The Grisly

[Monty]

Apologies Dave,

Just re read my post and it comes across rather cantankerous.

I have just cut the lawn and feel rether flustered.

Yes, makes no odds and your point is valid.

Eddowes is identified outside a Jewish club. A known tactic of prostitutes is to loiter where men gather. I see the same for Stride.

Levys famous comment alludes to prostitute and client.

Now I admit this is memory, but I believe Morris stated prostitutes were often turfed out from the corner of the Square Eddowes was found.

When 3 people call you a horse, its time to buy yourself a saddle.


Monty

[Simon Wood]

Hi Monty,

Do you honestly believe Warren resigned because of an article in Murrays Magazine, one which had been in the public domain for at least two weeks prior to his resignation?

It's called politics.

Regards,

Simon

[Cogidubnus]

Why does it matter? These were the Unfortunates.

Hi Roy

Well it might matter if it had a bearing on why they died? If, for example, these weren't the random set of killings we're always being led down the path of believing. I'm not romanticising these women or the lives they led...far from it...but I'm not going to be blindly led by historic assumptions either...else (against all logic and evidence) I'd believe Richard lll killed the Princes in the Tower...but that's another argument for another thread!

All the best

Dave

[Cogidubnus]

Erm, the Fire Engine impression is a myth.

Really? Well it makes no odds either way...somebody got her that legless and I should think it cost a good deal of money...

Dave

[Monty]

Erm, the Fire Engine impression is a myth.

Along with the reason Warren resigned was because of the Graffito erasure.

Monty

[Cogidubnus]

When I weigh up the probabilities I'm inclined to think we're dealing with a single killer. Lynn and Simon - highlighting the differences that do exist in the victims and in the details of the killings is fair enough, and I do agree that all assumptions should be challenged (or at least examined) always; but that said, had Peter Sutcliffe never been caught I'm sure you could use precisely the same minor variations to challenge the assumption that there was one man behind the soubriquet 'The Yorkshire Ripper'. Why would a man who routinely murdered haggard middle-aged prostitutes suddenly kill a beautiful innocent 16 year old girl? Or a college student? Why was one of the bodies moved and mutilated days after the murder, but none of the others? Why were some bodies hidden while others were left publicly displayed? Why were some masturbated over, while others were not? Etc.

But I no longer feel dogmatic about it. While I think it likely, for the reasons Roy states, that one man carried out these attacks , I also accept that just because it's likely doesn't mean it was necessarily the case.

Hi Henry

Like you, I'm not 100% convinced...but I do feel Lynn has raised interesting points, not just regarding JI, but his Hurlbert research is fascinating too...I agree with Tom when he observes elsewhere that Lynn is successfully raising the separate suspects theorem way out of the crank league and into respectability...in fact if I'm honest, if I was forced to name suspects, I'd currently be stuck between Lynns theory and Jacob Levy, with nobody else coming quite so close...

(Well that's until the next viable suspect surfaces, and we all know what that's like!)

All the best

Dave

[Cogidubnus]

Hi Cog. What exactly do you think Eddowes was up to at 1am in a dark alley if not street walking?

Hi Tom...Let me put it another way and ask you a question...who was buying her all the drinks she got so blotto on that she ended up doing fire engine impressions? No client would be so generous surely? I'm keeping an open mind on this one, pending what Lynn has to say...and I'm damm sure it'll be interesting...who knows, it might even involve your favourite private detective agency?

Regarding Liz - she was dressed (by her standards) up to the nines...she'd placed her special possessions in care, she was wearing a flower, and carrying cachous...suggests to me she was moving out of one relationship into another...and the fact she was waiting outside the club (as if to meet someone in particular) rather than soliciting in one of the main thoroughfares seems significant to me....Again can I ask you a question Tom...how reliable a witness do you honestly believe Schwartz is? Could he just be a "plant" to distract attention away from the club or one of it's members (or both)?

All surmise I know, but I'm still very much at the stage of weighing possibilities...

All the best

Dave

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

So much of the Ripper mystery is about what we have convinced ourselves is true.

I'm uncertain as to whether or not you're being ironic, but read through Abberline's 19th September report. Although his implications are loaded, you will not find one reference to Nichols or Chapman having been known prostitutes.

Eddowes is a conundrum, and Kelly appears to have arrived out of nowhere to briefly exist solely for the expedient of being "murdered".

Swanson wrote of Stride, "the body was identified as that of Elizabeth Stride, a prostitute . . ."

I'm agreeing with you about Stride, so who's evidence am I dismissing?

Regards,

Simon

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Simon. Of course Stride was a Ripper victim. It's Nichols and Chapman who weren't, remember? And don't say that no police ever said that the victims were prostitutes, and then dismiss that evidence when it's pointed out they had. These women were all prostitutes, from Emma Smith to Frances Coles.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Simon Wood]

Hi Tom,

Yep, it ain't me. I hate the maudlin sentiment and romanticization which has attached to the C5, MJK in particular.

Come on now, you couldn't exactly describe Dew or Woodhall as reliable sources. And none of the cops knew who Eddowes was until John Kelly turned up two days late with his BS story. Only then did they put two and two together and figure she might have been the woman arrested in Aldgate for D&D [whom the two arresting cops couldn't identify]. No suggestion there of prostitution or soliciting.

Prostitution was a handy premise for these women being out and about in the wee small hours.

Interesting that the circumstances leading up to Nichols and Chapman being out on the streets were officially reported almost word-for-word.

As a token of Esprit De Corps I'm willing to concede Liz Stride, but then she wasn't a "Ripper" victim.

Regards,

Simon

[lynn cates]

flowers

Hello Tom. The flower, then?

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

That's as good a reason as any, Lynn. After all, these coppers lived there and saw it every day and knew what to look for.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

get up

Hello Simon, Tom. At one point, an "Echo" reported chatted up some coppers from the Berner st neighbourhood to get their take on Liz. They thought her soliciting. Why? "Because of her get up."

Cheers.
LC

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Simon. Stride had a rap sheet and was treated for venereal disease in Sweden. Eddowes was described as a prostitute by a policeman either at her inquest or in the police reports, I can't recall which at the moment. And Kelly was described as walking the streets with her female friends in a police memoir, either by Dew or Woodhall (I believe). Sorry I can't recall more right now. And again, in every case, there's evidence from associates that these women were prostitutes. That really isn't a point open for debate, though some apparently want to romanticize these women into something they were not (I'm not saying you do, but some do).

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[lynn cates]

different

Hello Roy.

"These were the Unfortunates. They were out on the mean streets at night, whether is was soliciting, looking for a drink, whatever. Tragically making themselves easy victims for a serial killer. "

Ah, now put this way, it makes a BIG difference, and I am forced to agree.

Cheers.
LC