Body-count inflation?

[Sam Flynn]

From a Stride thread...

Im not trying to lessen the JtR body count.

That got me thinking, Mike.

I sometimes wonder whether, deep down, there might be a desire to keep Jack's body-count up at all costs, if only out of a desire to paint him as an even bigger SOB than he already was?

Views welcome.

[Celesta]

I've wondered about this, too, Sam, but then you have people minimizing, as in lessening, his body count, as well. So it seems the pendulum swings both directions. I think it depends, partly, on the personality of the person doing the assessing, and, also, whether they genuinely believe there's evidence to support their figures.

[perrymason]

Im pleased that something I wrote inspired your thinking Gareth...I think if we could give you better data that noggin of yours could find a way through it.

The Contemporary Authorities and todays Ripper authors and publishers are greatly advantaged by a larger count I believe.

Bad enough to have no evidence to use at all, but with the flurry of similar deaths that Fall, a madman with no logical path of progression killing whomever he gets his hands on is an extremely hard man to find. The residents might understand that. But if the Canonicals were actually 2 or 3 men, how would it look to say we now have 3 killers on the loose without one shred of evidence to follow? Plus the men who killed the other women. All East Enders...like the ones that got clubbed in Trafalgar Square. The more killings that could be attributed to a single genius-killer, the less inept the police would appear. I mean c'mon.....less than a single square mile for all 5, and not once did they nab anyone worthwhile? I saw the word "cunning" ,many times in contemporary opinions by Police. Creating a legend to lessen the sting of a sleuth that defeated them?

The modern rationale for maintaining that is obvious. Commerce. A man who kills a woman or two is hardly...JACK the RIPPER....and JACK....still sells. Whats in their favour is the fact that it is unlikely that we will ever sort the whole mess out anyway.....so perpetuate, regurgitate, and postulate....but only about the man that has sold papers, magazines and books for 120 years.


Best regards Sam,....and hi Celesta...nice to see ya.

[perrymason]

Sam, one quick non thread related question for that noggin of yours, a thought I had today....BSM is a thug that does work for the Club sometimes...maybe muscle work. He knows some bad things they have been up to...maybe including murder. And on the fateful night, he happens to kill some smart mouth street whore in the Clubs yard, Maybe he is turned down trying to get in the side door even.

So he leaves pissed off, and on his way home goes by an entrance to some model dwellings where Jews lived....and since he is likely a gentile by his yelling "Lipski", likely yelling a jewish slur rather than anyones name at the site....and he stops there, and writes what amounts to " Yeah, now Im the bad guy, but the Juewes/Juwes are blameless?"

Later on that evening Jack is heading past that same area, headed East, he sees the writing, smirks, and drops the apron piece he has been wiping his hands with to say" I hear ya brother."

Just think on it if you would.

Cheers mate.

[Mitch Rowe]

MacNaghton dont seem to be trying to do that. He is firm on the C5 and I believe rightly so.

[Monty]

MacNaghton?

Oooh Mitch, dont let Stewart Evans see that, it MacNaghten!

Seriously, his list, based on Bonds breakdown, is accepted as the Cannon and differs from Anderson who includes Tabram. However, I personally feel theres only 3 victims that can be attributed to Jack. Thats not to say there werent others, just that the evidence is inconclusive.

[Ally]

As I said in the podcast on Elizabeth Stride, some people are loathe to even consider taking Stride out of the equation because it lessens the "coolness factor" of Jack. The Double event, the daring, the dash, etc. So yes, I think there are some who want to maintain Jack the Myth regardless of what Jack the Truth is.

If I were a on a jury and had to come down on the side unequivocally one way or the other on Elizabeth, I would have to find not guilty. There are too many areas of reasonable doubt for me.

[Uncle Jack]

I do not believe Stride was a Ripper victim and haven't for quite a while. For me, there are just too much differences from the other 4 canons. You have the lack of strangulation, the fact that a small knife was used, the others had the throats cut twice whilst Stride was only cut once. There is then the sighting of an obvious domestic situation, making it likely that Stride was a victim of a domestic murder. Add to this the lack of mutilations, accepted by many as "Jack was interupted" when it has been suggested that he would have had time to do them. As Ally says, there are too many doubts and I think it is highly unlikely, in my opinion, that Stride was murdered by the Ripper.

[sdreid]

When we catch a serial killer, it is almost never found out that they killed less than was thought. Much more often it's discovered that they killed others that police had no idea they were responsible for.

[Mitch Rowe]

Thats right Stan..
Thats why I never use differences to try to exlude victims. I use similarities to try to include them. But Im very carefull about that. I wont say Tabram is a victim because I cant find anything I feel is solid enough to say that. But on the other hand I wont ever exlude her or any of the others including the torso murders.

[Celesta]

When we catch a serial killer, it is almost never found out that they killed less than was thought. Much more often it's discovered that they killed others that police had no idea they were responsible for.

True, Stan. You're knowledgeable about these guys. This is the reason people continue to look for other victims. He had to start somewhere. He may have started with Martha, but isn't it reasonable to think there was something else before her, if not outright murder. There was possibly something after MJK, if he was still alive and free. The question would be where and who.

[Fisherman]

Ally writes:

"As I said in the podcast on Elizabeth Stride, some people are loathe to even consider taking Stride out of the equation because it lessens the "coolness factor" of Jack. The Double event, the daring, the dash, etc. So yes, I think there are some who want to maintain Jack the Myth regardless of what Jack the Truth is.
If I were a on a jury and had to come down on the side unequivocally one way or the other on Elizabeth, I would have to find not guilty. There are too many areas of reasonable doubt for me."

Well put, Ally! In fact, I would not change a word in that post, had I found my signature under it.

My own guess is that Jack had five victims, Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly. But I will admit that what Monty says, that only three of them - and that would be Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes - display such likenesses inbetween them, that they leave us with little choice but to recognize them as Ripper victims.

The best, all!
Fisherman

[sdreid]

Hi Cel,

Yes, it's my suspicion that he killed more either before, during or after and that the victim(s) may not be on any of our radar screens.

[Uncle Jack]

It seems fair to assume that Jack could have killed other woman before and after the main 5 canons, including woman who were not prostitutes and also include murders that didn't just occur in or very near Whitechapel, because it is plausable that he could have killed in other parts of London and even other parts of the UK. We have to look for any unsolved murders and cases where the accused seems to be not guilty. One case that immedietly comes to mind is that of Catherine Mellows, who was murdered in East Dulwich in 1886, by having her throat cut twice. Maybe it would be advisable to look into murders from 1886 onwards, especially ones involving similar injuries to that of later victims.

Kind regards,

Adam

[Celesta]

We have to look for any unsolved murders and cases where the accused seems to be not guilty. One case that immedietly comes to mind is that of Catherine Mellows, who was murdered in East Dulwich in 1886, by having her throat cut twice. Maybe it would be advisable to look into murders from 1886 onwards, especially ones involving similar injuries to that of later victims.

Kind regards,

Adam

Hi Adam,

These are my thoughts, too. I've come across a few things. Failed attempts, too, should be considered, although I think they would be hard, if not impossibe, to research very far.

Best, C