Kelly's Killer

[DVV]

Hello David. Canonisation for you? Show me first your miracles. (heh-heh)
LC

Well, I've solved the whole case, mind you. The moon was shining bright, the flies were pink and the birds shut their mouths. I remember I was plastered, that night. (heh-heh)

[Robert]

David, if you're going to do miracles, please no water into wine. That's OK in France, but for me, water into a nice cup of tea.

Ta.

[DVV]

You'd never do that, Mr Linford. Nothing in our wine, nothing in our malt.
"Straight, no chaser", as Charlie Parker put it.

[Robert]

BTW David and Lynn, there's not many know this, but the New Testament water into wine miracle was provoked by a Scot saying to Jesus "It's your round."

[DVV]

For sure that's canonical, Robert. Or it has to be.

[lynn cates]

Who buys?

Hello Robert. I thought the correct Scots phrase was, "You're buying."

Cheers.
LC

[Robert]

Ok Lynn. I should perhaps say that the story that a thirsty Scot once said to a man on Death Row "You're in the chair" is a slander.

[caz]

Well, isn't someone statistically far more likely to be killed by a one off than a serial killer? Shouldn't the assumption be that every murder victim is a solitary kill and let a preponderance of evidence put them in as a victim of a serial killer?

Sorry Errata, I owe you a response!

To be fair, the police at the time did look at each murder individually and they did investigate the men who were known to have associated with each victim. This is the way they had always worked and they didn't have the kind of experience in 1888 that might otherwise have led them to an 'assumption' that they were dealing with a phenomenon that would in the dim and distant future be called serial murder. Today, the police might be expected to fall into such a trap, but I still feel that if these murders had been committed over the last few weeks in a similarly small area, a serial killer would be behind most if not all of them. Unsolved murders like these have always been rare, no matter how many times we have heard people claiming they were ten a penny in that particular time and place.

I doubt the police back then were thrilled at the prospect of having to find a veritable needle in a haystack, ie if this was in fact a complete stranger preying on one unfortunate after another just for his jollies, as opposed to being able to haul in abusive partner after abusive partner and get relatively easy convictions.

I do wonder sometimes how much more connective tissue some people want to see before conceding that the murders of Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly (at the very least) are terribly unlikely to have been the work of anyone but the individual who murdered Nichols. So soon after Nichols, statistically (to use your own word) one would not expect to see one similar but one-off murder, let alone three or more.

Time and place is everything here. The sheer closeness of these murders would be quite astonishing if unconnected.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

monkeying around

Hello Caroline. Well I should like to see a good bit more connective tissue than I have seen until now.

(By the way, what counts as closeness? 1 mile? 2 miles? 5?)

If you reread Mr. Evans' "Letters from Hell" you begin to get a feel for the power of persuasion--monkey see, monkey do. No letters; 1 letter; next, a deluge.

Cheers.
LC

[ChrisGeorge]

Hello Caroline. Well I should like to see a good bit more connective tissue than I have seen until now.

(By the way, what counts as closeness? 1 mile? 2 miles? 5?)

If you reread Mr. Evans' "Letters from Hell" you begin to get a feel for the power of persuasion--monkey see, monkey do. No letters; 1 letter; next, a deluge.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn

Do you have any evidence that the letters were written by monkeys?

Chris

[lynn cates]

going ape

Hello Chris. Cute.

But seriously, suggestion is a powerful psychological mechanism.

cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Stride tells us he was instinctive and his desire to kill rendered his desire to escape of little consequence.

Stride only speaks to us about the Ripper if she was attacked by "Jack". Given this assault (if BS-man) was far and away different to all the others, then we can't be guided by any aspect of this single killing.

But, I suppose you have to factor in the value placed upon life in those times. Today, life is cheap in some countries with serious poverty issues. Perhaps in those days, a life at sea, for example, wasn't too far removed from a life in prison; and it follows thus any fully-functioning, non-lunatic, with a desire to kill, from the lower working classes, would have taken that risk. Although hanging is a different matter.

If he was a seaman the chances are very good that he stopped at other ports in countries where prostitutes were equally available, but in cities much less populated.
Why, if he was a sailor, would he only kill in the busiest city in the world?
Stories about the Whitechapel murders were known in every country. It was world news. If any similar murders occured anywhere else, and some did, they would automatically become headlines.
The counter-argument against the sailor is that very point.

He certainly took huge risks, which would suggest to me that he had little to lose or he was a lunatic.

A sane man simply does not do what "Jack" did, but the definition of "lunatic" is not a definition at all. "Lunatic" encompases a broad range of actions.
This kind of lunacy might not be readily observable in his day-to-day movements, but all murderers take risks, sane or not.

Regards, Jon S.

[DVV]

Hi Chris

Do you have any evidence that the letters were written by monkeys?
Chris

Must be The purloined letter in the rue Morgue.

[ChrisGeorge]

Prime Suspect

[The Good Michael]

Prime Suspect

He doesn't look 6'7". but he is fairly thing, sort of a simian Peter Crouch.

Mike