Definitely canonical

[Mitch Rowe]

Its really simple. The chances of a PC patrolling the backyard of 29 hanbury are slim.

But whatever the reason the ultimate question is why Eddowes? Why not wait for the right situation? I can hardly believe JTR just happened to go nuts in the right place. He must have had chances with others and decided it was too risky.

[Malcolm X]

it's amazing the detail you guys get into, i really respect this.....Sam Flynn sais the right thing there.... dont forget that the Ripper will vary from day to day, from murder to murder...he's not a robot..

you guys show loads of enthusiasm , keep it up... because i might need your help soon......... to me this KELLY murder is wrong, but i need guys who are good researchers, have a keen eye for detail.

i think that you might have to accept that Kelly was butchered so badly; compared to the others, because he was safe indoors and had loads of time.

there was a large month gap, so i think he went in search of a suitable last victim; a few weeks before and maybe he spotted KELLY the previous week... not sure...

it's his motives for killing that now concern me, there's something not right in this KELLY murder, she looks posed and her organs too carefully placed about her body. why are her eyes undamaged...this is very strange for a killer who was supposedly slashing wildly at her face!

[Malcolm X]

Were nitpicking the minutia here....whats the reason that Kate was not mutilated like Mary but was like Annie?

because the ripper was disturbed at the Stride murder and M.Kelly was killed indoors, so he went over the top...... the odd one out here, is in fact the Stride murder!

the ripper would've had in his mind a maximum `` fail safe time`` ......... he would've thought, regardless of hearing anything or not, ``right it's time to get out of here`` and quite correct too, because Whitechapel or any large city is never truly dead at night; especially on the weekend....5 minutes at a murder site is about right, but definitely not 10 mins.

annie..............normal ripper

stride.............disturbed

kate..............nomal ripper

kelly...............all the time in the world !!!

[Nothing to see]

Of course MJK was Jack's. His 'masterpiece', if you will. I do find it strange that people will want to argue because of flaps of skin that she wasn't Jack's. Jack's approach, kill, then mutilate were his MO. I'm quite certain Jack was adaptable in what he performed and where. I'm sorry but trying to convince that MJK wasn't Jack's is a waste of time for me. Anyway.

He had the same amount of light in Miller's Ct as in Mitre Sq? U'm, it wasn't called Ripper's Corner because it was the brightest lit part. And I'm pretty sure, one of the gaslights wasn't working that night. You've got 3 storey warehouses closing the whole place in.

Why Hanbury St and Mitre Sq? Because that's where the pros led him. They knew the patch and I think Jack did also in a much less familiar way. He certainly knew how to navigate around the place. He knew how to get out and get home.

My last point. Copy cat killers? This, as far as I know, is a 20th century 'definition'. Are there any recorded cases that anyone knows of, from the 19th century or earlier, of people following other murders? I'd be interested to hear.

[DVV]

I do find it strange that people will want to argue because of flaps of skin that she wasn't Jack's.

Hi Nts,
quite the reverse.
The "flaps of skin detail", which links the murders of Chapman and Kelly, is an extremely solid evidence that MJK is a Ripper victim.

Amitiés,
David

[Nothing to see]

Hi Nts,
quite the reverse.
The "flaps of skin detail", which links the murders of Chapman and Kelly, is an extremely solid evidence that MJK is a Ripper victim.

Amitiés,
David

Hey man. I believe MJK is a Jack get.

[DVV]

I know, and agree. But that wasn't the point. The point is that the "flaps of skin detail" argues in favour of your opinion, not the contrary.

Amitiés,
David

[Nothing to see]

I have to say I'm damn jealous of you being in Provence. Hope you're enjoying it.

The flaps of skin I didn't read before as being details that Jack did both.

I read them as 3 or 4 flaps of flesh being used to prove that the murders were committed by different people.

OK. One murderer. 5 victims. That's Jack. And definitely MJK.

[DVV]

I have to say I'm damn jealous of you being in Provence. Hope you're enjoying it.

I do. That's Jerusalem to me.
And I believe I could have cured Jack's soul with a real bouillabaisse and some bottles of rosé.
He wouldn't have killed 5. Nor 6.

Amitiés,
David

[Nothing to see]

So. How many?

[DVV]

Well, that's not the proper thread for such a discussion. So let me just say quickly that I tend to include Martha Tabram in the frame, and that IMHO Annie Millwood could well have died from her injuries. In which case her attack should be considered a murder.
Just my current view of this eternal question ("How many?").

[FrankO]

Annie and Kates murderers had specific focus we can attribute by actions. Marys did not.

Hi Mike,

You can only say this if you think that what JtR did to his outside victims was all that satisfied him. Perhaps that wasn't the case. We don't know. Furthermore, Mary's murder obviously did have focus we can attribute by actions. She was taken apart and obliterated. Degraded, dewomanised, depersonalised, dehumanised.

Marys flaps are so that he could,....what......?

Obviously, it had nothing to do with peeling, skinning, the placing of the various organs and body parts or whatever. Mary's abdomen was opened up by cutting away flaps of skin, just like Annie Chapman's, in order to be able to get to the organs inside. Nothing more, nothing less.

All the best, Mike!
Frank

[perrymason]

Hi Nts,
quite the reverse.
The "flaps of skin detail", which links the murders of Chapman and Kelly, is an extremely solid evidence that MJK is a Ripper victim.

Amitiés,
David

Hi David,

What the flaps represent is the strong possibility that the man that killed Annie also killed Mary.....its not "evidence of". As has been ignored many times, Annie's skin flaps were common knowledge for some time before Mary was killed.The only thing done in Marys room that hadnt been in the papers before her death was cutting flesh from bone. An act that sits solitarily among the Canonical Group.

And the fact that we see this technique with Annie doesnt then mean it is only her killer who would do that...if he hadnt done it before anywhere, he learned it somewhere too.

Cheers David.

[Nothing to see]

Hi David,

What the flaps represent is the strong possibility that the man that killed Annie also killed Mary.....its not "evidence of". As has been ignored many times, Annie's skin flaps were common knowledge for some time before Mary was killed.The only thing done in Marys room that hadnt been in the papers before her death was cutting flesh from bone.

And the fact that we see this technique with Annie doesnt then mean it is only her killer who would do that...if he hadnt done it before anywhere, he learned it somewhere too.

Cheers David.

So you're saying a copy cat killer. Is there any evidence, anywhere, that this sort of behaviour existed in the 1880's?

[DVV]

Hi David,

What the flaps represent is the strong possibility that the man that killed Annie also killed Mary.....its not "evidence of". As has been ignored many times, Annie's skin flaps were common knowledge for some time before Mary was killed.The only thing done in Marys room that hadnt been in the papers before her death was cutting flesh from bone. An act that sits solitarily among the Canonical Group.

And the fact that we see this technique with Annie doesnt then mean it is only her killer who would do that...if he hadnt done it before anywhere, he learned it somewhere too.

Cheers David.

Hi Mike,
what kind of copy-cat killer he would have been...!
Able of copying not only Jack the Ripper, but also "Jack-the-flaps-of-skin-detacher."
Let me add incidentally that such an imitator wouldn't have forgotten to take the womb away.

Amitiés mon cher,
David