Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Killing Times

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post

    With a roughly 1 1/2 week trip time, always coming back to London. Not so much merchant, more cross channel ferry. And always returning to London? More likely a Londoner.

    How far out would a three week round trip go? Or four week?

    Trev, I'm not knocking your sailor theory, but the regularity might suggest a sailor who changed ships or routes? Or who specifically based himself in London? And if that meets the criteria of your suspect, then feel free to slap me in the face with a sock full of hot ****.
    unfortunately feigenbaum cant even be placed in london, let alone wc, during the autumn of terror.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post

      With a roughly 1 1/2 week trip time, always coming back to London. Not so much merchant, more cross channel ferry. And always returning to London? More likely a Londoner.

      How far out would a three week round trip go? Or four week?

      Trev, I'm not knocking your sailor theory, but the regularity might suggest a sailor who changed ships or routes? Or who specifically based himself in London? And if that meets the criteria of your suspect, then feel free to slap me in the face with a sock full of hot ****.
      Feigenbaum was employed by the Norddeutscher Line whose ships regularly sailed from Germany to The UK, and had ships in London on all the dates of the murders bar one, and although most of the crew lists for these dates are missing, there is one crew list which puts him in London on one of their ships at late as 1891

      www.trevormarriott.co.uk

      Comment


      • #18
        I think one trap here is that the presumption of a Canonical Group can cloud the perceptions. For example, to exclude a Suspect based on the fact he or she was not able to commit one or more of that pre-determined group. I run into that constantly when suggesting that Isenschmidt is a very good candidate for murders 1 and 2. Those 2 murders shape my perceptions of who this "Ripper" killer was. And I dont see him in later acts, except perhaps with Kate. And based on the fact that my suspect for the first 2 murders could not have done later murders, its therefore easier for me to accept multiple murderers just within the "Canonical Group" itself.

        Not so easy for others though, is it? Some would rather have just one man having many different personalities with many differing compulsions. I think its fairly obvious that statistically if 10 women are found murdered in a variety of ways that multiple killers is the most probable answer. But if any are almost identical with others, that indicates a lone wolf in the possible pack.
        Michael Richards

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
          I think one trap here is that the presumption of a Canonical Group can cloud the perceptions. For example, to exclude a Suspect based on the fact he or she was not able to commit one or more of that pre-determined group. I run into that constantly when suggesting that Isenschmidt is a very good candidate for murders 1 and 2. Those 2 murders shape my perceptions of who this "Ripper" killer was. And I dont see him in later acts, except perhaps with Kate. And based on the fact that my suspect for the first 2 murders could not have done later murders, its therefore easier for me to accept multiple murderers just within the "Canonical Group" itself.
          Wasn't Isenschmidt given an alibi by his brother for the date of Chapman's murder?

          Comment


          • #20
            Hi All,

            Could Jack's opportunities have been dictated, as has been argued elsewhere, more by the behaviour of his victims than any limitations of his own?

            Were his victims simply more likely to have found paying customers, or drinking companions, on or within a day or two of payday? Whether it meant more women out on the streets looking for business on those days, or whether that was just the killer's perception, might he not have thought it more worth his while to go looking for opportunities at weekends and Bank Holidays than on an ordinary working day, early to mid-week?

            Alternatively, the killer may have paid no attention to what day it was, but just tended to get lucky on nights when there were more customers about anyway, and therefore more prospective victims to supply the increased demand.

            Cause and effect is notoriously difficult to pinpoint.

            Love,

            Caz
            X
            "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by caz View Post
              Hi All,

              Could Jack's opportunities have been dictated, as has been argued elsewhere, more by the behaviour of his victims than any limitations of his own?

              Were his victims simply more likely to have found paying customers, or drinking companions, on or within a day or two of payday? Whether it meant more women out on the streets looking for business on those days, or whether that was just the killer's perception, might he not have thought it more worth his while to go looking for opportunities at weekends and Bank Holidays than on an ordinary working day, early to mid-week?
              That is a potential reason for weekend prowling, but it doesn't explain why he attacked alternately at the beginning or the end of the month.

              Originally posted by caz View Post
              Alternatively, the killer may have paid no attention to what day it was, but just tended to get lucky on nights when there were more customers about anyway, and therefore more prospective victims to supply the increased demand.

              Cause and effect is notoriously difficult to pinpoint.

              Love,

              Caz
              X
              Quite possibly, but given the pattern of the date / day of the killings, it looks less random.

              Days of killings are in sequence - Fri, Sat, Sun, Fri
              Dates are the end of the month or one week into the month - alternating.
              Also, something that caused me to consider whether poor Johnny Gill was a JTR victim - the murders follow intervals of 1 then 3 then 5 weeks followed by moving to the next day in the weekend day sequence (with Johnny Gill 7 weeks later (Sat, 29 December) -fitting all three of the patterns).

              It may all be coincidence or simply looking too hard for patterns in data or it may reflect some schedule in JTRs life. And, of course this is based on C5 victims which some would argue against all being committed by JTR. But the patterns exist nonetheless, though whether any meaning can be gleaned is another question.


              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Joshua Rogan View Post

                Wasn't Isenschmidt given an alibi by his brother for the date of Chapman's murder?
                Im not convinced by that Joshua, I think the Fiddymont sighting coupled with Abberlines comments about the similarity of appearance to the suspect sought, using the Chapelle and Taylor statements. The people they thought that they saw were obviously not the killer, Piser or Piggot, but that similarity mentioned is intriguing. He also had the skill set I believe to do Chapmans murder. And with that thought, its interesting that when the next alleged Ripper murder occurs he is institutionalized, and its not a Ripping Murder.
                Michael Richards

                Comment


                • #23
                  The Star, 21 Sept;

                  "WHITECHAPEL.
                  The Police are Satisfied of the Innocence of the Holloway Butcher.


                  The man who was arrested at Holloway on suspicion of being concerned in the Whitechapel murder, and subsequently removed and detained at Bow Asylum, will shortly be released. His brother has given satisfactory explanation as to his whereabouts on the morning of the murder. It has transpired that the authorities of the asylum would not allow the police to interrogate the patient whilst there, as it is against the rules laid down by the Lunacy Commissioners."

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I didnt say that no-one believed his "alibi", just that I dont. He was just the kind of man for this job, and the Fiddymont sighting could easily have been of him.
                    Michael Richards

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                      I didnt say that no-one believed his "alibi", just that I dont. He was just the kind of man for this job, and the Fiddymont sighting could easily have been of him.
                      What in particular do you find unbelievable?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X