Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

For what reason do we include Stride?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by JeffHamm View Post

    Yah, but then, it appears Chapman may have been seen my Mrs. Long shortly before JtR kills her at daybreak in a fenced in backyard of a house filled with people just after the neighbor has gone to the outdoor loo, and also killed Eddowes just after being spotted by 3 people who just passed them, and if any of the people seen with Kelly killed her, then again, having been spotted shortly before and in very risky locations for murder doesn't seem to deter him, so while it would be stupid to make that choice, almost all the murders occurred in locations where it would be stupid to do so Granted, in the other cases he's not seen in an altercation with the victim, and the sightings are not universally viewed as being of JtR and the victims, but that's the way with this case. If we only consider universally accepted bits of evidence, we end up with nothing to explain.

    - Jeff
    But Jeff, What is he guilty of? All Jack is doing is talking to a victim. He isn't seen having an altercation with them as in the case with Liz, and he doesn't drag them into the street neither. He goes quietly and silently to a corner/spot where he thinks he is safe [mainly in the dark], before he tries to subdue them quickly and silently.
    He doesn't go shouting anything to a potential witness to try and scare them off
    Regards Darryl

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Darryl Kenyon View Post

      But Jeff, What is he guilty of? All Jack is doing is talking to a victim. He isn't seen having an altercation with them as in the case with Liz, and he doesn't drag them into the street neither. He goes quietly and silently to a corner/spot where he thinks he is safe [mainly in the dark], before he tries to subdue them quickly and silently.
      He doesn't go shouting anything to a potential witness to try and scare them off
      Regards Darryl
      Hi Darryl,

      I just think that being spotted with the victim would be a deterrent, but since that appears not to have been, I see no great reason to see why he would stop now. Obviously that's a subjective evaluation, so opinions will vary. To me I see it as, if it's JtR, the witnesses have both fled, and that would give him a bit of time to finish what he started, but not enough time to do all he wanted. And JtR was not adverse to murdering and mutilating during short windows of opportunity. Other than Kelly, he often had very little time before someone was bound to show up. It appears all of the other victims, were found within 15 minutes or so of being murdered (oddly, Chapman seems to have been the longest, around 30 minutes after being murdered, despite this seeming to me to be the most risky and irrational choices of murder locations of all of them), and he may even have been scared off in the case of Nichols (by the arrival of Cross/Lechmere, or by Paul, pending on one's view of Cross/Lechmere as a suspect - either way, though, someone shows up).

      I don't know, it just doesn't seem to me like a choice that is all out of character for JtR given what he chose to do at other murder locations. If it's not JtR, I suppose it seems more odd, but I wouldn't go so far as to suggest this is evidence to support him being JtR.

      - Jeff

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

        The biggest issue in Ripperology is over-confidence. Stride might not have been killed by Jack but there’s nothing to justify stating this as a fact. That said, obviously you are entitled to feel as confident on the subject as you want to. ‘’Clearly’’ is a word that we can rarely be justified in using in this case.
        To address your embolden print in my post;

        1. Wasn't addressing the question of the identity of the killer, just the fact she had the cashous clutched.
        2. In no other alleged Ripper murder is there evidence of a garrote being used.
        3. Liz was standing on private property, just after a meeting involving primarily men, while 30 or so remain inside making noise she could hear, in a dark alleyway leading to an ajar kitchen door. Entitled to be there is a valid and reasonable assumption about her state of mind.
        4. There is not one tiny, miniscule, microscopic hint that any disturbance happened within the Inquiry accepted statements. Why do people keep perpetuating myths.
        5. There were lots of female throat cuttings that Fall, 3 on the Double Event night alone. I personally believe the double cuts help sort them out.
        6. When there is no ripping, there is no evidence a Ripper did it. There is in this case belief alone.
        7. The violent outbreak by club members, ones who at the time of the murders had active roles in what the Police described as an "anarchist" club...who had a murder occur on their property, establishes a reputation that may well include murderous acts. As to who spoke the truth...3 people stated they were in the alley by the body around 12:45, one stated he went in that passageway at that time and saw no-one and "couldn't be sure" if he had to step around or over a dying woman, by the time the police arrive we have only Diemshutz's word...and a shaky remembrance by Eagle, to help establish an arrival time of 1am precisely. Which he claimed. Someone lied.
        8. I wouldnt say that at all, many have believed this premise over the years, Im suggesting that belief has no support within the evidence, so lets stop making a Canon based on unsupported beliefs.

        Iv never argued a suspect in this case here, or anywhere else, I do not presume to know the identity of that person based on the fact other murders occurred around the same time and area, Im just certain that there is no evidence that Liz Stride was killed by someone with a reputation of double throat cuts and pm abdominal mutilations.

        If you have access to some additional evidence that to-date is unknown, hey, lets go....but if not, stopping telling me that logic and reason are arrogance.
        Michael Richards

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

          To address your embolden print in my post;

          1. Wasn't addressing the question of the identity of the killer, just the fact she had the cashous clutched.
          Your whole post is about showing that Stride wasn’t killed by the ripper but ok.
          2. In no other alleged Ripper murder is there evidence of a garrote being used.
          Not really a stumbling block if we simply suggest that in trying to subdue her before the kill he saw the scarf and used it.
          3. Liz was standing on private property, just after a meeting involving primarily men, while 30 or so remain inside making noise she could hear, in a dark alleyway leading to an ajar kitchen door. Entitled to be there is a valid and reasonable assumption about her state of mind.
          I don’t think so. It could simply mean that she felt that she could get away with doing business on that spot. These women weren’t exactly shrinking violets when it came to earning a crust.
          4. There is not one tiny, miniscule, microscopic hint that any disturbance happened within the Inquiry accepted statements. Why do people keep perpetuating myths.
          Because something wasn’t mentioned at an inquest isn’t proof that it didn’t happen. It might not have happened but we cannot know for certain.
          5. There were lots of female throat cuttings that Fall, 3 on the Double Event night alone. I personally believe the double cuts help sort them out.
          Fatal ones? And were they prostitutes?
          6. When there is no ripping, there is no evidence a Ripper did it. There is in this case belief alone.
          And of course this is why there is a doubt. But it’s no more than a doubt. That the killer was disturbed is a plausible possibility.
          7. The violent outbreak by club members, ones who at the time of the murders had active roles in what the Police described as an "anarchist" club...who had a murder occur on their property, establishes a reputation that may well include murderous acts. As to who spoke the truth...3 people stated they were in the alley by the body around 12:45, one stated he went in that passageway at that time and saw no-one and "couldn't be sure" if he had to step around or over a dying woman, by the time the police arrive we have only Diemshutz's word...and a shaky remembrance by Eagle, to help establish an arrival time of 1am precisely. Which he claimed. Someone lied.
          This isn’t proof of anything. You are elevating doubts to certainty.
          8. I wouldnt say that at all, many have believed this premise over the years, Im suggesting that belief has no support within the evidence, so lets stop making a Canon based on unsupported beliefs.
          And let’s not indulge in conspiracy theorist thinking where any minor error or doubt is elevated to the level of fact simply to bolster an opinion.

          Iv never argued a suspect in this case here, or anywhere else, I do not presume to know the identity of that person based on the fact other murders occurred around the same time and area, Im just certain that there is no evidence that Liz Stride was killed by someone with a reputation of double throat cuts and pm abdominal mutilations.
          The very simple, plausible suggestion that the killer might have been disturbed should prevent us from being certain that this wasn’t a ripper killing. Again, it might not have been. We cannot know for certain....that means that you cannot know for certain. This is logic.

          If you have access to some additional evidence that to-date is unknown, hey, lets go....but if not, stopping telling me that logic and reason are arrogance.

          I don’t know how to describe it when someone claims to know something for a fact when they categorically cannot
          Stride may or may not have been killed by the ripper. That’s the best that we can say with honesty.
          Regards

          Herlock






          "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

          Comment


          • Nice response post there, Herlock. And a very sound conclusion as well.

            c.d.

            Comment


            • For what it's worth, I fully agree that the evidence we have is entirely consistent with explanations that include Stride as a ripper victim and with explanations that do not. I've never been able to tip the balance to favour one option over the other. To the extent other aspects aspects of the case hinge upon drawing such a conclusion vary. For example only here, those who see the Dear Boss letter as genuine have put their stake in the ground on the Stride is definitely included road of this fork in the road, so any further reasoning that follows is building upon what I see as a very unsafe foundation. That doesn't mean it's not worth doing, or even that it is necessarily wrong. But to me it does mean that when one points to "But we can't be sure that Stride is included, and therefore if there even was a double event!" is always a valid point. One might have drawn that conclusion for themselves, but as much of the final weight of the evidence falls on our subjective estimates of how probable things are, I think it's important we recognize that subjective evaluations are opinions, and opinions vary, hence, despite our own strong personal beliefs, that's not evidence. When we can bring in objective probabilities, though, based upon actual measurements, then that subjective side at least can be deminished. Things like "An emperical study show that 95% of the time blood clots within X minutes under these conditions of temperature", can give us reason to prefer certain time frames over others, even if it doesn't allow a 100% confidence in ruling out times beyond X minutes.

              Hmmm, that went off on a tangent pretty quickly.

              - Jeff

              Comment


              • Herlock, a consistent theme running through your rebuttals is about a possible interruption, yet I believe you understand that there is no evidence to that effect within the known data. Sure, lots of things could have happened there, but when you open the door to pure speculation...which that is,..then you must allow for the improbable as well, which cannot possibly educate anyone as to what actually did happen. And what happened is that a regularly employed charwoman with regular residence in a doss house is found murdered inside a dark passageway near 1am with her throat cut once, severing 1 artery completely. She was dressed presentably, with flowers on her jacket and had cachous clutched in her hand. The alleyway belonged to a club that was believed to harbor anarchists by the local authorities and the neighbours, with an anarchist newsletter being published on the grounds, and the body was found sometime between 12:45 and 1am, according to witnesses interviewed onsite within an hour of the murder. Some 30 members remained at the club after a meeting dispersed at around 11:30, singing upstairs. The club manager found the body, at either approx. 12:45 as 3 witnesses claimed or at 1am precisely as claimed by the manager, and then 2...( or 3, as would be the case if one Isaac Kozebroski's statement to the press on the grounds an hour or so after the murder was accurate in its details), parties went out to look for a policeman just after 1am. That's it.

                Liz Stride's murder is included in the Canon based purely on timing and speculation, because the wounds don't match any other alleged Ripper murder, the circumstances are unclear, and there is no evidence that can be used to explain why she lacked any of the trademark Ripper mutilations. She is one of 3 women that night who had their throats cut, but only 1 that had it cut twice and had her abdomen mutilated and was left splay legged on the ground.
                Michael Richards

                Comment


                • It depends on how you see Jack the ripper was.

                  For me, Jack was an unknown person/persons who targeted prostitutes with a knife in Whitechapel late 1880s early 1890, without a clear reason.

                  Stride was an unfortunate, killed in 1888, in Whitechapel, with a knife, the crime and the reason was not solved, and we know for sure that the ripper was at large and active that very night and within an hour or less from Stride murder.

                  This is why I believe Stride WAS a ripper victim just like Nichols, Tabram, Eddowes, Chapman, Mckenzie and Kelly.

                  Until any one of them is proven otherwise.


                  Everyone has his own Jack!

                  The Baron

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                    Herlock, a consistent theme running through your rebuttals is about a possible interruption, yet I believe you understand that there is no evidence to that effect within the known data. Sure, lots of things could have happened there, but when you open the door to pure speculation...which that is,..then you must allow for the improbable as well, which cannot possibly educate anyone as to what actually did happen. And what happened is that a regularly employed charwoman with regular residence in a doss house is found murdered inside a dark passageway near 1am with her throat cut once, severing 1 artery completely. She was dressed presentably, with flowers on her jacket and had cachous clutched in her hand. The alleyway belonged to a club that was believed to harbor anarchists by the local authorities and the neighbours, with an anarchist newsletter being published on the grounds, and the body was found sometime between 12:45 and 1am, according to witnesses interviewed onsite within an hour of the murder. Some 30 members remained at the club after a meeting dispersed at around 11:30, singing upstairs. The club manager found the body, at either approx. 12:45 as 3 witnesses claimed or at 1am precisely as claimed by the manager, and then 2...( or 3, as would be the case if one Isaac Kozebroski's statement to the press on the grounds an hour or so after the murder was accurate in its details), parties went out to look for a policeman just after 1am. That's it.

                    Liz Stride's murder is included in the Canon based purely on timing and speculation, because the wounds don't match any other alleged Ripper murder, the circumstances are unclear, and there is no evidence that can be used to explain why she lacked any of the trademark Ripper mutilations. She is one of 3 women that night who had their throats cut, but only 1 that had it cut twice and had her abdomen mutilated and was left splay legged on the ground.
                    Michael, I agree that there is nothing that should lead us into stating that Stride was definitely a victim of Jack The Ripper. Equally though there is nothing to lead us to any definitive statements to the contrary. We are left to interpret what we know. Something that we have to do without preconceptions of course.

                    And what happened is that a regularly employed charwoman with regular residence in a doss house is found murdered inside a dark passageway near 1am with her throat cut once, severing 1 artery completely. She was dressed presentably, with flowers on her jacket and had cachous clutched in her hand
                    You appear to be implying that Stride wasn’t engaged in prostitution at the time that she was murdered on the basis that she did char work and that she was presentable dressed? Surely we have to accept that she might very well have been soliciting at the time? Maybe she was hoping for a potential customer from amongst the drunken members leaving the club? Just because that’s where her body was found it doesn’t automatically follow that that was where she had intended to conduct business?

                    . and the body was found sometime between 12:45 and 1am,
                    In the Victorian era this was hardly a ‘respectable’ time for a woman to be out and about on her own. It certainly allows for the possibility that she was actively soliciting.

                    . The alleyway belonged to a club that was believed to harbor anarchists by the local authorities and the neighbours, with an anarchist newsletter being published on the grounds,
                    Again, there is no way that we can connect anarchists with this murder. This attitude has the smack of the Victorian about it I’m afraid. It’s almost like saying that ‘no English gentleman could have committed these crimes but these anarchist types are capable of any kind of deviant behaviour.’

                    .
                    Liz Stride's murder is included in the Canon based purely on timing and speculation, because the wounds don't match any other alleged Ripper murder, the circumstances are unclear, and there is no evidence that can be used to explain why she lacked any of the trademark Ripper mutilations. She is one of 3 women that night who had their throats cut, but only 1 that had it cut twice and had her abdomen mutilated and was left splay legged on the ground.
                    Of course we shouldn’t define these women by how they were compelled to make ends meet but we cannot conveniently avoid the fact that the 2 that were actually killed were both known prostitutes. Stride was included and remains a possible ripper victim because she was a known prostitute murdered in the open by having her throat cut. We can’t simply dismiss this because it’s inconvenient. Any difference in wounds/mutilations can potentially be explained by the killer being disturbed by Diemschutz. This murder was during a period of throat-cutting prostitution murders that all occurred within a very small radius. Then there was the killing of Eddowes killed within a convenient distant and time frame which might tend us toward an opinion that the ripper was disturbed and so felt unsatisfied.

                    Again, we all have to admit that there is a possibility that Stride wasn’t a ripper victim but equally we have to admit that she might have been. There are absolutely no reasons to state either conclusion as a fact
                    Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 04-24-2019, 12:05 PM.
                    Regards

                    Herlock






                    "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                      You appear to be implying that Stride wasn’t engaged in prostitution at the time that she was murdered on the basis that she did char work and that she was presentable dressed? Surely we have to accept that she might very well have been soliciting at the time? Maybe she was hoping for a potential customer from amongst the drunken members leaving the club? Just because that’s where her body was found it doesn’t automatically follow that that was where she had intended to conduct business?

                      I am implying that exact thing Herlock. Liz had been gainfully employed the past few months "among the Jews" as a cleaner, and here we are, right after a meeting, in a hall that needed cleaning, one that was run by local Jews and attended by same. she is said to be nicely dressed by her lodgemmates, she asked to borrow a lint brush to clean her skirt, she has a new flower arrangement on her jacket, and she has breath fresheners in her hand.

                      I assure you that if she was soliciting at the time...outside a club that had little or no street traffic for over an hour since the meeting ended, and while she is on private property, she would have been the best dressed and smelling street walker out that night servicing poor dock workers or factory men. The evidence is that she probably hadn't planned on standing in the mud, lifting a boot level heavy skirt, and leaning against a fence that night. She was conscious of appearance and smell...something that indicates to me at least that she wanted to be respectable that night. There is again no evidence...(yeah, again with that evidence thing)... that despite being out all night to that point she solicited anyone.

                      Again, there is no way that we can connect anarchists with this murder. This attitude has the smack of the Victorian about it I’m afraid. It’s almost like saying that ‘no English gentleman could have committed these crimes but these anarchist types are capable of any kind of deviant behaviour.’

                      The murder occurred on their property and there was very little action on that street after 12:30. Fanny was at her door "off and on" from 12:30 until 12:50, at which point she stayed there until 1am,...which is one reason to suspect Diemshutz's story, 3 people saying that it was actually 12:45 when they joined Louis by the body...she saw or heard no cart arriving for the 10 minute interval she was at the door continuously. No "lipski" shout, no Pipeman, just the young couple, which is almost certainly the same one Brown saw. Liz is out of sight by witnesses after 12:35 by Inquest data, and by 12:45-46 by Israels story. That leaves a long time to make one cut, and puts Eagle in a position to have seen someone or something at 12:45... about which he said, "I couldn't be sure a body wasnt there".

                      We have conflicted stories from the club staff, ones that contradicted attendees and the first outside witness to the body, Edward Spooner. We have her on the property off the street for at least 10 minutes by credible witness testimony before Louis says he arrives...yet no mutilations (was he just pondering where to make cuts?).

                      "These anarchists" attack police with clubs in that yard within 6 months. Seems kind of deviant for law abiding folk. They had a lot at stake if the police believed strongly that the evidence pointed to someone at that club at a the time, so all the evidence they gave suggested otherwise...Israel, Louis and his arrival time, and Eagle uncertainty about stepping around or over a dying woman.


                      What youre suggesting is that despite enough evidence to discount her as Ripper victim, we should be open minded anyway. I say that enough time has elapsed with her assumptive inclusion... without any evidence coming forth to corroborate the theorizing, that we should finally accept the face value evidence and look for a motive that isn't restricted to a single, knife wielding madmen killing every street walker murdered.

                      The Canon is just guesswork, and Id rather not do that while researching. Facts, truth, Im more interested in those. When you have something to corroborate your possible interruption theory let me know. Even then its still only a possibility. Until then the evidence simply shows that Liz stride was not "ripper-ed".


                      Michael Richards

                      Comment




                      • What youre suggesting is that despite enough evidence to discount her as Ripper victim, we should be open minded anyway
                        No. What I’m suggesting is that there isn’t anywhere near enough evidence to dismiss the suggestion offhand. To be honest I didn’t expect open-mindedness to be something worthy of criticism.

                        . I say that enough time has elapsed with her assumptive inclusion... without any evidence coming forth to corroborate the theorizing, that we should finally accept the face value evidence and look for a motive that isn't restricted to a single, knife wielding madmen killing every street walker murdered
                        Surely you should have noticed by now that I have made no assumption that she was a victim as surely as I have noticed, from the second half of the above sentence, that you have a preconception that there was more than one killer. Naturally you wish to eliminate Stride as a victim. Again, open-mindedness is required.

                        The Canon is just guesswork, and Id rather not do that while researching. Facts, truth, Im more interested in those. When you have something to corroborate your possible interruption theory let me know. Even then its still only a possibility. Until then the evidence simply shows that Liz stride was not "ripper-ed".
                        We have nothing to corroborate the interruption theory, anymore than you have any definitive evidence that disproves it. You appear to be arranging things to accommodate some form of multiple ripper conspiracy theory. The fact that a known prostitute, killed in the open by having her throat cut in the middle of a series of throat cutting prostitute murders occurring within a very restricted radius, when added to the suggestion that if the killer was interrupted (and he could have been) it ties in with the possibility that he went on to kill Eddowes, then we are simply being bloody minded in denying even the possibility.

                        There can be no right or wrong on this issue as there is nothing concrete. The only way that anyone can be categorically wrong here is to either say “Stride was definitely a ripper victim” or “Stride definately wasn’t a ripper victim.” I’ll happily avoid either of them.
                        Regards

                        Herlock






                        "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by c.d. View Post
                          Nice response post there, Herlock. And a very sound conclusion as well.

                          c.d.
                          Thanks c.d.
                          Regards

                          Herlock






                          "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                          Comment


                          • To reply...
                            Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                            No. What I’m suggesting is that there isn’t anywhere near enough evidence to dismiss the suggestion offhand. To be honest I didn’t expect open-mindedness to be something worthy of criticism.

                            No, unsupported
                            speculation
                            without any corroborative evidence on the table is worth criticism IF we are looking for truth here, and that's what an interruption theory is. If you want to propogate a Phantom Menace that your call. Just don't expect guesses to be well received if they had no support whatsoever in any evidence.

                            Surely you should have noticed by now that I have made no assumption that she was a victim as surely as I have noticed, from the second half of the above sentence, that you have a preconception that there was more than one killer. Naturally you wish to eliminate Stride as a victim. Again, open-mindedness is required.

                            Jack the Ripper was made famous for his ripping, Liz has none. You can sit on a fence waiting for a miraculous appearance of interruption Herlock...which is the ONLY potential argument for why this ripper didn't rip, I don't have any such problem accepting what is and moving on from there

                            [B]We have nothing to corroborate the interruption theory, anymore than you have any definitive evidence that disproves it. You appear to be arranging things to accommodate some form of multiple ripper conspiracy theory. The fact that a known prostitute, killed in the open by having her throat cut in the middle of a series of throat cutting prostitute murders occurring within a very restricted radius, when added to the suggestion that if the killer was interrupted (and he could have been) it ties in with the possibility that he went on to kill Eddowes, then we are simply being bloody minded in denying even the possibility.

                            There are statements that contradict Israel, Louis, Morris and Lave. Some suggest that the management was by the dead woman at 12:45, and if they are correct, anyone that claimed differently either conspired to do so or did so by random accident. The tale that is forwarded to the authorities is by far the most advantageous to Jewish Socialists anarchists at that point in time there, and that warrants closer looks at the times and the content of those stories. Look for yourself. Check the timings. Its clear that some people lied.

                            There can be no right or wrong on this issue as there is nothing concrete. The only way that anyone can be categorically wrong here is to either say “Stride was definitely a ripper victim” or “Stride definately wasn’t a ripper victim.” I’ll happily avoid either of them.


                            All I can say is that people, who cant or wont try to determine truth from fiction, suggestion from factual, possibilities from probabilities will happily join you on the I CANT DECIDE WHAT THE EVIDENCE SAYS Fence.
                            You already have cd sitting happily beside you, so as long as you just seek cheers from a peanut gallery youre safe with your stance. I don't need affirmation from anyone as to what the interpretation of data suggests, I have the evidence to cheer for me.

                            Liz Stride wasn't ripped, a killer who definitely ripped was at large. You don't change the killers habits to explain why you cant decide who killed her, you accept what the evidence tells you. One cut, no rips, no evidence she was soliciting. The mainstay of JtR.

                            Michael Richards

                            Comment


                            • You already have cd sitting happily beside you, so as long as you just seek cheers from a peanut gallery youre safe with your stance. I don't need affirmation from anyone as to what the interpretation of data suggests, I have the evidence to cheer for me.
                              Your insecurities are showing when you need to resort to insults. I was merely being polite. C.D. according to you is part of a ‘peanut gallery’ for simply agreeing with my post. As you feel the need to stress that you don’t need affirmation why the sulk when you are disagreed with? You have nothing concrete to justify the unfeasibly high regard you have for your own interpretation of events surrounding Stride’s murder.

                              .
                              Liz Stride wasn't ripped, a killer who definitely ripped was at large. You don't change the killers habits to explain why you cant decide who killed her, you accept what the evidence tells you. One cut, no rips, no evidence she was soliciting The mainstay of JtR.
                              Im sorry but this is patently biased nonsense. No one is changing the killers habits. It is entirely possible though that events of that night might have forced the killer to have changed them. The possibility that the killer might have been disturbed is a real one. I’m not ideologically wedded to the idea of multiple killers so it makes not one jot of difference to me whether she was killed by the ripper or not. Preconceptions distort. If it’s possible that the killer was disturbed - and it absolutely is possible - then any absolute confidence that she wasn’t a ripper victim falls way short of honest evaluation.

                              .
                              no evidence she was soliciting
                              ? What would constitute evidence that she was soliciting? Some kind of badge saying ““I’m soliciting”” perhaps? How desperate is this as an argument when you can use the fact that she was reasonably dressed and did occasional char work to prove that a known prostitute loitering around outside a club at 1am wasn’t soliciting. I’m afraid that you will need much more than that.
                              Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 04-24-2019, 09:25 PM.
                              Regards

                              Herlock






                              "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                              Comment


                              • "You already have cd sitting happily beside you, so as long as you just seek cheers from a peanut gallery youre safe with your stance."

                                I just want to go on record to say that Herlock and I are just friends despite what rumors you may have heard.

                                No offense there, Herlock.

                                c.d.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X