McKenzie - Ripper or not?

[Abby Normal]

[/COLOR]

Both Tabram and Nichols had a similar stab.

bingo
which shows the ripper was progressing from stabber to ripper:
millwood-stabbed (a little-survived)
tabram-stabbed (a lot-killed)
Nichols-stabbed and ripped (killed)

serial killer escalation/progression 101

[Michael W Richards]

bingo
which shows the ripper was progressing from stabber to ripper:
millwood-stabbed (a little-survived)
tabram-stabbed (a lot-killed)
Nichols-stabbed and ripped (killed)

serial killer escalation/progression 101

After that he becomes a poisoner I suppose...then what, a politician?

[Abby Normal]

After that he becomes a poisoner I suppose...then what, a politician?

lol! good one

[John Wheat]

I still think the gap between the C5 and McKenzie rules McKenzie out as a Ripper victim.

[Michael W Richards]

I doubt that anyone would argue that Liz Strides murder more accurately represents what we consider a "Ripper" murder than Alice's does. The "ripper" is more than just a murderer, he has a style, a way of operating, that makes him seem like some whisp of smoke or fog. One that leaves ghastly scenes on the streets behind him. He might be that brooding guy in the pub with bloodstains on him, he might be that decked out toff trawling the streets, he might be that slaughterhouse guy on a break, or on his way home...no one was exempt from suspicion because no-one had any clues as to who this man was. Alices murder fits within that criteria. The reason she is excluded is usually either based on the time lapse in activity, a belief in the "institutionalized" stories, a belief he dies, or that he leaves the area.

What cant be denied is that if someone who is not Jack the Ripper can also kill in a manner which strongly resembles Jack the Ripper, then can the Jack the Ripper model be trusted?

[Abby Normal]

I doubt that anyone would argue that Liz Strides murder more accurately represents what we consider a "Ripper" murder than Alice's does. The "ripper" is more than just a murderer, he has a style, a way of operating, that makes him seem like some whisp of smoke or fog. One that leaves ghastly scenes on the streets behind him. He might be that brooding guy in the pub with bloodstains on him, he might be that decked out toff trawling the streets, he might be that slaughterhouse guy on a break, or on his way home...no one was exempt from suspicion because no-one had any clues as to who this man was. Alices murder fits within that criteria. The reason she is excluded is usually either based on the time lapse in activity, a belief in the "institutionalized" stories, a belief he dies, or that he leaves the area.

What cant be denied is that if someone who is not Jack the Ripper can also kill in a manner which strongly resembles Jack the Ripper, then can the Jack the Ripper model be trusted?

nah. the reason shes usually not included is because mcnauten didnt include her as a victim in his memorandom. which isnt surprising, since she was killed on his watch and part of his whole excuse for not catching the ripper was because he didnt join the force until after the murders ended.

[The Baron]

nah. the reason shes usually not included is because mcnauten didnt include her as a victim in his memorandom. which isnt surprising, since she was killed on his watch and part of his whole excuse for not catching the ripper was because he didnt join the force until after the murders ended.

Bingo!

Better he didn't join the force at all.



The Baron

[Herlock Sholmes]

Bingo!

Better he didn't join the force at all.



The Baron

More evidence of troll-like behaviour. Absolutely no attempt at joining in the debate but simply piping up with a stupid comment every time Macnaghten is mentioned.

Get a life Baron

[MK114]

I'm inclined to say Alice was not a Ripper victim.

The fact her live in husband, McCormick ( unsure of exact spelling) gave her money to pay the rent which he finds out she didn't. Then the land lady sees him after 4pm and at 11 pm , to which he gave a statement to police he had not seen Alice since 4PM.

Along with other things like the lack of deep wounds, or mutilation to the victim.

A Domestic violence murder it appears to me. Although I admit I have not seen anywhere how police cleared McCormick of the murder.


Respectfully
MK114

[MK114]

The land lady sees Alice and McCormick arguing at 830 pm.

Respectfully
MK114

[Joshua Rogan]

A Domestic violence murder it appears to me. Although I admit I have not seen anywhere how police cleared McCormick of the murder

Perhaps the police were able to verify that, as he and the deputy claimed, he had been asleep in the lodging house at the time of the murder?

The land lady sees Alice and McCormick arguing at 830 pm.

Is that from her police statement? Going by the inquest report in the Times, she said, in reply to the coroner;

"Do you know whether there had been any disagreement? - I believe there had; but I did not hear anything. "

Adding later;
"....he told me he had had a few words with the deceased, and sent her down to pay the lodging."

But doesn't specify the time, leaving some uncertainty as to whether the argument (and the handing over of money) took place when Macormack arrived home around 4pm, or when Alice was seen to leave around 8-9pm.

[MK114]

The information I posted came from the victim page on this site.

If Ryder or Macormack changes their original statements at all this would be suspect in my opinion.

However like you said if the police verified McCormack was asleep at the time of the murder then I would wonder how they verified that.

Respectfully
MK114

[Michael W Richards]

nah. the reason shes usually not included is because mcnauten didnt include her as a victim in his memorandom. which isnt surprising, since she was killed on his watch and part of his whole excuse for not catching the ripper was because he didnt join the force until after the murders ended.

Mac's nonsense aside, she wasnt included in the tally because we are told by officials that the man was institutionalized, or drowned, or left the city and/or the country, by the time she was killed. Which of course proved to be BS when they reactivated the same paranoia in 1896 based on someones knowledge of the GSG contents. And to Herlock,...trolling, sadly.. is his life. At least for the 15 years Ive seen his posts...assuming he is of course the same person who called himself Baron in the past.

[Aethelwulf]

Recent discussions (threads on John Richardson and anatomical knowledge) suggest that Dr Phillips is the go to expert because of his greater experience. He did not think McKenzie was a ripper victim. My opinion also.