The Canonical Five

[John G]

But! There *were* other murders in that year (and adjacent years), of prostitutes no less. Of course, you must be aware of this. So it seems a number of "murderous individuals" did in fact crawl out the woodwork around the same time. Unless you think ALL of the murders were done by JtR and nobody else..

It's really, really, not impossible for there to have been at least two killers on the same turf at the same time. Especially when looking at Stride, never mind the non-canon murders and attempted murders.



I kind of get where you're coming from?

But good grief, is it really "crackpot" to consider that Stride *may* have been killed by somebody else? Or even Kelly? I don't think so, I don't think those sort of questions are absolutely baseless or out of order. And besides, questions like that do generate some interesting conversations.

And yes, some "suspects" are sillier than others, and some people arguing their theories get a bit annoying at times, but are they all "crackpot" ir, worthless and beneath attention?

Of course, I'm not so lofty nor well informed as some, so I find it all rather interesting, whether I agree or not.

Yes, but murder in Whitechapel was uncommon, let alone the highly unusual mutilation murders that occurred in 1888. In fact, they continued to be uncommon in subsequent years-one murder in 1889 and one in 1890.

Throat cuttings were also extremely uncommon generally: outside of the C5 only one throat cutting murder in the whole of London (pop 5.6 million) in 1888, and that was a domestic incident for which the perpetrator went to the police station to confess.

I agree there's a significant element of doubt about Stride being killed by JtR although, on balance, I believe she was, i.e. largely based on the reasoning of Coroner Baxter.

[lynn cates]

yup

Hello Ausgirl. Precisely.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

bad day

Hello CD. Thanks.

Well, Phillips could have been wrong about the mutilations. But then, let's keep that SAME balance with ALL medical opinion (a la Trevor Marriott).

Or perhaps the killer was having a "bad day" with Kate.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

torsos

Hello (again) John.

"What is also moot is that all of these murderous individuals apparently emerged from the same tiny district, and in the same year."

Of course, one must believe this, UNLESS one wishes to include ALL the murders in that district as one handed. Let us not forget the torsos.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Clark

Hello John. Thanks.

Of course, the kidney removal was a huge exception. (Which, by the way, is grist for Trevor's mill.)

If you look at Dr. Clark's interview, he seems to confirm that Phillips NEVER accepted the one hand view--at least, not based on the forensic evidence.

Cheers.
LC

[Damaso Marte]

The simple fact is that with Kate, we have no idea exactly how long the killer had with her...much is merely assumed by Lawendes possible sighting. If Kate was not with Sailor Man then she could have been in that square for a half hour...which makes the sloppy navel tracing, cervical stump and the obviously accidental colon sectioning more questionable.

Wait, wasn't Watkins in Mitre Square around 1:30 AM?

[Ausgirl]

Hello Lynn,

What is also moot is that all of these murderous individuals apparently emerged from the same tiny district, and in the same year.

But! There *were* other murders in that year (and adjacent years), of prostitutes no less. Of course, you must be aware of this. So it seems a number of "murderous individuals" did in fact crawl out the woodwork around the same time. Unless you think ALL of the murders were done by JtR and nobody else..

It's really, really, not impossible for there to have been at least two killers on the same turf at the same time. Especially when looking at Stride, never mind the non-canon murders and attempted murders.

But John

Everyone knows all the C5 were committed by different people those being Crossmere, Van Gough, Sickert, Dr Barnardo and Gull. Its crackpot theory followed by crackpot theory at the moment.

I kind of get where you're coming from?

But good grief, is it really "crackpot" to consider that Stride *may* have been killed by somebody else? Or even Kelly? I don't think so, I don't think those sort of questions are absolutely baseless or out of order. And besides, questions like that do generate some interesting conversations.

And yes, some "suspects" are sillier than others, and some people arguing their theories get a bit annoying at times, but are they all "crackpot" ir, worthless and beneath attention?

Of course, I'm not so lofty nor well informed as some, so I find it all rather interesting, whether I agree or not.

[Pcdunn]

I disagree about Brown

Thanks for this Stan. I agree about Brown, however, I wouldn't completely rule out Austin as a victim.

I doubt Carrie Brown (aka Old Shakespeare) was a Ripper victim, unless he modified his methods. Last year I saw a detailed article in a New York paper describing the victim as bound with sheets to the bedstead.
One of the suspects was said to be "an abuser of women". Jack didn't seem to do torture, from the reports we have.

The article is at the Library of Congress site. I'll try to locate it again and get a link here.

[c.d.]

I should have added rather than use the term "expert opinions" it might be more accurate to say in the opinions of the doctors at the time.

c.d.

[c.d.]

"Could expert opinion be wrong? Certainly. But IF we go that route, then we had better close up the inquest accounts and completely disregard them."

Hello Lynn,

I refer you to my post (no. 94) in this thread. As I stated, we need to give their conclusions weight but were they really "expert opinions" especially when we don't know all of the details which went into the forming of that opinion?

c.d.

[John Wheat]

Hello Lynn,

What is also moot is that all of these murderous individuals apparently emerged from the same tiny district, and in the same year.

But John

Everyone knows all the C5 were committed by different people those being Crossmere, Van Gough, Sickert, Dr Barnardo and Gull. Its crackpot theory followed by crackpot theory at the moment.

[John G]

Hello Harry.

"For the multi-killer theorists, I'd love to know why there wasn't another "copycat" killing until some eight months after the last victim. We have whoever killed Tabram, then Isenschmid takes care of Nichols & Chapman, Stride's dead, shortly followed by Eddowes, and someone else butchers Kelly. Where were all these savage murderers popping up from and why did they all seem to go on hiatus around the same time?"

This question would have import if these killers were serialists or merely killing for sport. But I assume there was a point to their killings. If so, your question is moot.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

What is also moot is that all of these murderous individuals apparently emerged from the same tiny district, and in the same year.

[John G]

Hello John. Thanks.

Yes, that was stated at the Stride inquest; and, yes, Baxter saw only one perpetrator. But the point was skill level.

Actually, as Howard Brown has pointed out (by posting a snippet), the medicos determined more than one hand as early as the first week in October.

The difference was between one who knew HOW to use a knife properly and one who did not.

Could expert opinion be wrong? Certainly. But IF we go that route, then we had better close up the inquest accounts and completely disregard them.

Cheers.
LC

Hello Lynn,

But that's just the problem:the medical reports on Eddowes do not suggest a perpetrator lacking in skill; quite the reverse in fact. As Paul Harrison points out: "To remove the kidney from its membrane as is documented shows a high level of skill and anatomical knowledge." (Marriott, 2015), the emphasis is mine.

He added:

"The uterus was also removed without damaging any underlying tissue. This is also very difficult especially as the report says that the sigmoid colon was invaginated into the rectum very tightly."

And let's not forget, the perpetrator achieved all of this with a Victorian knife, in poor lighting conditions, and under serious time pressure. Therefore, if the reports are to be relied upon, a cut and slash method was clearly not employed. In fact, the perpetrator may well have been an experienced surgeon.

However, apparently, Chapman was eviscerated by someone demonstrating an even greater level of skill! Nonetheless, as I noted in my earlier post, Paul Harrison expressed the view that to "remove the appendages, the uterus, the fallopian tubes and ovaries in one frenzied attack and one slice of the blade would be almost impossible." Marriott, 2015).However, as Dr Phillips seems to suggest that this exactly what happened this obviously raises serious questions about his credibility.

And, as I also noted, Dr Brown seemed to believe Eddowes' perpetrator was a medical student, so if Chapman's perpetrator actually did exhibited much greater skill then we must surely be looking at an experienced surgeon at the very least.

Of course, all of this presupposes the medical reports can be relied upon.

Finally, Dr Phillips' comments at the McKenzie inquest clearly implies that, by this time at least, he believed all of the "Whitechapel murders" to be linked, whatever his provisional assessment may have been.

[lynn cates]

point

Hello Harry.

"For the multi-killer theorists, I'd love to know why there wasn't another "copycat" killing until some eight months after the last victim. We have whoever killed Tabram, then Isenschmid takes care of Nichols & Chapman, Stride's dead, shortly followed by Eddowes, and someone else butchers Kelly. Where were all these savage murderers popping up from and why did they all seem to go on hiatus around the same time?"

This question would have import if these killers were serialists or merely killing for sport. But I assume there was a point to their killings. If so, your question is moot.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

skill vs knowledge

Hello (yet again) John.

"I would also point out that Dr Brown was of the opinion that Eddowes' killer was, or had been, a medical student, i.e. because he "undoubtedly had knowledge of human anatomy"

This hardly suggests someone less skilled, or knowledgeable, than Chapman's killer"

Let's not conflate "skill" with "knowledge." One may know every nuance of anatomy but still be unable to make a clean cut. Conversely, an expert knifesman may know NOTHING about anatomy.

Cheers.
LC