Was Mackenzie a copycat?

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

like

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

"Intrusion. Still, something was going to happen next that didn't occur because of IS or PKM or both."

Very well. Like . . . ?

Cheers.
LC

Kick scream punch leave etc. If I were to speculate, I would say it likely continue assault. That doesn't necc mean murder.

[lynn cates]

blush

Hello DLDW. Thanks.

Hope you're not blushing.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

why?

Hello (again) DLDW. Thanks.

"Kick scream punch leave etc. If I were to speculate, I would say it likely continue assault."

I can live with that.

Why do you think he assaulted her in the first place?

Cheers.
LC

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

There it is...

There's the rub. Not sure. There isn't much of anything to support any motivation. I think that may be one reason "JTR" is compelling. He was out to kill. IF IS 's account is truthfull, at least in the respect that he was there and actually saw Stride being attacked, then we got a can of worms to deal with that leaves us with Kidney or some other disgruntled associate and that just sits wrong for some reason. I don't buy Kidney for many seconds based off of the data.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

I moving my next post to the thread I started earlier

Out of respect for this thread. Apologies.

[Mr Lucky]

that's well and good. I'm game. But if you wish to keep at this nonsense, then you will have to go it alone like Aaron Kosminski.

Your choice.

Cheers.
LC

Comedy is comedy and that is some funny s***. Apologies

Ok, Since you stuck your oar in, you try and do what Lynn can't.

You make these differences between the murders go away quoting contemporary references, ie Dr Llewellyn, Dr Phillips, the witness that saw the body in situ or at the mortuary (ie NOT CRAP like "It would never occur to JI to go through Polly's things. But Annie's rings provided a visual stimulus")

1) Different weapon
2) Different sharpness
3) One victim's stabbed, the other was cut open
4) One had her uterus extracted and stolen, the other didn't
5) One had her intestines removed the other hadn't
6) One had her abdominal wounds exposed with her dress/skirt up the other didn't
7) Only one had an attempt to separate the bones in her neck
8) Only one had her possessions removed from her pockets
9) One found in the street the other in a private yard
10) One had her legs spread, the other didn't.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Mr. Lucky

I have no reason to make anything go away. Except bad suspects I have no suspect which I prefer, just some that are interesting to look at. The differences in their murders are there. People will make of them what they will. Data, data, data. It is ever important to remain objective and state when you are taking liberties.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

[QUOTE=Mr Lucky
1) Different weapon
Very possible, maybe very probable
2) Different sharpness
Well if not the same weapon then yeah. If it was the same weapon then seems likely it was made sharper after Nichols murder.
3) One victim's stabbed, the other was cut open
Would need to review evidence and learn more about wounds by knifes to attempt to verify or refute Dr.'s claims. The body would be helpful too.
4) One had her uterus extracted and stolen, the other didn't
True
5) One had her intestines removed the other hadn't
True
6) One had her abdominal wounds exposed with her dress/skirt up the other didn't
Possible. Cannot be verified.
7) Only one had an attempt to separate the bones in her neck
Hmm. I might say one had a good attempt
8) Only one had her possessions removed from her pockets
Well Nichols could've had something removed. So it is possible but can't be verified
9) One found in the street the other in a private yard
True
10) One had her legs spread, the other didn't.
Witness statement supports that claim if I recall correctly.[/QUOTE]
Crude attemp but there you go.

[Mr Lucky]

Crude attemp but there you go.

Hi Dig,

No , that's reasonable attempt, fair enough, for example-

Well Nichols could've had something removed. So it is possible but can't be verified

yes, that's a good point, we can't even be sure what Nichols had in her pockets after she was attacked, Comb and broken piece of mirror are mentioned, but some other sources also list a pocket handkerchief and some a piece of soap.

It is ever important to remain objective and state when you are taking liberties.

Well said, This I heartily agree with and clearly I think Lynn is taking liberties and he's not stating that's what he is doing. That's the point. This is why Lynn's only counterpoints are that the Fenians have put me up to this, and this is why he's comparing me to Aaron Kosminski. It's all he can do.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

The Joke is...

That the data goes about two feet. We spend most of our time speculating and making assumptions. Some good and logical, but still it is speculation and assumptions. Which is fine. Fun too! One day I'll do the math. Not anytime soon though. Tedious.

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Back on topic

So what along the ways of motive is there for the murder of Mackenzie? Who would need to make it look like "JTR"? Or who might be trying to pay homage?

[DVV]

Hi Dig

The copycat theory makes no sense.
Unless you call it a "shy copycat" murder.

I'd vote for a desillusioned ripper.

[Michael W Richards]

Hello DLSDW. Thanks.

To be "interrupted" is to be interrupted at something--if at nothing but the next step.

The idea about "Liz's assailant being interrupted" is that he was planning mutilations, but didn't because he was interrupted. Hence, planning.

So also with Polly. The idea is that her uterus was to be taken, but her killer was interrupted.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

What I was pointing out really is that there is the possibility one could make an argument that Pollys murder was incomplete,.. the same argument cannot be made in the case of Liz Stride. We have actions in the first murder that seem to indicate a sequence when juxtaposed with the second.....which is a valid perspective Mr Lucky, not revisionist based on Chapman, but as a comparative when we can assume, safely, that the same man committed both murders. The coroner thought so, and so did the physician in Annies case.

To suggest an interruption one must carry a burden of proof....there is the possibility based on Pollys wounds that could have been the case, there is no such evidence in Berner Street.

Cheers mate

[Digalittledeeperwatson]

Hullo Michael

I know what you are saying, but IS provides an interuption or intrusion into the scene. Of course that is if his account is true. I think I know your feelngs on that already. You can not know the intentions of her murderer. Only what he did and didn't attempt. Which can be suggestive definitely. It is not concrete though. I hope I conveyed my point well enough. If not I'll try and articulate it further if needed. Once again I am neither pro or anti "JTR" at this time.

[lynn cates]

tangible

Hello Mike. Thanks.

Well, I know what you mean. However, I try not to posit something unless there is tangible evidence for it.

Cheers.
LC