Why Ada?

[Fisherman]

Ada Wilson - at the time of the Ripper deeds not weighed into the calculations by anybody, it would seem - is often thrown forward as a possible "warming-up" victim of Jacks.

The possibility that she may have prostituted herself is an obvious one, as can be read between the lines in quite an emphatic manner in Rose Biermanns testimony. It goes like this:

"Last evening she came into the house accompanied by a male companion, but whether he was her husband or not I could not say. She has often had visitors to see her, but I have rarely seen them myself, as Mrs. Wilson lives in the front room, her bedroom being just at the back, adjoining the parlour. My mother and I occupy two rooms upstairs. Well, I don't know who the young man was, but about midnight I heard the most terrible screams one can imagine. Running downstairs I saw Mrs. Wilson, partially dressed, wringing her hands and crying, 'Stop that man for cutting my throat! He has stabbed me!' She then fell fainting in the passage."

Ada Wilson´s own account of what happened is a different one. She says that she answered a knock at the door, only to find a man outside demanding money. Not getting that money, he produced a clasp knife and stabbed Wilson in the throat, and made good his escape. Says Wilson, that is.

Was Ada Wilson covering up the fact that she was a prostitute, providing the assailant with a metamorphosis from punter to robber?

To begin with, are we certain that the man Rose Biermann claims accompanied Wilson into her house "in the evening", was the same man that stabbed her at midnight? In the passage I quoted I feel that it is implied but not substantiated.
Do we know how much time that passed inbetween the two events; coming home and getting stabbed? Was the man a casual punter?

Rose Biermann says something that may give a clue:
”I saw all that as I was coming downstairs, but as soon as I commenced to descend I noticed a young fair man rush to the front door and let himself out. He did not seem somehow to unfasten the catch as if he had been accustomed to do so before.”

What catch? Is it a lock mechanism Biermann speaks of? And is she saying that the man seemed accustomed to handling the lock in Wilson´s house? If so, we are not speaking about the random punter, but instead about somebody who probably knew Wilson and her lodgings. A pimp, perhaps, unsatisfied by her takings?

What the Ripper establishes somewhere along the line is the ability to subdue and kill, blitz-style. There is no need to accept that he would have reached that ability at the time of the Wilson attack, but we do know that his urges took him there eventually.
In consequence with this, I think it must be asked if a man with an inner urge to procure organs from the abdominal cavity, and developing a method to extremely swiftly allow for this urge to be satisfied, would not kill instead of wound?
To me, the Wilson attack does not seem to have been the prelude to an evisceration at all. Nor does it evince any interest in the abdomen. In short, I see one interesting detail, and one only, when it comes to Wilson: she may well have been a prostitute. But although it is a factor that cannot be looked away from, it is also a factor that shows us that Wilson led a vulnerable life, as any prostitute does. I think that any fair guess tells us that the average prostitute of the day was subjected to violence at occasions, and that quite a lot of them would have seen knifes drawn in threatening situations.

The best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

Hi Fisherman!

If so, we are not speaking about the random punter, but instead about somebody who probably knew Wilson and her lodgings. A pimp, perhaps, unsatisfied by her takings?

If the attacker was known to known to Ada, I'd be rather surprised if she didn't name him directly given the severity of the attack. If anything, a familiarity with the lock may hint at lock-familiarity on a more general basis, which in turn could indicate an experienced criminal, or at least one accustomed to locks and fiddling with them.

In consequence with this, I think it must be asked if a man with an inner urge to procure organs from the abdominal cavity, and developing a method to extremely swiftly allow for this urge to be satisfied, would not kill instead of wound?

Firstly, we don't know if the ripper was possessed of an urge to procure organs from his victims at that stage, and secondly, his intention may well have been to kill rather the wound. It may well have been a botched job which failed on account of his inexperience, plus the fact that Wilson's screams would have put paid to any further designs he had upon the body. We simply don't know that any eviseration was intended, and even if none was, it wouldn't make her any less of a compelling candidate for an early offence by Jack the Ripper.

Best regards,
Ben

[Uncle Jack]

The conflicting views on the events by Ada herself and Rose Bierman are really interesting. As pointed out by Fisherman, Bierman never actually stated what time she saw Ada return to the lodging house and how much time there was until midnight. If the time was, lets say, around 8pm that would surely rule out that the man was Ada's attacker. If it was around 11:45pm, we maybe looking at the possibility that the punter attacked her. I think the statement by Bierman, in my opinion, always comes across as though she is trying to state that Ada was an unfortunate, by suggesting, in so many words, that Ada is "always bringing different strange men" back to her room.

Am I right in presuming that Ada lived in one of many rooms in the same house. From the illustration of the attack we have it appears to me that Ada lived on the ground floor and the attacker was seen to leave the actual main door (therefore, not Ada's door). I would suggest personally that a person would not have to be accostomed to regularly coming and going from the location to know how to exit the door. Maybe the door wasn't even locked - and even if it was, it only takes a fraction of a second to lift a catch, unless it was something very complicated but I imagine this isn't the case. I do personally see Ada's attack as an early attempt by the Ripper but it seems slightly different to the other attacks. I think that the Ripper may have actually had sex with Ada before he attacked her as he was leaving. It was probably his intention to attack/kill her before but he gave into a sexual urge. As he was leaving he became violent and then stabbed her. Thats how I see it anyhow! Lol

Best regards,

Adam

[Fisherman]

Ben writes:

"If the attacker was known to known to Ada, I'd be rather surprised if she didn't name him directly given the severity of the attack. If anything, a familiarity with the lock may hint at lock-familiarity on a more general basis, which in turn could indicate an experienced criminal, or at least one accustomed to locks and fiddling with them."

Reasonable, of course - but we are still left with a variety of possibilities. He could have been someone who had been entertained by Ada at a number of occasions - but not often enough for her to know his name.
There is also the distinct possibility that she DID know that name, along with a knowledge that it would have been distinctly unhealthy to reveal it. Like I said in my earlier post, he could have been her pimp, just to exemplify.

”Firstly, we don't know if the ripper was possessed of an urge to procure organs from his victims at that stage, and secondly, his intention may well have been to kill rather the wound. It may well have been a botched job which failed on account of his inexperience, plus the fact that Wilson's screams would have put paid to any further designs he had upon the body. We simply don't know that any eviseration was intended, and even if none was, it wouldn't make her any less of a compelling candidate for an early offence by Jack the Ripper.”

This is of course correct – we know not if the urge was there on the Rippers behalf as yet. But it is just as true to state that we have as little knowledge whether he would resort to killing at that stage.
I think that there are demands of all sorts of stretches involved before we should start talking about Wilson as a Ripper strike.
She may have been a prostitute, yes – but that only goes to show that she had placed herself in a danger zone, inhabited and visited by heaps of potential dangermen and killers.
She was stabbed in the throat, yes – but my contention is that the Rippers only interest in the throat area was of a practical character, and a priority only because the vocal chords and carotid arteries are situated there. If they had been placed in the underarm, my guess is that he had cut that first.
She lived in Maidman road, and thus in Fleming´s home arena. But that was a trait she shared with thousands and thousands of other women.

Still, as I have admitted, you put forward a case that is not unreasonable. But the problem is that if we are to accept that the Ripper may not have had any Ripperish urges at the time of the attack, then how are we to know what to look for? There is no knowing, is there? We can not even be sure that Jack would have been occupied in any criminal activities at all, just as we can not tell whether he would have chosen violent activities if he did decide on a life of crime.

And if the urge was not there, he would not have to arm himself with a knife, would he? A club would have been just as likely a choice for a man who had no urges to eviscerate at all.
You see, to connect Wilson to the Ripper, we simply must accept that the underlying urge WAS there, and that THIS would have led him to choose a knife, and that his stab to the neck would evince an interest to cut throats, etcetera, etcetera. Just carrying a knife is not enough, since assailants with knives came thirteen per dozen in the area – we need a suspicion of an underlying urge to cut women up. And the only way to get to that station is to travel by guesswork.

Now, Millwood – that is another thing altogether: stabs to the lower abdomen and the legs. She is infinitely more credible as an early Ripper victim than Wilson. Not that I count her as Jack´s, since I don´t think there is enough to it in this case either. But she is way, way ahead of Wilson when it comes to viability to my mind!

The best, Ben!
Fisherman

[Ben]

Hi Fisherman,

Your suggestion that the killer could have been a previous client or someone who she may have entertained seems reasonable to me, though of course such a person could easily have been the later "Ripper". I'm less convinced that it was someone she knew intimately by name, such as a pimp. Such was the severity of the attack - clearly demonstrating an intent to kill - that I can't envisage Ada failing to report him to the authorities, especially if there was every chance he could return to finish the job.

She was stabbed in the throat, yes – but my contention is that the Rippers only interest in the throat area was of a practical character, and a priority only because the vocal chords and carotid arteries are situated there

Again, that seems very reasonable, although it's worth bearing in mind that we don't know how much additional "knife-work" was intended by her attacker, who was undoubtedly interrupted by the screams of Wilson and possibly the hurrying footsteps of Rose Bierman from upstairs.

She lived in Maidman road, and thus in Fleming´s home arena. But that was a trait she shared with thousands and thousands of other women.

Not just his home area. It was also a stone's throw away from the location of his earlier crime, committed when he was 14 years old, where he was observed loitering outside the crime scene prior to his attempted break in. He would have been 29 years old and 5'7 at the time of the Wilson attack, which tallies well with the description of her attacker...which in turn tallies well with the more reliable eyewitness descriptions to have emerged from the Whitechapel investigation. I'm not suggesting that eyewitness congruity is persuasive in isolation, but the case becomes much more so when taken in conjuction with the other details pertaining to Fleming.

We don't know for certain that the killer had any criminal experience prior to the "Ripper" spree but I'd be incredibly surprised. Very rarely do serial offenders begin their criminal career with mutilation and evisceration, and it's even more rare to encounter a serial killer with a ready-polished MO with they act out to perfection first time.

You see, to connect Wilson to the Ripper, we simply must accept that the underlying urge WAS there, and that THIS would have led him to choose a knife

And I accept that 100%.

In fact, I don't see it as remotely possible that a man who by August 1888 was committing 'orrible murder and mutilations on women in the streets could not have had knife-related fantasies just five months earlier. Most serial killers' fantasies build up over far longer periods of time, and is rarely something they decide to do on the spur of a moment - never having given any previous thought to murder.

Now, Millwood – way ahead of Wilson when it comes to viability to my mind!

No, I wouldn't agree with that either. I'd say they were about equal. Millwood certainly has the location in her favour, but she didn't suffer any attacks to the throat and we don't know how physically compatible her attacker was with other descriptions, as we know Wilson's was.

Best regards,
Ben

[Fisherman]

I´ll take my pick here, Ben, and answer two points:

"it's even more rare to encounter a serial killer with a ready-polished MO with they act out to perfection first time"

It is. But I don´t think that the Ripper´s first victim was Nichols, and even if she HAD been, I think that the MO was not totally in place in Buck´s Row - no organ-procuring took place.
I say Tabram is the first, and I also say that the cut to the abdomen may well have been the very first blade-inflicted damage he did to anyone. The second would have been the thrust through the sternum and heart, led on by the fact that Tabram proved alive - something that he had not suspected.

Such a scenario - of which we have no proof whatsoever - is one that tallies with what we know of the Ripper: He was extremely keen on owning inner organs from a woman. When he was forced to stab her through the heart and flee the scene, he provided us with exactly what you are looking for - a botched Ripper job, that in itself suggested to him that it would mean a major improvement if he cut the neck of next woman, thus ensuring that she would not vocalwise be able attact the attention of potentially threatening persons.

"I wouldn't agree with that either. I'd say they were about equal."

It all comes down to what you deem important in the traits evinced, does it not?

To me, it was not important that the victims may all have been prostitutes. He was not after prostitutes, he was after that half part of humanity that carries reproductive organs withing them - women. Preferably vulnerable ones, since they make for easier prey.
It was not important that he went for the throat - no reproductive organs are hidden within it. My contention is that the cut throats were practicalities, ensuring silence and death. It was not urge-connected.

These are actually the only two circumstances that seemingly tie Wilson in with the Ripper victims, MO-wise. And as you see, they may well carry very little importance.

A third MO-connected trait is the interest in the lower abdomen. And THAT is something that we KNOW carries importance, as opposed to the two details I already mentioned. And we KNOW that this area was targetted by Millwoods attacker. Thus we also know that when it comes to the MO part, Millwood is the only victim of the two that can safely be ascribed to the category MO-related victims. And that is of monumental weight and importance, of course.

Both victims lived in the "right" area, one of them having the advantage of being situated close to the area where one Joseph Fleming was active as a burglar sixteen years earlier, whereas the other has the advantage of an adress that ties in very well with the actual Ripper deeds, and I see no immediate reason to choose the one advantge over the other. And the fact that Wilsons man answered to a description that seems superficially comparable to that given of a man who may have been the Ripper, whereas Millwoods assailant is only described as a man with a clasp knife tells precious little - Millwoods man may have been two and a half metres high, bald and outweighing a hippo for all we know - but he may just as well have been the twin of Wilsons man.

Adding it up, the one and only really crucial pointer lies in the MO. And in that respect, Millwood had already crossed the goal line before Wilson heard the starting shot, as far as I´m concerned.

It´s not that I deem the rest uniteresting - it is not. It offers possible likenesses and compatibilities. Going for the abdomen, though, makes for a sure and definite link to the Ripper.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Ben]

Hi Fisherman,

I consider it very likely that Martha Tabram was the first actual murder, but I'd be very surprised if she was the first ever attack with a knife. Serial killers will usually start on a much smaller scale, and make various mistakes with their first attacks. The case of Ada Wilson (and Annie Millwood, for that matter) strikes me as an almost perfect example of a serial killer's MO in its unschooled, unpolished infancy.

They also follow an exploratory pattern. He had failed to murder Millwood and Wilson (and complete any post-mortem mutilations he may have intended) because he couldn't prevent them from screaming, obliging him to rectify that problem next time around, perhaps by resorting to strangulation or suffocation. He learned the hard way, and improved as he gained experience, and with experience came the confidence to explore.

The desire to procure organs may not have been a major component of his fantasy from the outset, but rather something that he "tried out" once he had improved upon his methods, and which he decided he liked enough to keep doing afterwards. The same may well have been true of the facial mutilations. He experimented on the corspe of Eddowes, and evidently decided to retain that aspect of the signature next time around.

It was not important that he went for the throat - no reproductive organs are hidden within it.

It's very important if the "ripper" did so on later victims. Whether the throat cut was a component of MO or signature, it was clearly something the killer of the others did, and must be considered "important" for that reason, doubly so if there is ample reason to suppose that the killer did so under the guise of client with a prostitute, as was likely to have occured in the Wilson case. If it was carried out in the vicinity of the other murder by an attacker whose broad physical particulars are in allignment with those of other suspect descriptions, all the better still.

I think we need to exercise caution when assessing what may or may not be "important". An interest in the abdominal region isn't needed to demonstrate that the Wilson attack is prime candidate for an early attempt by an inexperienced ripper. The Millwood attack is also a probable early ripper attack, but since you've been highlighting the importance of "MO", then the absence of a throat would is surely just as significant? As I mentioned before, we don't what what further evisceral steps Wilson's attacker would have taken were he not interrupted.

Best regards,
Ben

[perrymason]

Hi Fisherman,

I consider it very likely that Martha Tabram was the first actual murder, but I'd be very surprised if she was the first ever attack with a knife. Serial killers will usually start on a much smaller scale, and make various mistakes with their first attacks. The case of Ada Wilson (and Annie Millwood, for that matter) strikes me as an almost perfect example of a serial killer's MO in its unschooled, unpolished infancy.

They also follow an exploratory pattern. He had failed to murder Millwood and Wilson (and complete any post-mortem mutilations he may have intended) because he couldn't prevent them from screaming, obliging him to rectify that problem next time around, perhaps by resorting to strangulation or suffocation. He learned the hard way, and improved as he gained experience, and with experience came the confidence to explore.

The desire to procure organs may not have been a major component of his fantasy from the outset, but rather something that he "tried out" once he had improved upon his methods, and which he decided he liked enough to keep doing afterwards. The same may well have been true of the facial mutilations. He experimented on the corspe of Eddowes, and evidently decided to retain that aspect of the signature next time around.

It's very important if the "ripper" did so on later victims. Whether the throat cut was a component of MO or signature, it was clearly something the killer of the others did, and must be considered "important" for that reason, doubly so if there is ample reason to suppose that the killer did so under the guise of client with a prostitute, as was likely to have occured in the Wilson case. If it was carried out in the vicinity of the other murder by an attacker whose broad physical particulars are in allignment with those of other suspect descriptions, all the better still.

I think we need to exercise caution when assessing what may or may not be "important". An interest in the abdominal region isn't needed to demonstrate that the Wilson attack is prime candidate for an early attempt by an inexperienced ripper. The Millwood attack is also a probable early ripper attack, but since you've been highlighting the importance of "MO", then the absence of a throat would is surely just as significant? As I mentioned before, we don't what what further evisceral steps Wilson's attacker would have taken were he not interrupted.

Best regards,
Ben

Hi Ben, hope the day is going well.

On the above, I think it is safe to ascribe certain traits to a killer when faced with similar, multiple victims, and I dont know that all change their MO per se, but some change the weapon..or the victim profile, or the location perhaps.

Heres what I mean...Zodiak killed a bunch of different ways and had differing victim profiles, but it appears his approach was always some form of deceipt....he acted like a cop, or acted like a passer by, ....I think elements like that do not neccesarily change, and in the case of The Whitechapel Murderer, I think it is safe to suggest that the manner in which he acquires his victims, likely posing as a "john", and the fact that he doesnt use a knife until they are subdued are essential parts of his pattern. And missing from some Canonicals murders.

When you mentioned that its hard to know whether he might have intended to cut abdomens, because he may have been interrupted, I spilled coffee. That is too often suggested here in order to preserve "possibilities", and implies that the killer known as Jack would have taken victims without being semi-sure that he could finish.

The case of Liz Stride is a perfect example. Over three weeks had gone by since his last kill, maybe he went looking some nights and decided against it. Maybe he waited until the urge was too great. But by the time of The Double Event, it is assumed he has not killed since Ms Chapman. To include Liz Stride assumes that the man who needed to kill and had waited, or been denied, for over three weeks suddenly jumps at a woman just inside a yard with open gates, and is then interrupted by a horse and cart. Ill give him more credit than that...particularly when the later killing is precisely what would be expected for his next kill.

We dont know that anything other than what actually happened, would have happened.

Best regards Ben.

[Ben]

Hi Mike,

Day's going fine so far, thanks! I hope all's well your end.

When you mentioned that its hard to know whether he might have intended to cut abdomens, because he may have been interrupted, I spilled coffee. That is too often suggested here in order to preserve "possibilities"

You say that as though the preservation of possibilities is a bad thing. The comparison between Wilson and Stride isn't quite a fair one. In Stride's case, it is only speculated that the killer may have been interrupted, whereas in Wilson's case, we know for certain that he was; by the victim crying out in pain and fear, and by an alarmed neighbour hurrying down the stairs. There's no ambiguity here as far as her being "interrupted" is concerned, and it naturally allows for the realistic possibility that he may have intended more "knife-work". I think you may be wasting nice coffee for no good reason.

The Whitechapel Murderer, I think it is safe to suggest that the manner in which he acquires his victims, likely posing as a "john"

Quite possibly, although there are indications that the Wilson's attacker did precisely that. It isn't quite true to say that the Zodiac always used some form of false guise or deceit. Darlene Ferrin and Mike Mageau were simply approached by a stranger with a gun and torch and shot several times - no false pretense there. So on that basis, it is by no means established that a serial killer must always be consistent in the manner in which he approaches his victims.

and the fact that he doesnt use a knife until they are subdued are essential parts of his pattern.

But again, patterns are developed through discovery and pratice on the job. It is only through finding out what works and what doesn't that a "pattern" can be allowed to develop, and the Wilson attack strikes me as an excellent example of that discovery phase characteristic of other serials.

Best regards,
Ben

[jmenges]

Heres what I mean...Zodiak killed a bunch of different ways and had differing victim profiles, but it appears his approach was always some form of deceipt....he acted like a cop, or acted like a passer by, ....I think elements like that do not neccesarily change

Hi Mike, all,

Quickly I'd like to chime in to somewhat disagree with the above example. Zodiac never really acted like someone other than who he was. He was perceived, wrongly, to be a cop by his victim in one case just because of the way he pulled his car up behind the victim's car. But this technique was a part of his overall strategy of blitz-attack. He drove up, parked near his victim's vehicle, got out and started shooting. His use of a flashlight was I believe intended to temporarily blind his victims as opposed to consciously being part of a policeman's uniform. He used a gun in 3 cases and a knife in 1, but all of the weapon attacks came on suddenly.

In 2 cases, he did possibly mislead his victims by not sharing his true intentions. One, that he was only going to tie them up and rob them (he never said he wouldn't kill them), and another, that he was simply a passenger in a taxi (which could, I guess, be labeled as acting like a passer by). But in all cases, the actual attempt to murder his victims sprang suddenly out of nowhere and with no deceit, that we know of, purposefully acted out by the offender.

Quiet day, just thought I'd inturrupt with this off-topic observation.

And mine and Ben's posts crossed...

Carry on,

JM

[Ben]

Agreed all round there, Jonathan.

The Zodiac case serves as a welcome cautionary note against fine-tuning a serial killer's MO too much when addressing unsolved cases. As you mentioned, it wasn't as if Z was putting his acting abilities to the test.

Best regards,
Ben

[jmenges]

Right,

Ted Bundy may have been a better example for Mike to use in that he regularly posed as a man in need of assistance. But it still goes to show that not all serial killers exhibit the same "certain traits".

JM

[perrymason]

Hi gents,

Fair enough on the comparison of Stride and Wilson cases Ben, but my mentioning of Zodiaks deceipt as an integral part of his MO I would stick with, because in the case of the young couple, he approached them as if he had the right to do so, thats why they didnt get up and run....he gave off the air of authority, or safety. And he used that. They probably saw him as a plain clothed cop.

You mentioned that the evolution of a pattern through "trial and error" if you will means that we cant be sure that when an MO is missing it indicates a new, different killer....some parts of that Id agree with, but in the case of this particular killer,....the guy who was called Jack, there is nothing that he needed to do to improve his success rate outdoors unless you include a victim that has only an element or two of what he has pre-established was his objective...including post mortem mutilation. Refining a technique to someone who is successful already just means increased activity or enhanced productivity each successive kill, and that is evident with Kates murder,... when... Annies is the one that precedes it.

Catherine Eddowes is a completely expected 3rd victim profile, all the signatures that worked were still there, plus some new tricks.

Hi JM,... the case where he uses the flashlight to, as you suggest, blind the victims temporaily makes sense if he only used it when at the car and pointing the flashlight in their eyes, ..but from what I understand, since the boy did survive, was that he was waving the flashlight at their car when he gets out of his behind them,...and thats using an impression of a safe authority figure to drop their guard...otherwise they would run. Anyone would believe it was a cop...even without the red light.

Maybe you dont agree, but I dont see that successful killers need to change anything neccesarily...other than maybe a victim profile, or as I said, increasing the activity period, or at each murder scene....due to increased efficiency via practice.

My point on suggesting interruptions for any of these kills is that its pure speculation, because not one killer was caught in any act,.... nor is there any evidence that was the case.... in Ada Wilsons story, he knocked on the door, forced his way in, tried to rob her, she declined, he stabbed her in the throat and left. Theres nothing in that alone to suggest interruption of anything, let alone mutilations....and the approach is completely inconsistent with the approach that Jack showed when killing Polly, Annie and Kate....maybe Liz might be similar, if BSM tried to rob her....but that doesnt make him Jack by a long shot.

Theres not enough to suggest that Liz was actually killed by Jack, let alone that an assault and attempted robbery in someones house was how he started.

Jack is not that difficult to see, hes the one the picks women up he doesnt know outdoors, leads or follows to someplace discreet, overwhelms them...and then, when they are on the ground, uses a knife to cut the throat, and mutilate the abdomens. Alice MacKenzie is a better bet than Ada, although the neck was stabbed also not sliced, and the mutilations superficial, but they were abdominal...but Pollys...and Annies, ....and Kate's were a logical, repetitive pattern and escalation "series".

Why would he even risk interruptions, and why would we assume he might, when he is undefeated? Even with Kate he had enough time to get done and gone. Liz's killer may have had 10 minutes or more with her...for a single wound.

All the best JM, Ben.

[jmenges]

Hi Mike,

Without turning this into a Zodiac discussion, I would just comment that it was the victims who perceived that he initially, was most likely a cop, given that the only person who could be expected to pull up behind you while you are sitting in your car with your mate is a patrol officer. Identifying him at first as a cop was their mistake. I don't believe there is any evidence that the killer intended to portray himself as such.

JM

[perrymason]

Hi JM,

Point (s) taken, ...but so Im clear, what I meant was that he used their impressions against them, because he could predict the reaction of two lovers having a car pull up behind them and approach them waving a flashlight...that they were caught by a cop making out.

But enough Mr Z, as you rightfully suggest, and back to Mr JTR.

Cheers JM