The Canonical Five

[harry]

In some cases where multiple killers have been caught,it has become known that the police have underestimated the number of victims they killed.The Whitechapel murderer,in my opinion,was responsible for more than 5.

[jerryd]

To Steve

Yes but McKenzie was killed long after Mary Jane Kelly. I doubt Jack could have waited over half a year to kill again after killing Mary Jane Kelly.

Cheers John

Anything over a month was a long time if you think about it, John. The first 4 of the canon were essentially killed in September.[Nichols was less than 24 hours from September 1st] Then Kelly almost two months later.

[John Wheat]

Hi John

agree about the Torso Murders, however Mackenzie is more similar than Tabram to the C5.

Steve

To Steve

Yes but McKenzie was killed long after Mary Jane Kelly. I doubt Jack could have waited over half a year to kill again after killing Mary Jane Kelly.

Cheers John

[John Wheat]

Which is why being a obsessed believer in a particular suspect is not a good thing. Can't see the Wood for the Trees situation.

Why someone has to have been Jack?

[Rosella]

Yes, I believe one killer was responsible for the C-5. I go to and fro about Tabram as I still think it possible that she was killed by a soldier client. It's a definite No from me as far as Coles and Alice McKenzie.

[Elamarna]

By the same token if you "Lock in", say MacKenzie, you are forced to disregard those you name.

That's why I try to keep an open mind on both questions.

Yes my friend exactly, so although I may think Mackenzie is a victim, she cannot be a certainty, and she cannot on her own be used to include or discard any suspect.

steve

[Mayerling]

Hi Errata
Couldn't agree more, If you favour say Druitt, Tumblety or Bury you obviously can't include Mackenzie.

Which is why being a obsessed believer in a particular suspect is not a good thing. Can't see the Wood for the Trees situation.

regards

Steve

As a basis for research stick to the Canonical or "Macnaughten" Five as a start. If anything definite turns up, add those who can definitely linked.

Jeff

[Damaso Marte]

I'd say about 50% of this forum does not adhere to the Canonical Five, and the other 50% generally at least has their minds partially open to the idea that the Ripper killed more/less than the Canonical Five.

I personally believe that the Canonical Five were all killed by the same person, whom I term "Jack the Ripper" - though I admit that I am most likely to be wrong about Stride. I also am open to the idea that Tabram and Mackenzie were killed by the Ripper. Coles I think was a one-off, probably by Sadler.

I have tried to coin the phrase "Canonical 4" to refer to Nichols/Chapman/Eddowes/Kelly, and "Canonical 3" to refer to Nichols/Chapman/Eddowes, and "Canonical 2" to refer to Nichols/Chapman, as these are generally the smaller groups that people who deny one or more or the C5 believe were killed by the same hand. They have not caught on at all.

[GUT]

Hi Errata
Couldn't agree more, If you favour say Druitt, Tumblety or Bury you obviously can't include Mackenzie.

Which is why being a obsessed believer in a particular suspect is not a good thing. Can't see the Wood for the Trees situation.

regards

Steve

By the same token if you "Lock in", say MacKenzie, you are forced to disregard those you name.

That's why I try to keep an open mind on both questions.

[Errata]

I've never been a fan of the term "canonical five". I much prefer the "Macnaughton five", a term that gives context but, not assumption.

I grew up on comic book canon, so I tend to have a much looser interpretation of the word. Nothing is immutable, and eventually someone always rips a hole in space/time. Which is a view I find useful for Ripperology. Maybe not so much the second one. But I'm open to it.

[drstrange169]

I've never been a fan of the term "canonical five". I much prefer the "Macnaughton five", a term that gives context but, not assumption.

[Elamarna]

Who I believe are Ripper victims depends on which ideas I am entertaining that day. Probably why I make a terrible Suspect person.

Hi Errata
Couldn't agree more, If you favour say Druitt, Tumblety or Bury you obviously can't include Mackenzie.

Which is why being a obsessed believer in a particular suspect is not a good thing. Can't see the Wood for the Trees situation.

regards

Steve

[Elamarna]

I believe Jack killed the C5 plus Tabram and as I believe WH Bury was probably the Ripper I'll add Ellen Bury to that list. Why? Well for a start the MO used in Ellen Bury's murder is closer in my opinion to the MO used in the C5 than for instance the MO used in the Torso Murders which some believe Jack committed.

Hi John

agree about the Torso Murders, however Mackenzie is more similar than Tabram to the C5.

Steve

[John Wheat]

I believe Jack killed the C5 plus Tabram and as I believe WH Bury was probably the Ripper I'll add Ellen Bury to that list. Why? Well for a start the MO used in Ellen Bury's murder is closer in my opinion to the MO used in the C5 than for instance the MO used in the Torso Murders which some believe Jack committed.

[Errata]

Who I believe are Ripper victims depends on which ideas I am entertaining that day. Probably why I make a terrible Suspect person.