A Killer Other Than the B.S. Man?

[Robert]

I treasure the vision of Mrs D stoutly defending her husband with a soft broom.

A brush with the law.

[curious4]

I treasure the vision of Mrs D stoutly defending her husband with a soft broom.

A brush with the law.

Very good! :-D

[Wyatt Earp]

You are still not taking into consideration the fact that harassment of women and general misogynistic behavior toward women did not stop during this time.

You are not taking into account that the police were looking for a multiple killer.

If he simply walks away after being seen by Schwartz:

He is possibly arrested for throwing Stride to the ground and might have to endure a lecture from the judge or perhaps pay a small fine. Nothing more.
He is questioned and possibly investigated but nothing comes of it and he simply falls into the same category as the hundreds of other men who were picked up by the police and eventually he falls off their radar. He is now free to go on to kill Mary Kelly.

No one can know how an investigation of Jack might have played out. Jack knew who he was and he would have been very touchy about being investigated by the police. There was no need for him to take a chance with an investigation when all he had to do was knife Stride and leave the scene.

On the other hand if he kills Stride:

He is perhaps arrested and shown to Schwartz (and possibly the Pipe Man) who unlike Long got a good look at his face. Their confirmation that this in fact was the man they saw assaulting Stride who was then found a short time later with her throat cut could be enough to convict and hang him and his funny little games have come to an end.

No, assuming Schwartz and Pipeman could not name him (or Pipeman, if he was a friend of his, would not name him), there was no danger of his being arrested for Stride’s murder. He simply walked away into the night.

[Wickerman]

Sutcliffe was interviewed nine times over the length of the Yorkshire Ripper investigation, it didn't seem to phase him any. Why should the Whitechapel murderer be any different?
I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't get a little 'kick' out of being their center of attention when he knew they had nothing to keep him for.

[lynn cates]

late September

Hello Wyatt.

"You are not taking into account that the police were looking for a multiple killer."

A bit of an anachronism?

Cheers.
LC

[Wyatt Earp]

Sutcliffe was interviewed nine times over the length of the Yorkshire Ripper investigation, it didn't seem to phase him any. Why should the Whitechapel murderer be any different?
I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't get a little 'kick' out of being their center of attention when he knew they had nothing to keep him for.

Do you think that Sutcliffe wanted to be interviewed by the police? I don’t think so. At some point he might have become amused by the repeated questioning, but I can’t imagine he would have welcomed it the first time the police came looking for him. Serial killers do not want to be identified, they want to remain unidentified so that they can continue with their crimes. Why should Jack be any different? Within the scenario I’ve described, Jack had the opportunity to quickly and easily snuff out the possibility of a police investigation…and he did.

[Wyatt Earp]

Hello Wyatt.

"You are not taking into account that the police were looking for a multiple killer."

A bit of an anachronism?

Cheers.
LC

I'm not sure I understand your point, Lynn. Hadn't Nichols and Chapman both been murdered by late September?

[Wickerman]

Do you think that Sutcliffe wanted to be interviewed by the police?

I don't think he cared, especially for roughing up a woman outside a club. The East End was a rough place, women were ill-treated all the time. One press report even commented that this brawl was mistaken for a husband & wife rowing - so that indicates to us how serious the exchange was, in other words, just a common occurrence.

Serial killers do not want to be identified, they want to remain unidentified so that they can continue with their crimes. Why should Jack be any different? Within the scenario I’ve described, Jack had the opportunity to quickly and easily snuff out the possibility of a police investigation…and he did.

Only IF (as you say) Stride identified him as the killer, but why she all of a sudden was able to do this is still obscure.
If Stride knew who the killer was before she went to Dutfileds Yard then how come she didn't tell anyone, and if only after, then how did she find out?

You don't think BS-man introduced himself as Leather Apron do you?
(a little too much Hollywood in that)

[Wyatt Earp]

Only IF (as you say) Stride identified him as the killer

No, this is incorrect. Nichols and Chapman were both prostitutes who were murdered in Whitechapel in the early hours of the morning. Stride was a prostitute who was seen being assaulted by a man in Whitechapel in the early hours of the morning. The police would have had a natural interest in looking into this man, regardless of whether or not Stride could tell them that he was the murderer of those two women. If this isn’t obvious to you, it should be.

Jack had a reasonable basis to fear a police investigation. There was no need for him to take a chance with an investigation when all he had to do was take a couple of steps into the yard, cut Stride’s throat, and then vanish into the night. Jack was a very naughty boy and you should accept that, yes, he could have chosen to do such a thing.

[lynn cates]

multiple killers

Hello Wyatt. Thanks.

"Hadn't Nichols and Chapman both been murdered by late September?"

Indeed. But are not multiple killers to make away with at least three?

Cheers.
LC

[Wyatt Earp]

Hello Wyatt. Thanks.

"Hadn't Nichols and Chapman both been murdered by late September?"

Indeed. But are not multiple killers to make away with at least three?

Cheers.
LC

There has been debate about how to define serial murder. This is from the recent FBI report, Serial Murder: Pathways for Investigations:

“For purposes of this research study, the definition of serial murder is a single offender who killed at least two victims in separate events at different times.”

In the past, a common definition had been three or more victims.

[Harry D]

Stride was a prostitute who was seen being assaulted by a man in Whitechapel in the early hours of the morning.

Was she a prostitute at that time? There's no proof that she was, nor Eddowes either. Not that this would've stopped the killer.

[Wickerman]

No, this is incorrect. Nichols and Chapman were both prostitutes who were murdered in Whitechapel in the early hours of the morning. Stride was a prostitute who was seen being assaulted by a man in Whitechapel in the early hours of the morning.

And the 'early morning' was when prostitutes plied their trade. Not every physical altercation between a woman and a man is going to be treated as another Ripper attack, as clearly this press account demonstrates.

"The police have been told that a man, aged between 35 and 40 years of age, and of fair complexion, was seen to throw the woman murdered in Berner-street to the ground. Those who saw it thought that it was a man and his wife quarrelling, and no notice was taken of it."

By that account the altercation doesn't appear to have been particularly violent, but you think rather than him explain, "she was a prostitute who tried to solicit me", his most logical response was to murder her?

How can you believe that makes any sense?

[c.d.]

Not every physical altercation between a woman and a man is going to be treated as another Ripper attack, as clearly this press account demonstrates.

Hello Jon,

Yes, exactly. And here, you are only speaking of physical attacks. Certainly there was no shortage of verbal attacks as well. Something along the lines of "those filthy whores got what was coming to them." I am sure the police would have wanted to investigate any situation involving bad treatment of a woman but they simply did not have the manpower to do so. And even if they did question a suspect or investigate him they lacked the manpower and resources to make it in depth and extensive unless they felt they had a real reason to do so.

c.d.

[c.d.]

I am sure that Jack did not want to be investigated given a choice. I mean why would he? But by the same token does anybody really WANT to get a flu shot? No. They simply feel that it is a better alternative than getting the flu. I would have to assume that Jack read or heard of the large number of men who had been questioned and then let go. Unless he had some personal items belonging to the victims or a diary and some preserved organs hidden under the floorboards in his home that could be found in a search, I can't see how an investigation could possibly turn up anything more damning than being seen by Schwartz and the Pipe Man.

Even if an investigation aroused enough suspicion for the police to follow him hoping to catch him in the act, he had already been seen if not in the actual act of murder but about as close to it as you can come. Why put yourself in a position where the testimony of Schwartz and the Pipe Man could put a rope around your neck? Better to take a chance on an investigation if it came to that which it might not. Definitely the lesser of evils.

c.d.