Was Mackenzie a copycat?

[DVV]

But didn't Monro believe that McKenzie was a Ripper victim?

Hi Garry,

True. While Anderson's opinion, that "it was an ordinary murder and not the work of a sexual maniac" is best forgotten. (We have only Anderson's word to believe Monro had changed his mind.)
If we follow Anderson, Nichols isn't a Ripper-victim either.

Cheers

[lynn cates]

fertility

Hello Jon.

"but the sort of copycat that would have been involved in the McKennzie murder only exists in over fertile imaginations and the fiction department of my local library."

Including the fertile imaginations at the Met and many ripper authors over the past few years.

Cheers.
LC

[DVV]

By 'she' do you mean McKenzie or Coles?

Hi Bridewell,

I meant McKenzie.
Sadler had a motive to kill Coles and probably did it. Not that it is proven, but at least he should be considered the most likely suspect.

Cheers

[Jon Guy]

Hi Christer

I appreciate you were just offering the below as an option, and it is not your belief. Just in case you think I`m attacking you ;-)

Therefore, such a killer could perhaps hope that cutting a neck and tentatively opening up the stomach would be enough to do the trick.

Even with this kind of scenario McKenzie`s death was caused by the "Ripperish" opened left carotid whilst on her back. So, whomever killed her, attacked her in a Ripper like manner from the onset, ie. cut throat , on her back, and making it look like the Ripper must have been the aim from the onset.

What is more likely? The same killer from a few months previous or another person who could commit murder, and then have the daring to violate the body in such a manner in the open street.

I understand there are the feeble minded, like that tit from Birtley, who are influenced by crimes but the sort of copycat that would have been involved in the McKennzie murder only exists in over fertile imaginations and the fiction department of my local library.

[Jon Guy]

But didn't Monro believe that McKenzie was a Ripper victim?

Thanks Garry.

Yes, everything that happened in the days following McKenzies murder clearly show that the authorities thought the Ripper had struck, and another series was about to begin.

[Garry Wroe]

Try the likelihood that the authorities knew perfectly well that JTR was under lock and key or dead before McKenzie was murdered.

But didn't Monro believe that McKenzie was a Ripper victim?

[Fisherman]

Not much, Phil - I agree with most of this. I am not sure, however, if it applies that a copycat killer would overdo things!
I think that would depend on why the killing was carried out in the first place.

If it was carried out because the copycat killer liked what the original killer had accomplished and wanted to add his own work to the total picture, then yes, I agree that underplaying the mutilations should perhaps not be expected.

But if the victim was killed by somebody who did not like what he saw in the original killings, but who realized that copying what the original killer did could keep himself out of trouble, then I think that we could end up with smaller mutilations. The simple reason for this is that most people are opposed to mutilating on the whole, and find the prospect appalling and distasteful. Therefore, such a killer could perhaps hope that cutting a neck and tentatively opening up the stomach would be enough to do the trick.

But on the whole, as I said, I agree with you - a half-hearted or partly disabled Ripper attack may be the best solution to the MacKenzie riddle.

All the best,
Fisherman

[Phil H]

The death of Alice Mackenzie suggests that there were at least 2 men who were capable of doing acts like these living in London in late 1888..unless her killer arrives sometime between Jacks run and her murder,... and the Police reaction to it proves that in the Spring of 1889 the Police did not know the identity of the man who killed in that same fashion that previous Fall.

Perhaps more, because the torso murdere was also never caught.

Unless one conflates the Torso killer with "Jack", there were at least two serial killers around in London at one time and the Pinchen St torso suggests the former was capable of entering the latter's territory. That said, Mckenzie does not look like to me the work of the perpetrator of the torso killings.

So with Mckenzie were are left with:

a) it was a murder of a random victim by an unknown hand at least partially copying "Jack's" technique; or

b) she was killed by "Jack" but he was weakened by illness, mental issues or some such problem; or

c) it was a "domestic" (killing by someone who knew Mckenzie) made to look like "Jack's work.

I don't see any other options.

(A) seems far-fetched; (c) seems improbable - I'd expect a copy cat to overdo things not underplay the mutilations; so we are left with (b).

Have I missed something?

Phil

[Wickerman]

Was not Lawende used as an ID witness at a date subsequent to McKenzie's death? What would that be in aid of if the authorities knew perfectly well that JtR was under lock and key or dead?

Hi Colin.
I don't think the police had one theory, possibly there were as many parallel investigations in progress as their were detectives available.

[Hunter]

They clutched at straws and hoped that Sadler would be identified as the killer. I think that's somewhat less than a fit-up.

I believe my use of the word 'fit' was a poor choice and led to a misunderstanding of my point. What I should have said was that they checked his alibis for the previous murders - normal procedure in a series of unsolved crimes that could have a possible link... as checking everyone known to the victim or was known to be in contact with the victim near the time of death was standard procedure despite a continuing chain of murders possibly committed by one individual.

[Michael W Richards]

The death of Alice Mackenzie suggests that there were at least 2 men who were capable of doing acts like these living in London in late 1888..unless her killer arrives sometime between Jacks run and her murder,... and the Police reaction to it proves that in the Spring of 1889 the Police did not know the identity of the man who killed in that same fashion that previous Fall.

Cheers

[Bridewell]

Try the likelihood that the authorities knew perfectly well that JTR was under lock and key or dead before McKenzie was murdered.

Was not Lawende used as an ID witness at a date subsequent to McKenzie's death? What would that be in aid of if the authorities knew perfectly well that JtR was under lock and key or dead?

[Bridewell]

[B]

It is, to my mind, a good reason to treat all the murders as individual crimes and then see how many WE would compile into the work of a single hand.

Phil

I agree. That's the way it should be done.

[Bridewell]

Wow, DVV, you're a bold man...bye bye Druitt, Cohen, Tumblety...
who else? I think Koz was still walking the dog....?

Greg

It would be bye-bye William Bury too of course, alibi'd by his own execution.

[Bridewell]

To answer Greg's question : no, I don't think it was a copycat.
Imo she's a Ripper-victim.

By 'she' do you mean McKenzie or Coles?