Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

McKenzie - Ripper or not?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by curious View Post
    Hello, Jerry,
    Thanks for replying.

    Would you please tell me where you found that information?

    Thanks, again,

    curious
    This particular info. came from a MEPO File that Jon Simons posted in Ripperologist 138. (MEPO 3/140, ff 263-71)

    There are several papers that covered the inquest and most of this you will find in those. I believe you quoted from the Times which is the version used here on Casebook.

    Comment


    • #62
      On the balance of probabilities, I think that McKenzie was the work of the Whitechapel killer. The only "Ripper-like" murders approaching copycats (Ellen Bury & Jane Beadmore) were both domestics. McKenzie's murder was seemingly 'motiveless'. A random prostitute left in the gutter with her left carotid artery severed and mutilations inflicted on her abdominal region. A killer who was able to dispatch his victim within police beats before escaping unnoticed. If it was a copycat, we either have someone who inflicted the mutilations for kicks OR they did it to mislead the authorities. Neither of these are credible imo.

      Firstly, it's possible the Ripper inspired a copycat with the same pathology, but the fact he waited some eight months later, when the Ripper scare had died down is suspect. Murders of this nature were unprecedented before 1888. It is highly unlikely that another Ripper was on the scene. Secondly, if he was trying to blame the Ripper, I would argue there was no need, as none of the other non-canonical murderers were ever caught. Without witnesses, forensics or confessions, it was almost impossible to catch anyone under these circumstances. If anything, the mutilations were an unnecessary risk, as if caught they might have thrown the whole series at the copycat.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Harry D View Post
        On the balance of probabilities, I think that McKenzie was the work of the Whitechapel killer. The only "Ripper-like" murders approaching copycats (Ellen Bury & Jane Beadmore) were both domestics. McKenzie's murder was seemingly 'motiveless'. A random prostitute left in the gutter with her left carotid artery severed and mutilations inflicted on her abdominal region. A killer who was able to dispatch his victim within police beats before escaping unnoticed. If it was a copycat, we either have someone who inflicted the mutilations for kicks OR they did it to mislead the authorities. Neither of these are credible imo.

        Firstly, it's possible the Ripper inspired a copycat with the same pathology, but the fact he waited some eight months later, when the Ripper scare had died down is suspect. Murders of this nature were unprecedented before 1888. It is highly unlikely that another Ripper was on the scene. Secondly, if he was trying to blame the Ripper, I would argue there was no need, as none of the other non-canonical murderers were ever caught. Without witnesses, forensics or confessions, it was almost impossible to catch anyone under these circumstances. If anything, the mutilations were an unnecessary risk, as if caught they might have thrown the whole series at the copycat.
        Bingo harry
        and to add what pushes it over the edge with me she was found with her skirt hiked up like most of the rest exposing her abdomen and the object of the rippers desire!

        and you bring up a great point re copycats. In the annals of crime I have only heard of one killer trying to copycat another to throw off police. And even that was someone who was trying to blame a known killer, Manson, and as you say no one knew who the ripper was, so what’s the point? All mckenzies killer would be doing would be putting himself in the picture for the other murders, of which he was innocent, and taking more time and risk to inflict the abdominal mutilations.
        "Is all that we see or seem
        but a dream within a dream?"

        -Edgar Allan Poe


        "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
        quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

        -Frederick G. Abberline

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Harry D View Post
          On the balance of probabilities, I think that McKenzie was the work of the Whitechapel killer. The only "Ripper-like" murders approaching copycats (Ellen Bury & Jane Beadmore) were both domestics. McKenzie's murder was seemingly 'motiveless'. A random prostitute left in the gutter with her left carotid artery severed and mutilations inflicted on her abdominal region. A killer who was able to dispatch his victim within police beats before escaping unnoticed. If it was a copycat, we either have someone who inflicted the mutilations for kicks OR they did it to mislead the authorities. Neither of these are credible imo.

          Firstly, it's possible the Ripper inspired a copycat with the same pathology, but the fact he waited some eight months later, when the Ripper scare had died down is suspect. Murders of this nature were unprecedented before 1888. It is highly unlikely that another Ripper was on the scene. Secondly, if he was trying to blame the Ripper, I would argue there was no need, as none of the other non-canonical murderers were ever caught. Without witnesses, forensics or confessions, it was almost impossible to catch anyone under these circumstances. If anything, the mutilations were an unnecessary risk, as if caught they might have thrown the whole series at the copycat.
          On paragraph A above, I would agree with much of what you said. The only part I take disagreement is this...the possibility that her murder may have been presented in a manner which mislead one to presume a lack of motive, as you suggests, and I agree with, as at least the first 2 Canonicals circumstances seem. On paragraph B, I agree that it would be a reach to presume Alices murder was represented in a way that suggested Jack from the Fall of 88, but Im loathe to rule out the possibility that it was intended to look anything but mundane. If madness seems to be the primary driver for Jack and some other of these murders, then its good cover for any other actual motive that may lie underneath. Surely if you can kill someone with a knife making a few more cuts wouldn't present any courage issues, although in Marys case, the amount of and the cuts themselves that were made do suggest a form of madness for sure. Can extreme rage, temporary or fleeting, be considered a form of temporary madness? I ask because in no other Canonical murder do I see any real emotion, other than perhaps spite in the form of Kate chevrons and nose.

          I think it also fair to say that the evidence suggests that there was no forced, or sneak entrance by the killer that night. Mary was on her side, perhaps in a fetal like position, facing the partition wall, oriented to the right hand side of the bed, when the initial attack commences. Someone was in the room while she lay on her side facing away, and she was aware of that for at least some period of time. If he arrived at 3:45ish, then she might have been sleeping off a heavy booze night and just opened the door when she heard the knock, made an exclamation, and left the door to be closed by the arrival and slip back in bed...sliding to the right hand side in anticipation of a body coming in behind her. I wonder if it was Blotchy's job to see that she was going to bed exhausted and drunk. And I wonder if we missed the chance to find that out when Blotchy is seen a few days later and the constable refuses to chase him down, because they "were looking for someone quite different", namely A Man. This is where I believe the tampering with the investigation shows itself.
          Michael Richards

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
            On paragraph A above, I would agree with much of what you said. The only part I take disagreement is this...the possibility that her murder may have been presented in a manner which mislead one to presume a lack of motive, as you suggests, and I agree with, as at least the first 2 Canonicals circumstances seem. On paragraph B, I agree that it would be a reach to presume Alices murder was represented in a way that suggested Jack from the Fall of 88, but Im loathe to rule out the possibility that it was intended to look anything but mundane.
            My point, Michael, is that there's no reason for a copycat to deflect this murder onto the ripper, regardless of whether the killer was known to her or not.

            Case in point: if Frances Coles had been mutilated, would this have prevented the police investigating Thomas Sadler? Of course not. In fact, the police explored the idea of Sadler being the Ripper and subjected him to an identification.

            Comment


            • #66
              What if this murder so strongly resembles some earlier murders because some of the earlier ones were also by the same person, and not the one dubbed JtR? What if this trademark knife usage was actually more common than we give credit for. Im of the opinion that some of the Canonical murders may not belong in that group, and that means that other people could commit the level of atrocity seen in some events. Ongoing parallel events like the multiple creation of Torsos does suggest that.

              I believe that the only murders that can be viewed as almost certainly by the same, one lone man, are those of Polly and Annie. Sequential. Almost identical Victimology and MO, one more savaged than the other due to learned behaviors. But no mistaking that these 2 are twin murders in many ways. Interestingly they are also the ONLY 2 where we have witness testimony that indicates these women were actively soliciting when they met their killer, be he known or unknown to them previously. For the rest its just speculation. Here we have the victims themselves on record.
              Michael Richards

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post
                What if this murder so strongly resembles some earlier murders because some of the earlier ones were also by the same person, and not the one dubbed JtR? What if this trademark knife usage was actually more common than we give credit for. Im of the opinion that some of the Canonical murders may not belong in that group, and that means that other people could commit the level of atrocity seen in some events. Ongoing parallel events like the multiple creation of Torsos does suggest that.

                I believe that the only murders that can be viewed as almost certainly by the same, one lone man, are those of Polly and Annie. Sequential. Almost identical Victimology and MO, one more savaged than the other due to learned behaviors. But no mistaking that these 2 are twin murders in many ways. Interestingly they are also the ONLY 2 where we have witness testimony that indicates these women were actively soliciting when they met their killer, be he known or unknown to them previously. For the rest its just speculation. Here we have the victims themselves on record.
                well if your going down the minutia rabbit hole then actually chapman and eddowes have more in common that Nichols and chapman because Nichols had no organs removed. and eddowes shows escalation also, because now the face was targeted.

                but its all a moot point anyway isn't it, because the C5 at the very least were all killed by the same hand.
                "Is all that we see or seem
                but a dream within a dream?"

                -Edgar Allan Poe


                "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                -Frederick G. Abberline

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                  well if your going down the minutia rabbit hole then actually chapman and eddowes have more in common that Nichols and chapman because Nichols had no organs removed. and eddowes shows escalation also, because now the face was targeted.

                  but its all a moot point anyway isn't it, because the C5 at the very least were all killed by the same hand.
                  There are many circumstantial differences from Chapman to Eddowes, the very least being how much skill the killer(s) demonstrated. As to "moot point", if you are willing to accept pure opinion as the factual barometer, then that's up to you. For me peoples guesses don't constitute facts, no matter what if any consensus exists.

                  Nichols to Chapman is a clean match, they are virtually identical in all relevant aspects. On the Triple Event night, many established parameters were discarded, and the lack of the same skill shown with Chapman is reflected in the way they looked for suspects. After Chapman, in September, they sought people who had specific knowledge, medical grade knowledge. They didn't after the Triple Event.
                  Michael Richards

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                    Nichols to Chapman is a clean match, they are virtually identical in all relevant aspects.
                    That's hard to square with the fact that, unlike Chapman, Nichols was killed in an open street, sustained multiple cuts all over her abdomen, and wasn't eviscerated.

                    (Not that I doubt that the same person was responsible.)
                    Kind regards, Sam Flynn

                    "Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by jerryd View Post

                      Look at the cuts on her abdomen compared to Polly Nichols. They are almost identical except the number of them. Same two directions. Horizontal and vertical! Imagine that.

                      Great observation Jerry, McKenzey is one of the Whitechapel murders, she met the same hand that attacked Nichols.

                      Though some will still deny the obvious because that doesn't go well with their preferable suspect.

                      Didn't MacNaghten himself leave the investigations and give up to his fantasies?!

                      MacNaghten is the reason why this case hasn't been solved to date.



                      The Baron

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by The Baron View Post


                        Great observation Jerry, McKenzey is one of the Whitechapel murders, she met the same hand that attacked Nichols.

                        Though some will still deny the obvious because that doesn't go well with their preferable suspect.

                        Didn't MacNaghten himself leave the investigations and give up to his fantasies?!

                        MacNaghten is the reason why this case hasn't been solved to date.



                        The Baron
                        Just thought that you’d drop in again just to have a pointless dig?

                        You are still addicted to baseless overconfidence I see. You cannot know that Mackenzie was a ripper victim. It is impossible to know that of course. You can suspect; you can favour; you cannot know.

                        Macnaghten has absolutely nothing to do with why the case hasn’t been solved of course but there’s no point in mentioning that fact to you as you have a blinkered and biased obsession against anything to do with Macnaghten or Druitt.

                        Fishy on one thread and you on here. Logic, reason, fairness and unbiased reflection fly out of the door again.

                        Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 07-22-2019, 08:32 PM.
                        Regards

                        Herlock






                        "Crime is common. Logic is rare. Therefore it is upon the logic rather than upon the crime that you should dwell.”

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                          There are many circumstantial differences from Chapman to Eddowes, the very least being how much skill the killer(s) demonstrated. As to "moot point", if you are willing to accept pure opinion as the factual barometer, then that's up to you. For me peoples guesses don't constitute facts, no matter what if any consensus exists.

                          Nichols to Chapman is a clean match, they are virtually identical in all relevant aspects. On the Triple Event night, many established parameters were discarded, and the lack of the same skill shown with Chapman is reflected in the way they looked for suspects. After Chapman, in September, they sought people who had specific knowledge, medical grade knowledge. They didn't after the Triple Event.
                          no not guesses-analysis based on evidence and facts.

                          and what the heck is the "triple event"?!? lol
                          "Is all that we see or seem
                          but a dream within a dream?"

                          -Edgar Allan Poe


                          "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                          quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                          -Frederick G. Abberline

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                            no not guesses-analysis based on evidence and facts.

                            and what the heck is the "triple event"?!? lol
                            The Triple Event is the night where 3 women get their throats slit, Liz, Kate and Mrs Brown. Since I know the "facts" regarding these cases, and the many conclusions people make based on the meager amount of said "facts", your assertion is essentially just your own interpretation. There is no definitive piece of evidence that connects any of these murders to one killer, there are only the "facts" as you say..and they do not allow for final conclusions. My interpretation of the facts is that Polly and Annie were acquired in the same way, killed in the same manner, and left to be found shortly thereafter. The mutilations that happened to Annie not Polly were almost certainly a result of a venue choice, one much more agreeable to spending time over the body after the throat cuts. That's the evolving killer as so many wish to see in these cases, however, evolution from frenzied stabber to someone the authorities though knew how to access and remove internal organs seems a stretch to me...so does someone losing said abilities and focus a few weeks later.
                            Michael Richards

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                              The Triple Event is the night where 3 women get their throats slit, Liz, Kate and Mrs Brown. Since I know the "facts" regarding these cases, and the many conclusions people make based on the meager amount of said "facts", your assertion is essentially just your own interpretation. There is no definitive piece of evidence that connects any of these murders to one killer, there are only the "facts" as you say..and they do not allow for final conclusions. My interpretation of the facts is that Polly and Annie were acquired in the same way, killed in the same manner, and left to be found shortly thereafter. The mutilations that happened to Annie not Polly were almost certainly a result of a venue choice, one much more agreeable to spending time over the body after the throat cuts. That's the evolving killer as so many wish to see in these cases, however, evolution from frenzied stabber to someone the authorities though knew how to access and remove internal organs seems a stretch to me...so does someone losing said abilities and focus a few weeks later.
                              there is no triple event. brown is a common domestic murder solved and her husband the killer. thats so very different than the double event where two prostitutes are murdered by cut throat in the streets mere minutes from each other and unsolved and both victims seen with a man wearing a peaked cap. this is the evidence that ties these two victims together.

                              and no one lost any abilities between chapman and eddowes. the drs were all divided throughout the series as to medical skill which is to be expected in such a unique and rare case at the time of a post mortem type serial killer and many medicos giving their opinions for different reasons. its really just you cherry picking what you want to fit your convoluted conspiracy theory and what your doing is worse than "guessing". your piling guesses upon guesses upon speculation. and add to that your vivid imagination and your idea borders on fantasy- the victims were killed conspiratorially because they knew too much and were snitches. its laughable and there is not one shred of evidence to support it.

                              and to think that the killers with a political agenda, be it against the police and or government would target dirt poor street walkers, members of another oppressed group, and not objects of their dislike is laughable. as in all cases of mission oriented killers/groups they would target officials, the rich, the government buildings the police officers the,selves etc, not unfortunate victims of society like themselves. cmon man, get real.
                              Last edited by Abby Normal; 07-23-2019, 12:13 PM.
                              "Is all that we see or seem
                              but a dream within a dream?"

                              -Edgar Allan Poe


                              "...the man and the peaked cap he is said to have worn
                              quite tallies with the descriptions I got of him."

                              -Frederick G. Abberline

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

                                there is no triple event. brown is a common domestic murder solved and her husband the killer. thats so very different than the double event where two prostitutes are murdered by cut throat in the streets mere minutes from each other and unsolved and both victims seen with a man wearing a peaked cap. this is the evidence that ties these two victims together.

                                and no one lost any abilities between chapman and eddowes. the drs were all divided throughout the series as to medical skill which is to be expected in such a unique and rare case at the time of a post mortem type serial killer and many medicos giving their opinions for different reasons. its really just you cherry picking what you want to fit your convoluted conspiracy theory and what your doing is worse than "guessing". your piling guesses upon guesses upon speculation. and add to that your vivid imagination and your idea borders on fantasy- the victims were killed conspiratorially because they knew too much and were snitches. its laughable and there is not one shred of evidence to support it.

                                and to think that the killers with a political agenda, be it against the police and or government would target dirt poor street walkers, members of another oppressed group, and not objects of their dislike is laughable. as in all cases of mission oriented killers/groups they would target officials, the rich, the government buildings the police officers the,selves etc, not unfortunate victims of society like themselves. cmon man, get real.
                                Bingo bongo.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X