How Many Victims Were There?

[c.d.]

I do think that Jack had 'eyes on' or chatted with his victims prior to the murder, possibly built their confidence with them with a "oh its you again" or "funny seeing you round here"

Yes, I have always had the feeling (and that is all that it is) that Jack had met Mary a few days earlier and she told him to come by some time.

c.d.

[Juniper4576]

Hello Juniper,

I do think she was going to meet someone or at least looking for someone. She had a lot to drink that evening apparently. Could someone have been buying her drinks and was she looking for that someone? Could very well be.

c.d.

I do think that Jack had 'eyes on' or chatted with his victims prior to the murder, possibly built their confidence with them with a "oh its you again" or "funny seeing you round here"

[c.d.]

Hello Herlock,

With regard to Stride being approached even if her initial response was to say no what would her response have been to an offer to pay more than the usual? Certainly Jack could have come up with a believable story that he just got paid and was looking for a good time and was willing to up the price. Why not knowing he could take it all back?

c.d.

[c.d.]

Hello Juniper,

I do think she was going to meet someone or at least looking for someone. She had a lot to drink that evening apparently. Could someone have been buying her drinks and was she looking for that someone? Could very well be.

c.d.

[Christian]

Hi Juniper

Id forgotten starting this thread?

There are certainly people that feel that the Miller’s Court victim might have been mutilated so badly to disguise the fact that she wasn’t Kelly but I certainly think that she was. I see no evidence of any kind of cover up. Stride might not have been a ripper victim of course but, on balance, I’d say that it would have been a major coincidence to have had 2 throat cutting Murders so close together, in time and location, for them not to have been connected.

Great point regarding the double event!! Historically how often do two woman die within 1 mile of each other similar neck wound and on the same night??? Been saying this for years!! Still doubters say Stride not a Ripper victim SOME coincidence or statistically amazing!!! Just saying

[Juniper4576]

Good point c.d. I guess the same could be said about Eddowes too. Many ask why she ended up in Mitre Square? I’ve suggested (and it’s only a suggestion) that maybe she was going to see someone she knew and that she might have felt would lend her a few pence? So she might not have been actively soliciting or expecting a customer until she bumped into one. Sadly of course.

I think she was going to meet someone, as it has been quoted, when she left the police station she turned left instead of right...completely the opposite direction to that of 'home'

c.d. Any thoughts?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hello Juniper,

Welcome to the boards.

Yes, these topics have been discussed before and you can look at some old threads discussing these points.

I will simply give you my thoughts - I don't see any evidence to indicate that MJK was deliberately defaced. If you start cutting flesh you are eventually going to get to the face.

Liz may or may not have been soliciting that evening. She might have had a date but dates can end. Regardless of why she was out that night we have no way of knowing what her response would have been had she been approached and asked for her services. So talk of dates etc. is pretty much a moot point.

Hope this helps.

c.d.

Good point c.d. I guess the same could be said about Eddowes too. Many ask why she ended up in Mitre Square? I’ve suggested (and it’s only a suggestion) that maybe she was going to see someone she knew and that she might have felt would lend her a few pence? So she might not have been actively soliciting or expecting a customer until she bumped into one. Sadly of course.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Hi Herlock, as you can see I'm new here and I apologise if it has been discussed before. What are peoples thought MJK and Liz stride were not victims? I loosely, Little knowledge to back up, that MJK was deliberately defaced to hide the identity. And with Liz, in my amateur eye some things don't add up, she was overdressed with a flower, like she was going to meet someone, the location, the most southern murder site and the timings of the double event. I know Jack was quick with his work, but if the double eve t did happen, along with the writing and the apron he had a lot of luck that night. Do you or anyone have any thoughts on this?

Hi Juniper

Id forgotten starting this thread?

There are certainly people that feel that the Miller’s Court victim might have been mutilated so badly to disguise the fact that she wasn’t Kelly but I certainly think that she was. I see no evidence of any kind of cover up. Stride might not have been a ripper victim of course but, on balance, I’d say that it would have been a major coincidence to have had 2 throat cutting Murders so close together, in time and location, for them not to have been connected.

[c.d.]

Hello Juniper,

Welcome to the boards.

Yes, these topics have been discussed before and you can look at some old threads discussing these points.

I will simply give you my thoughts - I don't see any evidence to indicate that MJK was deliberately defaced. If you start cutting flesh you are eventually going to get to the face.

Liz may or may not have been soliciting that evening. She might have had a date but dates can end. Regardless of why she was out that night we have no way of knowing what her response would have been had she been approached and asked for her services. So talk of dates etc. is pretty much a moot point.

Hope this helps.

c.d.

[Juniper4576]

Hi Herlock, as you can see I'm new here and I apologise if it has been discussed before. What are peoples thought MJK and Liz stride were not victims? I loosely, Little knowledge to back up, that MJK was deliberately defaced to hide the identity. And with Liz, in my amateur eye some things don't add up, she was overdressed with a flower, like she was going to meet someone, the location, the most southern murder site and the timings of the double event. I know Jack was quick with his work, but if the double eve t did happen, along with the writing and the apron he had a lot of luck that night. Do you or anyone have any thoughts on this?

[Michael W Richards]

Of course the same victimology of prostitutes counts for something.

So you do get that. Then paying attention to ones that we can say with any degree of certainty were actually acting as prostitutes at the time would be important? 2. 2 of 5 "Canonicals", ….and that's all folks.

[Michael W Richards]

Outdoors/Rapidly/Abandoned in place
Indoors/Pace Unknown/Discarded at other location(s)

Those seem like similar traits to anyone? The acts the Ripper performed and the ones Torso man did are almost polar opposites.

[Abby Normal]

Can't see how we can say that the torsos were probably linked to the Ripper. These were very different crimes, the overwhelming majority of which occurred in a completely different part of London, geographically and socio-economically. Even the solitary East End torso was found further south than any of the Canonical Five murders, of which the nearest was the least convincing of the Canon by far.

As to victimology, there were other prostitute murders in the East End before, during and after 1888, so this counts for little or nothing, especially as we're talking about a part of London where casual street prostitution was a major social issue.

hi Sam

Can't see how we can say that the torsos were probably linked to the Ripper. These were very different crimes, the overwhelming majority of which occurred in a completely different part of London, geographically and socio-economically. Even the solitary East End torso was found further south than any of the Canonical Five murders, of which the nearest was the least convincing of the Canon by far.

yes I know im in the minority when it comes to the torsos, which is why included probably (and im not at 100% certain by any means) but nevertheless IMHO they are not very different at all as ive mentioned previously. If none of the torso victims had post mortem mutilation above and beyond what was needed for dismemberment then I would probably conclude that they were probably not related. but they do-all of them. pinchin had a gash vertically on the abdomen, totenhams face was disfigured like Eddowes, Jackson had flaps removed from her stomach like Kelly and chapman, Whitehall had internal organs removed etc.

re location-as has been discussed before, we don't know where the killer lived,nor where his chop was. if for example, he lived in the east and his chop shop was in the west, and his chop shop wasn't available during the ripper killings (and he had to kill on the street nearer to his home), then that could be one explanation of the apparent difference in location. there are other possible explanations. and of course pinchin was in the east end ripper territory. and both series also coincidently end at the same time with McKenzie and pinchin both in the east.

As to victimology, there were other prostitute murders in the East End before, during and after 1888, so this counts for little or nothing, especially as we're talking about a part of London where casual street prostitution was a major social issue.

Of course the same victimology of prostitutes counts for something. Serial killers dont just target female prostitutes. there victimology includes, men, children, non prostitute women, gay men etc. That both torsoman and the ripper targeted female prostitutes is very telling, and that the MO was basically the same in terms of targeting with a ruse involved-mainly getting the victims to a secluded spot, probably with the offer of money involved, should also be taken into consideration.

[Michael W Richards]

History has also shown us that serial killer get blamed for crimes they didn't commit too. You say that its well known myth that serial killers don't change their MO... Abby..interesting you think that, but any way.....approaches working street whore prey acting as potential client, attacks quickly, subdues quickly, cuts throats deeply, twice...then proceeds to mutilate the abdomen, in some cases, taking internal organs from that location. That's the MO for both Polly and Annie, and perhaps Kate. That's it.

He didn't leave or place anything, other than perhaps an apron section, he left them where he killed them. There is no "placement", and in the Torsos it can only be suggested things were placed in 1, perhaps 2, cases. This killers MO is very clearly carried on from 1 to 2, so why do you think he then just cuts a throat once a month later? Fatigue? Arthritis? Boredom?

And you've stated this erroneous remark many times in these kinds of threads, Id really prefer you use facts to try and bolster a position...and those facts are that only 2 of the Canonical Group left evidence behind that indicates that they were actively soliciting at the time they met their killer. That establishes a stranger to stranger encounter...another facet of his MO, he kills strangers...and there is no such evidence that Liz or Kate were soliciting at the time. Ergo, we cannot assume they were killed by someone unknown to them. There is evidence that is later discarded that Mary may have been, but its highly improbable a drunken woman without any recent history of concern for her arrears or an inclination to work the streets at all...(since Joe gave her, excluding that last day, money),...would go back out to work through her hangover. The murder location and the circumstances indicate she knew her killer.

[Sam Flynn]

Their sigs remain for the most part consistent, as does the victimology-which is exactly what we have for the c5, plus tabram and McKenzie and (probably)the torsos.

Can't see how we can say that the torsos were probably linked to the Ripper. These were very different crimes, the overwhelming majority of which occurred in a completely different part of London, geographically and socio-economically. Even the solitary East End torso was found further south than any of the Canonical Five murders, of which the nearest was the least convincing of the Canon by far.

As to victimology, there were other prostitute murders in the East End before, during and after 1888, so this counts for little or nothing, especially as we're talking about a part of London where casual street prostitution was a major social issue.