What's the compelling feature?

[Ally]

Sorry Tom but you have not nailed anything on the head. Speculation, opinion and fantasy is not fact, evidence or proof.

And sorry to shatter your illusions, but as I said in my opening post, I remain unconvinced as to whether Stride should be included in the "canon".

I have not decided one way or the other as to her candidacy.

[Tom_Wescott]

Yes, and the culprit was caught, as are most domestic murderers. But Stride wasn't a domestic murder and she wasn't killed in a frenzy, nor was she killed in doors. Nor were murders such as hers and Eddowes common. Anything but. We've been over this before. But had Eddowes and Stride been found laying next to each other, a certain group on here would still argue two unrelated killings.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Yes, and the culprit was caught, as are most domestic murderers.

Yes, but most domestic murders do not happen in a context where a victim of a serial killer is found the same night - things that easily would influence the police in their judgements and a situation that would be problematic even for modern police forces.
No doubt, we've been here before, but then again, considering the 'context' has never been your thing, has it?

But had Eddowes and Stride been found laying next to each other, a certain group on here would still argue two unrelated killings.

LOok who's talking - I assume you're take on (or rather 'obsession' about) this is objective?

All the best

[Natalie Severn]

Ally,
Ok lets put your first points to one side for a minute- it seems contradictory to you but this man is a serial killer.He probably killed more than the 5 or 6 women attributed to him and he killed them -at least five of them, in less than three months-and he didnt get caught.
There werent just a few extra police after him,there were vigilante groups,a very alarmed,panic stricken public on permanent watch .....and still he didnt get caught.
So how did he do it? We saw that in Bucks row alone he was operating between two patrolling policemen on 15 minute beats-as well as a night watchmen with a view.It looked very like he had to hop it "in mid flow" there ,because of a returning policeman, and as Tom said he seems to have learnt from that -he didnt try to cut through clothes again.
In Annie Chapman"s case he is in a backyard in daylight with people moving about in the their overlooking bedrooms,a man next door having a pee-----and he again hops it without anyone see him gthat time though it looks like he completed what he set out to do..

In Berner Street theres singing and dancing and people going in and out the building.He cuts Strides throat in pitch darkness,leaving two bruises on her shoulders and then quits.He never lost control.And then another woman is found up the road with her throat cut in much the same fashion .So it has seemed to many that he left off suddenly in Berner Street, when Diemshutz returned to the yard.If this is the case then he left off , in the middle of the murder-he never lost control .And he got to Aldgate/Mitre Square more or less undetected.And it appears he then completed the job he started,again between two patrolling policemen ,And gets out -undetected and presumably that too required him to be in control.
Finally he goes to Millers Court.This time he goes berserk.I dont think he was in control in the same way there.He seems to have lost it there, but he still got away undetected .But those particular kind of killings came to an end.

[Tom_Wescott]

But where's your proof they let that sway them? Where's the letter saying 'well, let's not bother interviewing her associates since her killer was the ripper.' It's not there. what is there is proof that all her close associates, including Kidney, were investigated and their alibis proved. You say the police were lying or incompetent. Ally says the doctors were wrong. This is the argument you need to 'maybe' exclude Stride? Come on!

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Ally]

Natalie,

You seem to have the same sort of appreciation that the doctors of the time did, greatly exagerating the skill, daring and nerve that Jack supposedly had. Could he have been greatly daring, nerves of steel, etc. Sure. Could he also have just been lucky? Used dark streets or shadowed corners to his advantage? We aren't talking about a killing spree that spanned decades, we are talking about a fairly short series of killings. In modern times with all the modern conveniences and technology available to police, communities and witnesses, killings occur constantly with no witnesses and serial killers have streaks that run into the dozens with no one ever catching them. But they don't get the kind of honoring that Jack does with his huge balls and nerves of steel.

[Natalie Severn]

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.

You dont half talk a lot of bollocks AP.

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

Again - as is evident from the police files, the domestic angle is shut down rather quickly and the Stride murder turned into a Ripper killing, and the Eddowes murder would be a natural reason. The media of the day were pressuring the police since the papers connected the killings.

As for alibis, we have no idea in what way these were investigated.
In other words, if the police believed the Ripper did it, all Kidney had to do was to provide an alibi for the murders of Nichols and Chapman.

Indeed, my opinion is that the police dropped the domestic angle before it was fully investigated. The police incompetent? Hardly. But didn't know how to do deal with murders in a context of complicated serial murders? Absolutely.
Modern police forces makes these mistakes all the time, and often committs errors based on bad judgement due to pressure and complex circumstances, but for some reason we are forced to believe that a inexperienced police force in 1888 was infalliable and could never make a mistake. Ridiculous.

All the best

[Cap'n Jack]

They help to keep my legs apart, Nats, and I can even bounce a Yankee dollar of 'em.

[Natalie Severn]

Natalie,

You seem to have the same sort of appreciation that the doctors of the time did, greatly exagerating the skill, daring and nerve that Jack supposedly had. Could he have been greatly daring, nerves of steel, etc. Sure. Could he also have just been lucky? Used dark streets or shadowed corners to his advantage? We aren't talking about a killing spree that spanned decades, we are talking about a fairly short series of killings. In modern times with all the modern conveniences and technology available to police, communities and witnesses, killings occur constantly with no witnesses and serial killers have streaks that run into the dozens with no one ever catching them. But they don't get the kind of honoring that Jack does with his huge balls and nerves of steel.

I enjoyed that Ally!
But seriously,you have to give him credit here or you fail to see how he did it.When paranoia turns to psychosis the results are chilling.Hitler is said to be an example of a cold, paranoid,schizophrenic killer.He never got his hands dirty even, but he had exterminated six million Jews,fooled Chamberlain and destroyed half of Europe by the time he committed suicide.
Dont underestimate the Ripper.

[rjpalmer]

A bit off topic but this one caught my eye:

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

What a difference a few weeks make.

'a few old women'

"incapable of defending themselves.'

Absolutely---or at least in general.

And yet, countless times over the past months, the same A.P.W. --bless ‘im---has repeatedly implied that a 57 or 58 year old man, 6' or 6' 1" in height, and often described as 'muscular' in his younger days, would be incapable of overpowering an unarmed Eddowes or the sickly Chapman...

Ah, well...nothing like a unified theory...

To my mind, the so-called ‘victimology’ of the women murdered in East London suggests someone who was himself less than capable. Who may not have been all that much removed from the women he victimized.

If, on the otherhand, the Ripper was some crazed youthful lunatic of the Richard Chase variety, I’d expect to see a broader range of victims; possibly infants, young girls, old spinsters in their rooms in Mile-End, etc. a few males here and there.

We dont’ see that. We see a very specific type of victim, and Stride fits it. There is ample evidence, for instance, that very young girls prostituted themselves in Whitechapel and were out on the streets at night. Yet they were not victimized; and this suggests to me that the Ripper wasn’t interested in them.

This, of course, is a severe blow to AP’s Cutbush theory, because the ‘victimology’ is so strikingly different to the 18-22 year-old members of the bourgoise that he 'jobbed.'

[Glenn Lauritz Andersson]

They help to keep my legs apart, Nats, and I can even bounce a Yankee dollar of 'em.

Now, that was a picture I didn't need to bring with me when I tuck in for the night...

[Natalie Severn]

They help to keep my legs apart, Nats, and I can even bounce a Yankee dollar of 'em.

dont flatter yourself AP-its just wind!

[Tom_Wescott]

You've obviously forgotten how much effort was put into finding and interrogating Chapman's 'Pensioner'. Good thing I haven't.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Cap'n Jack]

RJP me old mate, you obviously missed this, which I posted about two weeks ago:

I've always been a volatile critic of those who promote Tumblety as a suspect, and this has been largely and simply because of his age in 1888, approaching his 60th, and I just could not imagine a man of that age having the will, speed or agility to commit the Whitechapel Murders.
But then blow me down I find this old fart at 65 running round the East End, trying to entice women into dark alleyways, and then stabbing them when they refuse... two in one night if you please!
And the old buggar tries to stab the copper who arrests him as well.
There is something very familiar about this tale as well, isn't there?
Anyways, with some 'umble pie:

JOHN ROWLEY, Breaking Peace > wounding, 16th September 1889.


Reference Number: t18890916-757
Offence: Breaking Peace > wounding
Verdict: Guilty > lesser offence
Punishment: Imprisonment > hard labour
See original
757. JOHN ROWLEY (65) , Feloniously wounding Mary Ann Potts, with intent to do her grievous bodily harm.

MARY ANN POTTS . I am the wife of George Potts, a bookbinder, of 64, Whitecross Street—on September 2nd, a little while after twelve o'clock, I was in Whitecross Street with Mary Ann Short; the prisoner came up by Basket Alley, and said, "If you will come up here I will give you 2s."—I pulled my shoulder away from him, and hit him on his face with my open hand, and told him to be off—we went towards home, and he came behind me and stabbed me—he was the only man there at the time; I fell, and remember no more.

By the COURT. He was the worse for drink; he put one hand in his pocket when he first came up—he offered me 2s. for a certain purpose, and my friend called him an old beast—after I hit him he ran away, and he stabbed me about five minutes afterwards in my right side—I screamed out—I did not put my hand in his pocket, and take his money; he did not seem as if he had anything to take—I do not know him.

MARY ANN SHORT . I am the wife of Edward Short, a tailor—on this Monday, after twelve o'clock, I came out of the Bedford Arms as they were closing—I had had a drop of drink, but I knew everything—I left my daughter to go to Royal Street, and went down Whitecross Street, and the prisoner came to Mrs. Potts, and took her by the shoulders, and said he would give her 2s. to go home with him—she told him to go home out of the cold, and perhaps his wife wanted 2s.—she struck him, and he came again, and put his hand on her shoulder—his hat fell off, and we went away, making a laugh at his offering two old ladies 2s.—I knew no more till Mrs. Potts said, "I am stabbed"—I said, "Where?"—she said, "In my side," and I saw the prisoner with a white-handled knife in his hand, making at her again—she fell—I called him a pig.

See original
FREDERICK GOODWIN (Policeman G 105). I was on duty on this morning, about 12. 40; Mrs. Potts made a complaint to me with Mrs. Short—they went away, and a few minutes afterwards I heard calls of "Police!" and "Murder!"—I ran up Whitecross Street, and saw the two women in the road, and the prisoner running away; I followed him to the corner of Old Street—he struggled to get away, and tried several times to stab me with this knife (produced), which he had in his right hand—he was sober—Harwood came to my assistance, and after a struggle got the knife from the prisoner, which was open—the two women then came up, and said, "This man has stabbed us"—he said, "Serve you right; you should not try to take my money"—as the women were bleeding I took him to the station, and charged him with stabbing them and attempting to stab me—he said nothing—I found 5 1/2 d. on him.

HARWOOD (Policeman G 279). I was on duty in Whitecross Street about 12.20 a. m., and heard screams of Police!" and "Murder!" I ran in that direction, and saw the two women, and the prisoner running away from them, and Goodwin chasing him; he struggled with Goodwin, and was in the act of striking him with his hand—I caught hold of his hand, and found this open knife in it.

GEORGE EUGENE YARROW . I am divisional surgeon to the police—I examined Mary Ann Potts at 1 a. m.; she had a punctured wound on the outer side of her left breast, half an inch deep and about an inch long—there were corresponding cuts in her jacket, stays, and chemise—the upper edge of her stays was cut through where the binding goes over—this knife would cause it—the wound was not dangerous in itself, but it was in a dangerous part; it did not penetrate the chest wall; it was stopped by the rib, or it would have gone into the lungs—there must have been some violence, or it would not have gone through the bound part of the stays.

The prisoner, in his statement before the Magistrate and in his defence, said that the women attacked him first, and struck him in his face, and he resisted; and, having a knife in his hand cutting tobacco, it came in contact with them, and that he was trying to save his property.

GUILTY of unlawfully wounding. — Twenty Months' Hard Labour. There

was another indictment against the prisoner for wounding Mary Ann Short.