How Many Victims Were There?

[JeffHamm]

But its an overwhelming factor coupled with all the other differences

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trevor,

It is a major point of difference, I agree, and it's one of the reasons I'm not convinced she was a victim of JtR. However, it is unwise to dismiss her solely for that reason alone. Serial killers have often deviated from their usual pattern of crime scene behaviour, and sometimes there are cases that only get clarified upon their apprehension and it turns out something happened that doesn't leave a recognizable trace in the evidence that resulted in that change. There are enough similarities that out right rejection of her as a victim is not warranted, but at the same time, there's enough dissimilarity to warrant skepticism.

- Jeff

[Herlock Sholmes]

I see you are still playing at being a smart arse

www.trevormarriott.co.uk

No, just pointing out silliness

[Astatine211]

Regardless of the perpetrator there were eleven murders gathered by the MET Police into a single case file. The file was called the Whitechapel Murders. Unit all 11 of them (and preferably associated cases) are solved we cannot class the case as complete.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Another quick example of the moving of goalposts. In post #358 Trevor responded to Fiver with this:

I never said Stride and Eddowes were killed with different knives I said that Stride was killed using a smaller knife than the previous victims

And yet in post #336 he said this:

Both killed using different knives

What can you do?

[caz]

Both killed using different knives
Stride killed out of time with all the other victims
Stride no body wounds
Stride killed almost on a main street
Stride the only victim killed south of The Whitechapel road
Stride killed when the public were still moving about and club members were in an out of the club.

I would say they are good reasons to suggest a different killer

And this old tosh about being disturbed and unable to finish what he was intent on doing if farcical just an excuse to link her murder to the rest

https://www.trevormarriott.co.uk

Hi Trev,

Here's a case from one night in 2003:

Two women were attacked using different methods and weapons: first one was punched and strangled into unconsciousness; second one was beaten to death with a piece of wood, leaving 68 separate injuries to her head, torso and limbs. Police believed the murder weapon may have been picked up from a nearby skip or garden.
Second one was attacked within 2 hours of the first, 500m from the scene of the first.
CCTV showed a man walking with the first woman - a prostitute - along the main London Road in West Croydon, at 2.40am. She was told by her assailant that he was going to kill her after they argued over money, and he squeezed her neck. She passed out but regained consciousness to find him still standing over her. She screamed, and the man was chased by a passing group of youths.
First one was attacked on the main road; second one was found in an alleyway next to a Hindu temple.
No witnesses were around for the second attack.
First victim was a prostitute aged 26; second victim wasn't. She was 38, and on her way home from a 24-hour store.
Police believed the man was prowling the streets looking for a second victim when he was caught by CCTV in the area again at 3.30am, appearing to stagger as if he was drunk or on drugs.

Former soldier, Leigh Thornhill, was 18 at the time, and was later convicted of both crimes.

But you know better, don't you, Trev? Some old tosh about being unable to finish what he started - a farcical excuse to link two attacks on women, when the only similarity was that they both happened on the same night.

I hope all policemen are not that stupid.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

whats so crazy is that the schwartz evidence is actually evidence of an interuption.

I was thinking the same thing, Abby.

It's entirely plausible to think that if BS man went on to kill Stride, he did it quickly and scarpered, in case Schwartz or Pipeman was fetching a copper, after seeing him manhandling the poor woman.

Alternatively, we have Louis D arriving as Stride lay dying, so if her killer had not yet left the scene safely, the pony and cart would have dictated his next move - to get out of there fast, ready or not.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

There are enough differences that it is possible that Stride was not killed by the Ripper, but your list is deeply flawed.

Feel free to provide evidence that Stride and Eddowes were killed with different knives.

Stride was not "killed out of time with all the other victims". The opposite is true - the smallest difference in time of night is between the murders of Stride and Eddowes.

Stride was not killed "almost on a main street", she was killed in Dutfield's Yard.

One element being different about the location does not exclude that victim from being killed by the Ripper. Stride was killed farther south than any other victim. Nichols was killed farther east than any other victim. Chapman was killed farther north than any other victim. Eddowes was killed farther west than any other victim. kelly was the only victim killed indoors.

Dutfield's Yard did see more traffic than the other murder sites. That could mean a different killer or the same killer interrupted.

Stride's body was not mutilated. That could mean a different killer or the same killer interrupted.

Or the same killer who wasn't quite insane enough to attempt mutilation in that location, with all the comings and goings?

Other women were willing to go off with a stranger to a suitable location for whatever they both had in mind. What if Stride wasn't willing to do this small thing? If she wasn't up for a quickie, and wanted this man to go away, he'd have had no choice - whoever he was and whatever his intentions towards her were - but to push off. The fact that he cut her throat before doing just that, merely gives us a violent individual, armed that night with a lethal blade, who had the will and the skill to use it on a vulnerable, defenceless woman.

Now who in the world do we know, who would be a likely person of interest? And why would the killer of Eddowes have spared Stride his knife? Was he too much of a gentleman to attack a woman unless she gave him permission to rip her to shreds?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi Trevor,

It is a major point of difference, I agree, and it's one of the reasons I'm not convinced she was a victim of JtR. However, it is unwise to dismiss her solely for that reason alone. Serial killers have often deviated from their usual pattern of crime scene behaviour, and sometimes there are cases that only get clarified upon their apprehension and it turns out something happened that doesn't leave a recognizable trace in the evidence that resulted in that change. There are enough similarities that out right rejection of her as a victim is not warranted, but at the same time, there's enough dissimilarity to warrant skepticism.

- Jeff

Hi Jeff,

If the Yorkshire Ripper had not been caught, I wonder if we would now have a whole assortment of different offenders in the frame for his crimes, considering the many differences between them? Women who were attacked but survived; women killed by one or more different weapons and methods; some mutilated, others not; prostitutes and non-prostitutes. Did he follow a strict timetable for his attacks, or stick to a 'killing zone' dictated by others?

Love,

Caz
X

[c.d.]

It's entirely plausible to think that if BS man went on to kill Stride, he did it quickly and scarpered, in case Schwartz or Pipeman was fetching a copper, after seeing him manhandling the poor woman.

Hello Caz,

Wouldn't this indicate an extremely poor choice on the part of the B.S. man? He kills Stride so she won't identify him as the man who pushed her. Would Stride have gone to the police and said "officer, I was out soliciting and some drunk man pushed me?" Even if caught, which seems unlikely, what would happen to the B.S. man? A small fine? A warning not to do it again? So are we to believe that to avoid this fate he murders her (a hanging offense) but allows both Schwartz and the Pipe Man to leave the scene unharmed?

So he doesn't want Stride to identify him but has no problem with Schwartz and the Pipe Man doing the same? That doesn't make a lot of sense.

c.d.

[caz]

Hi c.d,

I was thinking more along the lines of BS man being the same man who had recently murdered Nichols and Chapman, and having more to fear than a small fine or a warning if he was caught assaulting another woman, or identified later. I doubt he could have done anything much to silence both Schwartz and Pipeman, but he had a knife and was not afraid to use it on a woman to commit a hanging offence. Of course, this scenario is speculative and assumes that BS man did go on to kill Stride, after the witnesses left. But it doesn't follow that he killed her to stop her identifying him. He slit her throat because he was a knife happy chappy who felt like it and had the time to do it before anyone else came along. He may not even have cared if the single cut would suffice, if he was a total stranger who could not be connected to her. What he couldn't risk was being caught up to his elbows in guts, by a copper sent to the club by one of the two witnesses to see if the woman was all right. That was really my point. If his original intention for Stride was murder and mutilation, he could do the first but not the second, with the danger of a copper finding them there together at any moment. No use hanging around if he wasn't getting anywhere with this woman and would still be working on her when the next witness arrived.

Love,

Caz
X

[c.d.]

I was thinking more along the lines of BS man being the same man who had recently murdered Nichols and Chapman, and having more to fear than a small fine or a warning if he was caught assaulting another woman, or identified later.

I am not sure I get you, Caz. How would anyone know B.S. man was the same man who had murdered Nichols and Chapman?

c.d.

[Fiver]

I never said Stride and Eddowes were killed with different knives I said that Stride was killed using a smaller knife than the previous victims.

Perhaps you missed post #336, where someone using your account said.

Both killed using different knives

[Herlock Sholmes]

Perhaps you missed post #336, where someone using your account said.

Surreal isn’t it?

I pointed this out in post #364.

[JeffHamm]

Hi Jeff,

If the Yorkshire Ripper had not been caught, I wonder if we would now have a whole assortment of different offenders in the frame for his crimes, considering the many differences between them? Women who were attacked but survived; women killed by one or more different weapons and methods; some mutilated, others not; prostitutes and non-prostitutes. Did he follow a strict timetable for his attacks, or stick to a 'killing zone' dictated by others?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

Indeed, and at the time they were suggesting that a bunch of victims must have been attacked by other people. One of the major problems in that case was that early on the police decided he was only targeting prostitutes. They dismissed other cases, despite similarities, simply because the victim wasn't a prostitute. The one case they couldn't dismiss, they even went so far as to say that it was the Y.R. who made the mistake and he must have thought she was a prostitute rather than recognize they were the ones who made a mistake. Tunnel vision, where one discards evidence because it doesn't fit the theory, was a major problem in that investigation. The belief the letters and tapes had to be genuine is another example, despite surviving victims telling them their attacker had a local accent. Offenders learn and adapt, and situations influence what they do as well, so to expect carbon copies each time is just unrealistic. Some offenders do have behaviours that they repeat (signature behaviours), and they have behaviours that are "pragmatic" (M.O.). For example, if we had a case where a victim was disembowled, but rather than have her throat cut she had been struck down by blunt force trauma, there would be no reason to dismiss that case from the JtR series. It would tell us that how JtR renders his victim available for mutilations (M.O.) is not so important to him as getting the victim silent and available to him to mutilate (signature). The rarity of that sort of behaviour strongly links Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, and Kelly. Stride, due to the similarity of the throat wound with that of Eddowes, makes her worth considering, while the lack of mutilations gives pause for thought. There are explanations as to why the latter may have occurred with Stride, but proving those explanations is difficult because it's hard to know how to prove "something made JtR stop". Hence my fence sitting on her inclusion, I don't want to dismiss her in case she's part of the series, but don't want an explanation that relies upon her inclusion in case she's not. I think any solution based theory should be capable of working regardless of Stride's inclusion. But, if a solution requires Stride (or her exclusion), it would have to be otherwise very convincing in order to use that to make the call. But I'm digressing.

- Jeff

[caz]

I was thinking more along the lines of BS man being the same man who had recently murdered Nichols and Chapman, and having more to fear than a small fine or a warning if he was caught assaulting another woman, or identified later.

I am not sure I get you, Caz. How would anyone know B.S. man was the same man who had murdered Nichols and Chapman?

c.d.

The killer would know, c.d. We have to get inside his head. The last thing he needed was to be stopped and questioned about previous murders - assuming he was the one who committed them - because he had been seen behaving badly towards a woman on the street at that point in time. I doubt it improved his mood when Schwartz and Pipeman joined the party uninvited.

Love,

Caz
X