Ripper Victim?

[Shelley]

I'd try to be a little less belligerent, if I were you.

Sam,
That's just a little plain speaking........It is some b*ll*cks! to say what you did as a senario of just face butchering, When Eddowes had a nick in one eye, a cut across the bridge of her nose, then the bottom part of nose into the cheek. I mean face butchering with a nick in one eyelid? etc.... Then have a look at Mary Kelly's face.
I posted the quote of the report mentioning that feature of mutilations on the face of Eddowes. Sam, i'm not you i'm Shelley.....Is there anything else you would have say for me Sam? Because i could take it the wrong way and think you are dictating to an extent Sam.

[Ben]

If you go by Ben's gracious explaination...in which i corrected him

Eh?

Corrected me about what, Shelley?

I never said anything about "gangs".

[Sam Flynn]

Is there anything else you would have say for me Sam?

Yup, since you ask... Your cocksure attitude might be a little more tolerable if what you posted wasn't so ill-informed.

Because i could take it the wrong way and think you are dictating to an extent Sam.

I trust I haven't left much room for misinterpretation.

[Shelley]

Yup, since you ask... Your cocksure attitude might be a little more tolerable if what you posted wasn't so ill-informed.I trust I haven't left much room for misinterpretation.

Sam,

i have not the slightest idea of what you are reffering to.....And ill-informed?, i might add that there are a lot of posts on here which adere to the same sort ideas that i have ( some not obviously)........And where the heck do you get so ****-sure from, casebook i have no doubts have a lot of opinons that fall into the band of your so called ' ****-sure '...........I but will say this Sam, i'll be ****-sure to disagree with you if i see another point of view, one of which is don't try and put words in my mouth.
And if you consider a little bit of sense of humour as a ****-sure attitude or that of Belligerent, i can see that we won't always see eye to eye Sam.

[Shelley]

Eh?

Corrected me about what, Shelley?

I never said anything about "gangs".

Ben, it's a little fickle to mention Gangs as such, i was reffering to the MO & Signature as you full well know......Thanks so much for telling me that i should read up on Mo & Signature, when i already know what it is and you yourself agreed that it seemed mixed as with the Deep-Throat-cutting, in another post.

[Brenda]

I for one happen to think there's a very good chance that Jack may have been involved in a prior gang attack, perhaps Emma Smith, and found it very much to his liking. Every attack after that, with the exception of Stride and including Tabram, is an escalation from the attack prior.

And all the 1,000 exclamations that nobody could escalate an attack in 3 weeks time is pure garbage as far as I'm concerned. If someone can't think up a new attack in a 3 weeks' time, then they are extremely feeble-minded. If a serial killer is incapable of a new thought within 3 weeks' time, then what IS the accepted amount of time to try something new?

[Ben]

Ben, it's a little fickle to mention Gangs as such

Fortunate it is then that I never mentioned "gangs".

You claimed to have "corrected" me on some point related to gangs, and I was a little non-plussed.

[Shelley]

Brenda,
It can depend on the extent of a change in MO, usually minor changes occur in a short period of time. As in the Tabram & Nicholls example, it just isn't a plausible amount of time given the wounding/cuts on Tabram to that of Nicholls. But you have a point Brenda in your post.
There are big differences in style of MO between these two women, and one of those being, that no one has managed to post it here either.
And for some posts getting to a good point hasn't happened with that either.
Still, people are entitled to thier opinions, in which i've said that before now.

[Shelley]

Fortunate it is then that I never mentioned "gangs".

You claimed to have "corrected" me on some point related to gangs, and I was a little non-plussed.

No I didn't Ben, i used more than one word in a post as regarding that , also it wasn't specifically gangs as you well know, it was in Mo and gangs could have been used, still a reference to the Zodiac Killer came as well, but you haven't used that, so stop nit picking over one word, it belittles you to being petty, so please don't twist it, Just because we have a disagreement on somethings, or most or whatever.
I suggest you use a better argument.......especially in your posts and state of said MO, also in your posts.
Ok

Also have you ever heard of the term ' Devil's Advoctae ' ?

[Ben]

I suggest you use a better argument.......especially in your posts and state of said MO, also in your posts.

You told me that MO referred to "personality" whereas signature meant "intent", both of which were wrong. I thought you should know that, considering that you purport an interest in criminology, that's all.

[Chava]

In favour: She's a prostitute. She's killed overnight rather than during the day. She's killed with a blade/blades. She's killed in an open area after having proceeded through a narrower area. No one hears the murder. It's three weeks before the first acknowledged Ripper murder. She's the same age and social situation as the other victims. She is destitute.

Against: Stabbing rather than ripping. No concentration on generative organs. No attempt to strangle or smother before death.

I think on balance I'm for her being a victim. It's a different MO and it looks much more personal--a 'rage' killing. Interesting that we have 4 victims that most of us are certain are Ripper killings, bracketed by 2 victims that may or may not be Ripper killings but sure look like they are. Tabram's wounds and pattern go against a Ripper diagnosis. Kelly's age, situation and the fact that she was undressed suggest to me she may not have been a victim. Both these 2 look more personal than the other 4.

[Shelley]

You told me that MO referred to "personality" whereas signature meant "intent", both of which were wrong. I thought you should know that, considering that you purport an interest in criminology, that's all.

It does all refer to personality Ben in theory, i mean unless we have a robot doing criminal acts then it is about the person. Being on these boards is an interest in Criminology/Ripperology in any case. And signature is about intent, so why do you think this is incorrect Ben?, if you want to explain your version of MO & Signature than do so, in an explainatry manner rather than just bleeting out ......You said this! you said that!, that's wrong, that isn't it, why do you not use a good argument with your version of information, rather than behaving like a jumped up teenager. I also doubt that people look up in a library just in case for every post, saying you don't understand it. When i first began posting a few posts on this thread, we had differences, but i always produced an instance and explained why, or something that i recalled that stuck in my mind, i have never stooped to a personal targetting ( this one post is now an exception)
And as for the study criminology plause....Why what do you expect that i'm an expert in the field bounding on with a PHD in criminology or something?.

Oh, and an a established author i know often mis-spells in her work, but i don't fire, oh, your a writer with a MA in English Literature, you've spelt that wrong...na...na...na..na..na!


Let's have something else shall we and i'll use your belt Ben.......

Where's your expertise in knowing exactly what MO is & Signature is to correct someone else on it, or is a theory of yours that you are no PHD in Criminology & Neither am i, but you choose to witter on about this ' You purport to being a study in Criminology...na... na.... na...na..na ' Shelley......sounds like a school boy, you have finished secondary school haven't you Ben?

Now this is getting rather pathetic with this tone of line isn't it Ben?
Oh, and my opinion is no one with a PhD in Criminology is likely to search information to rely on, on these boards..........I am an amateur and so are you Ben!
And by the sounds of it Ben your a Juvenille to boot....If you can't take a disagreement or an argument don't join in. But nit picking to fall back on Ben is beneath someone i consider to have intelligence.

USE A BETTER ARUGMENT BEN AND ONE THAT'S IN LINE WITH THIS THREAD

NOT PERSONALITY FIRING AT ONES WHO POST....DID YOU LIKE WHAT I'VE WRITTEN ABOVE BEN?

So stop these silly arguments and say what you mean, just post info and try that instead.

If you have decided you don't like my personality or my tone don't talk, fire whatever with cross exchanging of posts........That's my point.

[Shelley]

Yup, since you ask... Your cocksure attitude might be a little more tolerable if what you posted wasn't so ill-informed.I trust I haven't left much room for misinterpretation.

Sam,
I'd like for you to explain what you mean by my cocksure attitude, because you've lost me completely i'm afraid.
The other thing is, explain what you mean by ' ill-informed ' and also what you mean by this........For one, are you saying that everything i have written in posts is ill-informed? Or be specific in terms of ' ill-informed ' for some? I hope this will not run into opinions, as everyone is entitled to that and cannot possibly be ill-informed.

[Ben]

I never said I didn't like your personality, Shelley.

I only suggested that you may have been given a mistaken impression about the difference between "MO" and "signature". You sent me a private message on this topic, and I responded with what I hoped was a helpful overview of the distinction between the two. I think people may end up being put off trying to help or exhange views with you, though, if you choose to respond with such bizarre and incoherent aggression, and dismissing an opposing viewpoint as "Bollocks!" isn't expecially polite either.

[Brenda]

In favour: She's a prostitute. She's killed overnight rather than during the day. She's killed with a blade/blades. She's killed in an open area after having proceeded through a narrower area. No one hears the murder. It's three weeks before the first acknowledged Ripper murder. She's the same age and social situation as the other victims. She is destitute.

Hi Chava, don't forget, Martha was killed on a Bank Holiday too, like some of the others.