Was Mackenzie a copycat?

[DVV]

If De Salvo ad not been caught, some casebookers would see a dozen of different killers behind his crimes.
And that's just an example among many.
On the one hand, I see people claiming that Schwartz has fabricated his story, for a lack of corroboration.
And on the other, they trust Smith.
But who has ever corroborated her story ?
The attack, if she's to be believed, must have been quite nosy, messy, etc.
However, no blood, no clues, no witness.
The police, btw, did not put much faith in her gang explanation, but were to give more credit to Schwartz veracity.

[Phil H]

I don't accept the bayonet or the gang unequivocally, DVV. Yet those are by far the most usual explanations of those crimes, and in that post my intent was not to get an overall message lost in unnecessarily controversial details.

There are many explanations of the Tabram killing, some sensible, some not so. Yet the idea that she was killed by soldiers, who might wield a bayonet is not too surprising - she was after all in their company earlier, wasn't she?

I don't see her as the victim of one man, I think there were at least two, one of whom finished her off.

I don't see her as a Ripper victim at all.

On Smith, a gang attack gone wrong is not implausible in my eyes. I don't think they intended to kill, but went too far. On the other hand, Smith's own story and the timings of the event don't seem to add up - sop maybe she was covering something (or somebody) up. Out of fear - I don't think she knew she was going to die?

Again, I don't see her as a Ripper victim.

So, I agree their are "complications" in regard to both murders, but sometimes, for the sake of bringing out a point, the conventional wisdom serves a purpose. It did here.

Glad you enjoyed the Shakespeare post.

phil

[DVV]

So you have the answer, do you, DVV?

Do share?

Sincerely, Phil, I'm a bit disenchanted sometimes.
When it comes (again) to Killeen's bayonet, or to the gang that attacked Smith... (for what ? - that's the question)
I was reading your post on Shakespeare last night.
I was impressed. And thankful.
But how can the same man swallow that ****bayonet and that *****gang that never was ?

Cheers

[Michael W Richards]

Hi Mike,

On the surface this looks like a perfectly reasonable view to hold, but where is the evidence that 'violent crimes like some of these' (ie unsolved, motiveless knife attacks on adult women) were also occurring quite naturally in this worst district in any of the years before or after the Whitechapel cases from 1888-91?

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

Really narrowing that scope there.......but as you asked, I wouldnt assume at this point that any of the alleged Ripper crimes were motiveless, a motive is required to mutilate a corpse just as it would be to silence a potential threat ... which would lead into my next point, that "unsolved" means just that,... it doesnt mean Phantom Menace.

Colin is your man for stats, Im sure he has the relevant numbers as per your request Caz,.... but if we look for threats as well as attacks, on both men and women, using a knife...then I would imagine those stats would be different.

Instead of being curious why 6 women were brutally murdered between the first of August and the 10th of November, your concern is to isolate these events from the regular "noise" shall we say around Whitechapel, because you believe these are "special", one killer murders. You know full well that there is in no way sufficient hard evidence to link any single Canonical murder to another Canonical murder, let alone all 5 to one person, yet I have to feel that you choose to believe it exists anyway.

In reality they are only special because of the brutality of some of them, not because they are the trail left by a lone blood thirsty ghoul.

The misleading quantifier is really the "unsolved" bit, a truer picture can be seen when all the murders are tallied...including the ones that resulted in charges being laid and trials being held.

I believe one reason these were "unsolved" and remain so is because contemporary and modern investigators, professionals and amateurs andf their guesswork have assumed connections between these cases that within any known evidence, dont exist. Guesswork made the Canonical Group, ....I dont see that anyone vigorously pursued other possible answers at that time, when all the evidence there ever would be was still together and intact...and maybe thats the reason we cant today, the evidence or what is left of it is insufficient to allow for any conclusions.

I suppose Im saying that if people had not been so ready to associate these crimes with each other under one killer, then perhaps they wouldnt all still be unsolved. Part of the reason they remain unsolved is probably because they were, and are, misunderstood.

If these were not one spree by one killer, then you have the kind of violence I suggested erupts from social and economic strife caz....almost predictable. It may be a spike year statistically, but its understandable when you consider Bloody Sunday, the strikes, the murders, the Parnell Commission, the plot to assassinate the Queen during the Jubillee, then Lord Balfour in 1888-1889....these were unusual times. 1887-1889 in particular.

So unusual stats at a mid-point shouldnt be so surprising.

Cheers Caz

[Phil H]

So you have the answer, do you, DVV?

Do share?

[DVV]

Frenzy, soldiers and bayonet.
And the famous gang with their blunt instrument.
How can such things be still believed by well-educated people ?
A thicker mystery than JtR identity, imho.

Cheers all

[Phil H]

Were they all "motiveless" attacks?

Tabram could well be some sort of revenge attack (soldiers or someone who felt cheated) - its frenzy might suggest something personal. Smith seems likely to be some gang violence gone wrong.

Stride could could be a "domestic" as could Kelly (albeit in the latter case dressed up to look like JtR's work). Coles similarly could be the victim of a "jilted" Sadler.

We have to remember, surely, that it was the press that linked these killings into a series and hyped them up so that they stand out as "singular" and make 1888 appear unusual. Even then the Torso killings are left to one side. In considering serial killers and numbers of killings they should not be left out of the reckoning.

At base we might be left with Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes as the sum total of the work of a single killer.

It all depends on perspective and perception, I think. All too often we tend to accept the stand point and perceptions imposed by the press in 1888. Perhaps we should try using alternative vantage points more often.

Phil

[caz]

In the worst district perhaps in the UK at the time, with the poorest people, severe overpopulation, and a large and often inebriated street population wandering in the dark, one that is comprised of faceless, forgotten people....I can see violent crimes like some of these occurring quite naturally.

Hi Mike,

On the surface this looks like a perfectly reasonable view to hold, but where is the evidence that 'violent crimes like some of these' (ie unsolved, motiveless knife attacks on adult women) were also occurring quite naturally in this worst district in any of the years before or after the Whitechapel cases from 1888-91?

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

not found guilty

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"Apart from one of them, they weren't found guilty of a murder in Whitechapel, is usually pretty good."

There is a long list of people who were not found guilty of murder. But I spare you the litany.

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

Hi Lynn

Oh? And the evidence?

Apart from one of them, they weren`t found guilty of a murder in Whitechapel, is usually pretty good.

[lynn cates]

evidence

Hello Jon. Thanks.

"They may all have been walking the Whitechapel streets, but only one of them actually committed murder in Whitechapel."

Oh? And the evidence?

Cheers.
LC

[Jon Guy]

"Let's not forget murderers William Bury, William Seamen and George Chapman who were also roaming around the area, if not involved in the Whitechapel murder cases. Will be a few others as well."

Now you're talking!

They may all have been walking the Whitechapel streets, but only one of them actually comitted murder in Whitechapel.

[lynn cates]

right

Hello Phil.

Quite.

Sensible post.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

accounting

Hello John.

"To clarify things I think the idea that eight separate individuals were responsible for the Whitechapel murders as has been suggested in this thread is highly unlikely."

Why? How many do you think Sir MLM and Sir RA believed in?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

Thanks!

Hello Jon.

"Let's not forget murderers William Bury, William Seamen and George Chapman who were also roaming around the area, if not involved in the Whitechapel murder cases. Will be a few others as well."

Now you're talking! Thanks.

Cheers.
LC