, Stride, Chapman and Eddowes were killed by one man, and Nichols and Kelly were each killed by a different man.

The Ripper made two significant mistakes in his Buck's Row escapade from which he learned. The first lesson was to pick a location with predictable entry and exit which would give him audible and visual advantage in the event of interruption and allow him to defend himself and escape. The other mistake was attempting to open Nichols' abdomen under her clothes. He never tried that again. This is why the next three victims were all killed in unusual places (to us) but comfortable (for the killer). It stands to reason that a man comfortable with killing a woman in Mitre Square would be perfectly comfortable in a room in a court, even if we don't agree with the logic.

I also think the Ripper wore a good-sized hat since overlooking windows didn't bother him at all.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Natalie Severn]

Sorry Nats, but that's the kind of fantasizing and pure speculation that occurs and has no more relationship to fact than saying Jack was beaten by his mother which caused his hatred of women. You are presuming you know his motives for killing the women, you are presuming to know what drove him and presuming to know how he would have behaved under a given circumstances. If he so badly needed to finish that he would risk capture twice in one night, then how could he have possibly been together enough to avoid capture in the first place? You paint conflicting views of a killer simultaneously ruled by his "evil instincts" and his need to carry them out and yet able to completely control them while under their influence (i.e in the middle of a kill) when the need arises.

Ally,
Robert Anderson - 23rd October 1888
he writes:that a crime of this kind should have been committed without any clue being supplied by the criminal,is unusual,but that five successive murders should have been committed without our having the slightest clue of any kind is extraordinary,if not unique in the annals of crime.

Coroner summing up at the Stride Inquest
- incorporating the views of the police surgeons , the police involved in the case and witness statements:
".....there had been the same skill exhibited in the way the victim had been entrapped,and the injuries inflicted,so as to cause instant death and prevent blood from soiling the operator,and the same daring defiance of immediate detection........."
The doctors had also talked of Stride being found on her left side,the killer positioned on her left side .....
all these things ----the extremely unusual lack of clues,the daring behaviour and subsequent escape of detection------presented a picture to those there at the time,that the Berner Street killer and the Mitre Square killer were one and the same.
If this was indeed the case then he had nerves of steel and he was able to put the plug in and get away fast when in danger.
I didnt call the killer"s instincts "evil" maybe the killings were "command killings" as in a psychosis,maybe they were the result of dangerous urges as in other serial killings .

[Tom_Wescott]

Ally,

Kids shoot kids with guns all the time. Nothing significant in it. I can show you days where DOZENS were shot in the same building, let alone two in the same neighborhood. Anyone can point a gun and squeeze, but most don't have what it takes to use a knife in such a manner. It was true then and it's true now. Not unheard of, but on a balance of probability and weighing IT ALL TOGETHER, it's difficult to conclude Stride was killed by someone other than Eddowes' killer.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

Natalie,

The idea that the police at the time were infallible in their opinions is as equally shortsighted as the idea that they were bumbling ignorami who couldn't find a criminal if they stumbled over one. The fact that the police felt they were all the work of one man is nice, but it's not evidence. Look at the atlanta child killings. You cannot say with any certainty that ALL cops involved in the case believed that ALL the murders were committed by one man. And even if they did, that still doesn't make it proof. It makes it opinion.


What I read when I read the coroner's report is a whole lot of adjectives that speak to admiration and incredulity "daring" "skill", etc. The likelihood that they would want to believe there couldn't be two men "daring" enough to kill a prostitute out in the open speaks more to their opinions than to fact. If a right handed man is going to kill a woman, then the likelihood is, she'll end up on her left side. Most people are right handed. It's as simple as that.

The fact also remains, and you have not addressed the substantial point, whether they are called "evil instincts" or "murderous impulse" or "desire to kill", the idea that he could have such total control over them that he could stop in the middle of his murders, but then be so overwhelmed by them that he doesn't even manage to get a safe distance away before succumbing to them again is contradictory.

[Tom_Wescott]

Look at the atlanta child killings. You cannot say with any certainty that ALL cops involved in the case believed that ALL the murders were committed by one man. And even if they did, that still doesn't make it proof.

I believe Wayne Williams is innocent. It's also obvious that some of the attributed ACM killings were domestic and that possibly some legitimate ones (committed after Wayne was captured) were written off as something else. This is the case that made the name for FBI profiling and allowed Douglas to get funding for his fledgling office. But the Atlanta police knew what they were doing. They knew some of these killings weren't ACM, but they were able to write them off the books by saying they were. When the pressure got too hot they helped Douglas pin it on Wiliams and be done with it. Hell, the two people he was convicted of killing weren't even children!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

Ally,

Kids shoot kids with guns all the time. Nothing significant in it. I can show you days where DOZENS were shot in the same building, let alone two in the same neighborhood. Anyone can point a gun and squeeze, but most don't have what it takes to use a knife in such a manner. It was true then and it's true now. Not unheard of, but on a balance of probability and weighing IT ALL TOGETHER, it's difficult to conclude Stride was killed by someone other than Eddowes' killer.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

You are confusing your 21st century American mentality to the 1800 British mentality when a knife would have been more common than a gun. Even today in England, knifings are more common than shootings.

[Tom_Wescott]

You are confusing your 21st century American mentality to the 1800 British mentality when a knife would have been more common than a gun. Even today in England, knifings are more common than shootings.

I'm not confusing anything, nor am I the one using 21st century examples for comparison. And throat cuttings on the open street were not so common as you think, then or now. I know you're just playing devil's advocate, but when you have to stray this far affield to keep the argument alive, the game is over.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Cap'n Jack]

Natalie's and Tom's attempts to give purpose and motive to the Whitechapel Murderer are peppered with good old Wilsonian claptrap, 'nerves of steel' etc, as if we are talking of acts of heroism in a battle, when we are in fact talking of the tawdry murders of a few old women who were probably entirely incapable of defending themselves against common criminal assailants of the night. Tom's efforts to give the murderer magical wings to 'finish off the job' by killing two women in one night is a useful insight into just how this perverted logic works.
It is not Porn, Tom, it is murder.
And Natalie's efforts, despite her agressive feministic approach, totally devalues the victims as pure and simple human beings, and turns them into paper cut-outs to stick in some Victorian album.
Jack killed 'em, but by Henry, you two just finish them off.

[Ally]

And when you fail to substantially address any of the points put to you, I guess you are right, the game is over. Stride was more than likely NOT a ripper victim. You have convinced me.

[Tom_Wescott]

Ally,

You're full of it. I know it and you know it. I've nailed every point on the head and only ignored those that were redundant. And I don't buy it for a minute that you think Stride was not a Ripper victim.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Ally,

Kids shoot kids with guns all the time. Nothing significant in it. I can show you days where DOZENS were shot in the same building, let alone two in the same neighborhood. Anyone can point a gun and squeeze, but most don't have what it takes to use a knife in such a manner. It was true then and it's true now. Not unheard of, but on a balance of probability and weighing IT ALL TOGETHER, it's difficult to conclude Stride was killed by someone other than Eddowes' killer.

That is absolute nonsense.
Not only is modern domestic crime annals littered with murders perpetrated with a knife in an extremely vicious manner, but your statement also reveals how little you actually understand about life conditions in 1888. Gun shots may be common in connection with crimes in the United States but definitely not where I live. In fact, in most parts of Europe, murders committed with a gun are quite rare while brutal knife murders are extremely common.

Even though you're also wrong about how knives are being used today Ally is right when she says that you can't make such a comparison, since people lived different lives a hundred years ago. To people in 1888 the knife was as common a working tool as the mobile phone is to us today; most people among the working class used it daily and KNEW HOW to use it. Indoors or outdoors.

And again - let's all remember that the same night as the Double Event, a brutal domestic knife murder was committed in Westminster, when the gardener John Browne killed his wife Sarah by cutting her throat and stab her viciously. Yes, it happened indoors, but of course it perfectly well illsutrates what people were and are capable of.
So let's put that nonsense argument about 'few people would be able to murder someone with a knife in 1888' to rest once and for all. Because it's all bogus.

All the best