4 or more unreasonable?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Mr. Lucky, my brain and

Bleed ? , where have you got that idea from?

The cut to the throat. I was just wondering if he maybe allowed them to drain for a bit before he commenced with the mutilations. Secured them in place to assure no autonomic responses or what have you. Rifle through belongings. Etc. The longer they bled before the ripping, the less the mess.

[Abby Normal]

Which victims? And why is you'd be so kind?

Hi Digger
The c5 plus Tabram and possibly McKenzie. Based on similar victimology, crime scene, times/location, wounds, weapon, unsolved, closeness in area and time between murders, contemperous expert opinions (police) and modern expert opinion and my own analysis.

I also, don't rule out any of the torso victims (although I think it's unlikely any were the rippers work), especially since most had signs of abdomen mutilation.

Also, when dealing with serial killers, when the truth comes out their activity is often times much more horrendous than previously known.

[Mr Lucky]

The cut to the throat. I was just wondering if he maybe allowed them to drain for a bit before he commenced with the mutilations. Secured them in place to assure no autonomic responses or what have you. Rifle through belongings. Etc. The longer they bled before the ripping, the less the mess.

Hi Dig,

Well I don't agree but you might be right, he allowed them to drain for a bit before he secured them in place, sounds very sensible.

[Bridewell]

I have no doubt about Tabram and little regarding McKenzie and Smith, Colin.
I don't buy the "death from natural causes" in the Millwood case.
I don't count Wilson because she managed to survive.
I exclude Coles, for Sadler has to be the prime suspect imo.
It's also possible - although remotely - that Emily Horsnell had met the ripper (as a beginner).

And I'm clearly not hip, I know.

Cheers

Apologies for the late acknowledgement. You may not be 'hip' but that by no means means you're wrong. I agree re Tabram and McKenzie. Two independent abdominal mutilators in the same area at the same time is much less likely than a single perpetrator. I'm with you in excluding Coles as a likely Ripper victim and for the same reasons. You may not be trendy but you are not alone!

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Abby and thanks

I understand why some are reluctant to wanna entertain Coles too much. Sadler looks obvious. Yet he was tried and found not guilty. I know that means only so much. I wonder if he was in any condition to do it. Let alone run away. Still he is the best option. That might not be saying much though.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Mr. Lucky and thanks

I'm not sure I buy it myself but something to consider. Think about how it may play with Strides murder. I'm not pro or anti "JTR" on her. Still, calculating.

[caz]

Is the attribution of 4 or more victims to one killer an unreasonable assertion? I created this thread since things tend to get off topic rather quickly. Feel free to go to town on whatever here as anything can point to or away from a victims possible inclusion. Now, as it pertains to this matter, I say no. Although there isn't enough data to draw that conclusion with much certainty. But out of all the possibilities I think it is still a good one that is more likely than most others. Not set in stone of course. I say victims killed by same hand are most likely in this manner- Descending order. Nichols and Chapman closest. Eddowes by same hand but with the variations less likely. Followed by "MJK" being less likely than the previous. Tabram. Coles Mackenzie Stride. So 4-8 isn't unreasonable. The closer to 8 the less reasonable it gets. Bedlam is welcomed.

I have only read the original post so far, but I would have to say that in my opinion, the closer to 8 the more reasonable it gets.

Love,

Caz
X

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Caz

Interesting. Which victims do you attribute to "JTR" if you would be so kind?

[DVV]

I have only read the original post so far, but I would have to say that in my opinion, the closer to 8 the more reasonable it gets.

Love,

Caz
X

Après Abby, Caroline.
Excellent.
Je ne suis pas aussi ringard que ça, at last.

Cheers

[caz]

Interesting. Which victims do you attribute to "JTR" if you would be so kind?

Hi Diggy,

Sorry for the delay in replying.

I think any of them are potential ripper victims, in the absence of any evidence that someone else would have made a better suspect.

I would certainly not rule any victim out on the basis of any known suspect's unavailability at the time. I would sooner rule out that suspect.

Love,

Caz
X

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Not a problem, and thanks Caz!

That line of reasoning is sound enough. It's sometimes difficult to exclude "JTR" as the best candidate for certain murders. "MJK" is the big one for me. Question, is there anything that could really exclude that as a possibility for her murder? People have made many decent points, but then I look at the picture and they kinda fizzle. It was an extraordinary event. Difficult to chalk it up to just a copycat type thing or whatever.

[RivkahChaya]

For me, it's Kelly's age. Don't get me wrong; I'm inclined to rule her in. However, it does seem odd that there was a clear preference for women in a fairly narrow age range, and that's true even if you include Tabram, and the 1889 victims.

The indoor killing doesn't seem problematic, because Kelly was the only victim with an indoors available. In fact, sometimes I wonder if what he did to Kelly is what he really wanted to do to all the victims, but couldn't in the limited time he had outside. Once he'd had that experience, he couldn't go back to just killing women on the street with slight abdominal mutilations, and he had to sort of reboot his whole operation, even if it meant moving his own living space to some place with a private entrance.

There may have been more victims, they were just thoroughly butchered, and disposed of in pieces, so there was never any body to discover. That may sound over the top, but it has been done. A guy named William Hickman committed one of the more gruesome crimes in the US, ever, which I'll leave you to Google, because it's that awful, but any any rate, he left parts of a victim all over town.

[Mayerling]

Hi all,

Actually I could accept more than the normal "canonical" five, certainly Tabram and Smith, and the Coles case I find curious - the constable who saw the killing and chased the murderer never got over the possibility that he actually could have been chasing the Ripper and failed to catch him (this was in the memoirs of Chief Constable Frederick Wensley).

But my deepest curiosity is the overlooke gap of October 1888. Up till then the murders from August through September began at the start of each month and concluded near the end of each month. Then nothing. Then comes Miller's Court in November 1888, and the killer (a) kills inside the Victim's room, and (b) really destroys the body of the victim by his over-the-top mutilations. Why was he absent for all of October? Was the murder of Mary Kelly a culmination (and all those horrors planned in advance by the killer) or was it pent up anger and misdirected energy by the killer because he or she could not act at all in October 1888?

Jeff

[C. F. Leon]

Hi all,

Actually I could accept more than the normal "canonical" five, certainly Tabram and Smith, and the Coles case I find curious - the constable who saw the killing and chased the murderer never got over the possibility that he actually could have been chasing the Ripper and failed to catch him (this was in the memoirs of Chief Constable Frederick Wensley).

But my deepest curiosity is the overlooke gap of October 1888. Up till then the murders from August through September began at the start of each month and concluded near the end of each month. Then nothing. Then comes Miller's Court in November 1888, and the killer (a) kills inside the Victim's room, and (b) really destroys the body of the victim by his over-the-top mutilations. Why was he absent for all of October? Was the murder of Mary Kelly a culmination (and all those horrors planned in advance by the killer) or was it pent up anger and misdirected energy by the killer because he or she could not act at all in October 1888?

Jeff

Increased police activity and public scrutinty after the double event made him skitish? Maybe his work schedule changed? Or perhaps there was some sort of failed attack that we don't know about? Which probably frustrated him even more and may explain why he went with a hooker with a place (Maybe that's what AM asked Kelly- if she had a place. She says "yes". "You'll be all right..").

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

I wonder.......

Increased police activity and public scrutinty after the double event made him skitish? Maybe his work schedule changed? Or perhaps there was some sort of failed attack that we don't know about? Which probably frustrated him even more and may explain why he went with a hooker with a place (Maybe that's what AM asked Kelly- if she had a place. She says "yes". "You'll be all right..").

How many evenings might he have been on the hunt with no success? I imagine that approach may have raised some eyebrows. Of course, it need not be a problem if he struck gold first time to bat with said approach? Maybe he had been doing recon and knew who to approach?