Victim Conversation (off-topic moved)

[Cap'n Jack]

Ah Mr Chumley... shades of grey is it now?
Are you quite sure, sir, that you do not mean a whiter shade of pale?

'And so it was that later
as the miller told his tale
that her face, at first just ghostly,
turned a whiter shade of pale

She said, 'There is no reason
and the truth is plain to see.'

[perrymason]

I appreciate your position Chris, and yes, the emphasis Caz uses about any post I make is inflammatory and a source of aggravation personally...but I think the error she makes is in suggesting my exclusion desires about any Ripper victim needs to have definitive proof attached....which is the exact opposite approach used in prosecutions, whereby the accused is assumed innocent until proven otherwise. In this case, despite the lack of evidence or any reasonably repetitive streak, an unknown man is guilty of 5 murders. And I'm just to respect and accept that remark?

The burden of proof here isnt on the people who would like to dispel the idea of value of any mythical Rippers list based solely on opinion not evidence....its on the people who stand with conviction and claim that Jack the Ripper killed this woman,...or that woman, or both those women.

I suggest proving one individual guilty or reasonably suspected based on incriminating evidence would substantiate Caz's position, and I for one look forward to reviewing that data should it ever come to light.

But unsolved murders are not suddenly solved by support for opinions, and the murders of 5 women were not linked by evidence to one man.

Best regards.

[Mr Chumley]

Ahoy Cap'n, sorry for the delay..I think Black Stone cherry put it more aptly than Procul Harem
You can't judge a book looking at its cover
You can't love someone messing with another
you can't win a war fighting with your brother
you wanna have peace gotta love one another

yo ho ho and a bottle of Rum

[Jeff Leahy]

I appreciate your position Chris, and yes, the emphasis Caz uses about any post I make is inflammatory and a source of aggravation personally...but I think the error she makes is in suggesting my exclusion desires about any Ripper victim needs to have definitive proof attached....which is the exact opposite approach used in prosecutions, whereby the accused is assumed innocent until proven otherwise. In this case, despite the lack of evidence or any reasonably repetitive streak, an unknown man is guilty of 5 murders. And I'm just to respect and accept that remark?

The burden of proof here isnt on the people who would like to dispel the idea of value of any mythical Rippers list based solely on opinion not evidence....its on the people who stand with conviction and claim that Jack the Ripper killed this woman,...or that woman, or both those women.

I suggest proving one individual guilty or reasonably suspected based on incriminating evidence would substantiate Caz's position, and I for one look forward to reviewing that data should it ever come to light.

But unsolved murders are not suddenly solved by support for opinions, and the murders of 5 women were not linked by evidence to one man.

Best regards.

Far be it from me to suggest that your operating a bizarre double standard here Mike.

But are you suggesting that we need ‘absolute proof’ to condemn a homicidal maniac of murdering these women but it’s perfectly OK to accuse these women of being ‘bad mothers’ with NO proof what so ever?

A group of women whose only crime was to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?

I just don’t get the logic here, not that I’ve seen you comment on the victims, but you didn’t exactly defend them either.

Pirate

[perrymason]

Far be it from me to suggest that your operating a bizarre double standard here Mike.

But are you suggesting that we need ‘absolute proof’ to condemn a homicidal maniac of murdering these women but it’s perfectly OK to accuse these women of being ‘bad mothers’ with NO proof what so ever?

A group of women whose only crime was to be in the wrong place at the wrong time?

I just don’t get the logic here, not that I’ve seen you comment on the victims, but you didn’t exactly defend them either.

Pirate

I have no idea where you got the idea that I ever said, thought, or posted that any woman was a bad mother. If I mentioned Motherhood it was to demonstrate some kind of connectivity from one woman to the next as far as middle aged Canonicals and a woman half their age.

Please re-read what you thought I said and see who you should be posting this towards.

I said it is the ones who have figuratively convicted one man for the deaths of the Canonical Five that carry the burden of proof here.....because not only are they not solved, they are not linked to one another with anything but guesswork.

Regards.

[Jeff Leahy]

Apart from the fact; that they were all committed in close proximity, in a short space of time, in a very similar manor? All the women were prostitutes. They all were murdered with a knife. At least six had slash or Rip wounds. All had had their throats cut or stabbed. All but one (presumed disturbed) had cuts to the lower body. They all happened in sequence of progression…

That’s one big coincidence Mike, but if you and Andrew Cook insist, who am I to argue.

Pirate

[perrymason]

Apart from the fact; that they were all committed in close proximity, in a short space of time, in a very similar manor? All the women were prostitutes. They all were murdered with a knife. At least six had slash or Rip wounds. All had had their throats cut or stabbed. All but one (presumed disturbed) had cuts to the lower body. They all happened in sequence of progression…

That’s one big coincidence Mike, but if you and Andrew Cook insist, who am I to argue.

Pirate

I dont know why you decided to put words in my mouth today Pirate, but Ive only said and only will say until proven otherwise that 2 of the Canonical murders seem identical in the manner of victim acquisition...in the phased approach to their defeat and then murder, and in the post mortem activities which in fact is the only reason anyone made the name Jack the RIPPER up in the first place. A 3rd murder looks very similar in most aspects to those first 2 murders,... but the 3rd in the Canonical Group emphatically does not.

I think you should revist the Dutfields Yard murder....there is zero evidence that any interruption took place and testimony from professionals who portray the murder itself as being uncharacteristic of the previous 2.

Polly and Annie were cut when not resisting and lying down. No knife is used until then. Liz may have been choked with her scarf and cut while falling....meaning the killer had the knife out while she was able to resist, and was being choked while standing up,.. with her scarf.

Regards.

[Jeff Leahy]

I think you should revist the Dutfields Yard murder....there is zero evidence that any interruption took place

Regards.

Apart from the statement given by Schwartz you mean.

[perrymason]

Apart from the statement given by Schwartz you mean.

You mean the witness who gave a statement on Sunday night then was never called or mentioned at any of the 5 day Inquest? The one whose story is remembered by Swanson in a memo, not documented in the Inquest proceeding? The one whose 12:45 account is superseded by James Browns 12:45am sighting of Liz?

That guy?

Best regards Pirate.

[Jeff Leahy]

You mean the witness who gave a statement on Sunday night then was never called or mentioned at any of the 5 day Inquest? The one whose story is remembered by Swanson in a memo, not documented in the Inquest proceeding? The one whose 12:45 account is superseded by James Browns 12:45am sighting of Liz?
That guy?

Best regards Pirate.

Aah! Fantastic you do remember.....I was getting worried there for a minute

Pirate

[perrymason]

Aah! Fantastic you do remember.....I was getting worried there for a minute

Pirate

Take one empty yard as stated by the members Lave and Eagle, add Liz Stride seen with someone leaning over her by the school nowhere near the gates at 12:45am, then add Blackwells estimate on the time of her cut, and the arrival time of Diemshutz.

That scenario lends itself to an interrupted mutilation phase?

Oh yeah....add the fact that from the moment she was on the ground, her skirt was down to her boots, she is on her side, and she has a single throat cut nowhere near as deep as any other Canonical.

Cheers for today.....catch you later Pirate.

[caz]

The Devil & The Deep Blue Sea

Well, Perry, someone murdered Liz and someone murdered Mary.

We only know of one homicidal maniac going round the area at the time cutting the throats of unfortunates who went out on the streets unaccompanied after dark, and mutilating them if and when the conditions and circumstances allowed.

Arguably they didn't allow in Dutfield's Yard, if Schwartz or Pipeman could have brought a copper back at any second, or a clubman could have emerged for a slash of a different kind at any second, or pony hooves could have come clip-clopping down the road and into the yard at any second.

As I posted elsewhere, earlier today, I can only imagine how I feel about the thought of being remembered, a hundred years from now, as a murder victim - pure and simple.

I don't need to go into the reasons these individual women were in the wrong place at the wrong time, to know that if I have to have my name and slaughtered remains pored over by a million strangers by 2109, I would much sooner be remembered as the impersonal victim of a serial killer who would have done it to someone else had I not been there, and didn't do it because of who I was to him. Who would seriously prefer to be remembered as the victim of someone who knew them personally, really wanted them dead and did it in a cold and brutal fashion, and then let a serial killer who was active at the time take the blame?

Harold Shipman's victims were 'responsible' for nothing more than being old and at home when the devil called to 'check up' on the wellbeing of patients who happened to be on his little list. They did not die because they got themselves addicted to alcohol, in an era when the water could have killed you quicker than the beer; they were not murdered because they abandoned their children. So the behaviour or lifestyle of a serial killer's victims has bugger all to do with my original point.

In short, I would sooner be remembered as the victim of a Harold Shipman any day, than the victim of someone close to me who so badly wanted me snuffed out that they did just that. Call me selfish or unimaginative, but I can only really relate to the victims on that basis: how they might have felt if they knew people would one day be trying to force them into the latter category for no good reason.

Love,

Caz
X

[Mr.Hyde]

Overwhelming homocide statistics point to victim knowing murderer.

[Tom_Wescott]

Michael,

With all due respect, you've been rather obsessed with your anti-C5 theory for some time now, and it seeps into everything you post on all threads. Surely you can understand the frustration this seems to have caused a number of other posters, particularly since your stance isn't exactly a popular one?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Victor]

What about the weekend\ bank holiday timing of the C5 (+ Tabram) murders?