Mitre Square: Take Two?

[Tom_Wescott]

On this point you're are in conflict with Wynne Baxter when he stated at the Stride inquest "There had been no skilful mutilation as in the cases of Nichols and Chapman, and no unskilful injuries as in the case in Mitre-square - possibly the work of an imitator;".

He judged that there were basic differences beyond just different methods. And he was there at the time. Trevor makes points worthy of the listening.

I've always felt there was a bit of territorialism over the Ripper when it came to Eddowes. The City Police to a man were convinced she was a Ripper victim whereas every other guy on the Met side was keen to dismiss her as a copycat while fully accepting the unmutilated Stride into the canonical fold. I've always wondered at that and what else it might be symptomatic of. Skip forward to the present era and nobody except Lynn Cates and Simon Wood dismiss Eddowes as a Ripper victim but roughly 30% (don't quote me on that) want to give Stride the boot. Personally, I think the odds are strong both Stride and Eddowes are Ripper victims, but it might be good to keep in mind that a) Contemporary opinion tipped in favor of striking Eddowes not Stride, and b) Had Eddowes been killed on the Met side of the boundary, not a one of the contemporary naysayers are likely to have been naysaying.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[The Rookie Detective]

I've always felt there was a bit of territorialism over the Ripper when it came to Eddowes. The City Police to a man were convinced she was a Ripper victim whereas every other guy on the Met side was keen to dismiss her as a copycat while fully accepting the unmutilated Stride into the canonical fold. I've always wondered at that and what else it might be symptomatic of. Skip forward to the present era and nobody except Lynn Cates and Simon Wood dismiss Eddowes as a Ripper victim but roughly 30% (don't quote me on that) want to give Stride the boot. Personally, I think the odds are strong both Stride and Eddowes are Ripper victims, but it might be good to keep in mind that a) Contemporary opinion tipped in favor of striking Eddowes not Stride, and b) Had Eddowes been killed on the Met side of the boundary, not a one of the contemporary naysayers are likely to have been naysaying.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Completely agree Tom, great post!

[GBinOz]

I've always felt there was a bit of territorialism over the Ripper when it came to Eddowes. The City Police to a man were convinced she was a Ripper victim whereas every other guy on the Met side was keen to dismiss her as a copycat while fully accepting the unmutilated Stride into the canonical fold. I've always wondered at that and what else it might be symptomatic of. Skip forward to the present era and nobody except Lynn Cates and Simon Wood dismiss Eddowes as a Ripper victim but roughly 30% (don't quote me on that) want to give Stride the boot. Personally, I think the odds are strong both Stride and Eddowes are Ripper victims, but it might be good to keep in mind that a) Contemporary opinion tipped in favor of striking Eddowes not Stride, and b) Had Eddowes been killed on the Met side of the boundary, not a one of the contemporary naysayers are likely to have been naysaying.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

The opinions of Lynn Cates and Simon Wood are not to be dismissed lightly. I too am not convinced that the C5 is set in stone. Stride and McKenzie are so similar in their circumstances that, IMO, they need to be treated the same in their acceptance or dismissal.

[Lewis C]

The opinions of Lynn Cates and Simon Wood are not to be dismissed lightly. I too am not convinced that the C5 is set in stone. Stride and McKenzie are so similar in their circumstances that, IMO, they need to be treated the same in their acceptance or dismissal.

Hi George,

Many of us would agree that the C5 isn't set in stone, but for me, it is set in stone that Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were Ripper victims, and I'd put Kelly at about 90%. Tabram, Stride, and McKenzie are all debatable.

There's an important difference in the circumstances of Stride and McKenzie: Stride was killed about 50 minutes prior to another Ripper victim, and within easy walking distance. That can't be said of McKenzie.

[Tom_Wescott]

The opinions of Lynn Cates and Simon Wood are not to be dismissed lightly. I too am not convinced that the C5 is set in stone. Stride and McKenzie are so similar in their circumstances that, IMO, they need to be treated the same in their acceptance or dismissal.

When Lynn Cates first proposed his theory eons ago, I laughed it off. But over time it sank in (my head is thick, it takes time)and I neither think it's nutty or impossible now. But it is unlikely that Stride and Eddowes are outliers. We're probably looking at a series from at least Tabram to McKenzie. The crime scene evidence supports that. Stride is actually most similar to Coles and McKenzie more similar to Eddowes.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi George,

Many of us would agree that the C5 isn't set in stone, but for me, it is set in stone that Nichols, Chapman and Eddowes were Ripper victims, and I'd put Kelly at about 90%. Tabram, Stride, and McKenzie are all debatable.

There's an important difference in the circumstances of Stride and McKenzie: Stride was killed about 50 minutes prior to another Ripper victim, and within easy walking distance. That can't be said of McKenzie.

I only set in stone Nichols and Chapman. Eddowes and Stride have to be taken as a pair. Those two must be related because coincidence like that doesn't happen (two identical murders in one hour, the writing and apron linking them). Kelly, Tabram, McKenzie, and Coles could all be outliers, but unless we think there are six or seven murderers this adept at killing and escaping, we're still looking at probably two or more serial killers. I think we'd all agree identifying at least one would be worthwhile?

Stone setting aside, the probability (but only that!) has to be that Tabram-McKenzie are related crimes. If we're looking for a reason to explain the differences (aside from the obvious), then I'd say two killers working together is more likely than two working separately and by coincidence. Rightly or wrongly, I only accept 'coincidence' when it's proven. Using it as a fallback position as so many writers do is lazy. I think many of the old 'classic bibles' on the case have done more harm than good in the influence they've had on our thinking. But that's another thread.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Lewis C]

I only set in stone Nichols and Chapman. Eddowes and Stride have to be taken as a pair. Those two must be related because coincidence like that doesn't happen (two identical murders in one hour, the writing and apron linking them). Kelly, Tabram, McKenzie, and Coles could all be outliers, but unless we think there are six or seven murderers this adept at killing and escaping, we're still looking at probably two or more serial killers. I think we'd all agree identifying at least one would be worthwhile?

Stone setting aside, the probability (but only that!) has to be that Tabram-McKenzie are related crimes. If we're looking for a reason to explain the differences (aside from the obvious), then I'd say two killers working together is more likely than two working separately and by coincidence. Rightly or wrongly, I only accept 'coincidence' when it's proven. Using it as a fallback position as so many writers do is lazy. I think many of the old 'classic bibles' on the case have done more harm than good in the influence they've had on our thinking. But that's another thread.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

I agree with most of this, but one doesn't have to believe in coincidence to think that McKenzie wasn't a Ripper murder. It could have been a copycat murder. I do think that it's very probable that it was one of the two though: either a Ripper murder or a copycat.

How does the apron link the Eddowes murder to the Stride murder?

[Tom_Wescott]

I agree with most of this, but one doesn't have to believe in coincidence to think that McKenzie wasn't a Ripper murder. It could have been a copycat murder. I do think that it's very probable that it was one of the two though: either a Ripper murder or a copycat.

How does the apron link the Eddowes murder to the Stride murder?

I think my 'coincidence' rant was in relation to Stride/Eddowes. The second part of my coincidence rant was in regards to coincidences in general that have been proposed over the years, such as the killer dropping an apron under a piece of chalk writing that makes no sense outside of the context of that night's murders. McKenzie, if not a Ripper murder, was a remarkable simulation from a confident copy cat.
The apron was left in Whitechapel, either as a ruse to make police think the Mitre Square killer lived in Whitechapel or because he actually did. Either associates the Mitre Square crime with the Whitechapel series. Then you have the writing on the wall, which I agree with Anderson most likely was written by the killer. Whether we read the second word as 'Jews' or "IWMES' it appears to refer back to the Berner Street club. Aware that he didn't mutilate the victim, he wanted to make sure he got credit for it. He wasn't blaming the jews, he was making sure police understood he (the Ripper) committed the crime. Pure ego.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott