Deconstructing Jack by Simon Wood

[Abby Normal]

Hello Herlock,

Yes, and maybe most importantly of all was the killer's mental state exactly the same every time? Had he been drinking prior to one kill and not another? Had he noticed a police presence when out scouting victims? Was he more paranoid during one kill than another? There are lots of factors to consider and they could all result in differences between one murder and another.

c.d.

Bingo

[Abby Normal]

Get a grip Abby!

What about those pesky Freemasons and their Illuminati buds?

Regards

Herlock

Well now your getting into some real crackpot theories there Herlock!

[Herlock Sholmes]

What if there was an internecine battle amongst prostitutes over territory. Chapman killed Nichols and was, in turn, killed by Eddowes. Then Kelly killed Eddowes after having already killed Stride in retaliation for Stride killing Tabram. Mackenzie was obviously down to Abberline as a warning to the women that 'enough was enough' and Francis Coles was walking home one night taking a new knife home as a gift for Sadler when she slipped on a discarded leather apron, fell and cut her own throat!

Hey, it's better than the 'dated' notion that there was a madman with a sharp knife roaming the streets!

Regards

Herlock ( live from The Grassy Knoll )

[c.d.]

Hello Herlock,

Yes, and maybe most importantly of all was the killer's mental state exactly the same every time? Had he been drinking prior to one kill and not another? Had he noticed a police presence when out scouting victims? Was he more paranoid during one kill than another? There are lots of factors to consider and they could all result in differences between one murder and another.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

"Are serial killers consistent? Was Sutcliffe consistent in respect of Victimology, for instance? Levels of skill?"

I think the same question can be asked for pretty much any kind of criminal activity. Take house break-ins for example. A robber might enter through a window the first time and might enter through a back door of another house. He might take a computer or tv at the first house and jewelry from the second house. Does this inconsistency automatically lead us to conclude that it could not possibly have been the same robber at both houses even though other aspects of the two robberies are the same?

c.d.

Good points c.d.

Of course they are affected by different factors. The location, the time available, the resistance/strength of the victim, whether the killer had an injury or an illness etc. Killers don't kill whilst thumbing through an instruction manual.

Regards

Herlock

[Herlock Sholmes]

No no no. You got it all wrong!


Nichols-leather apron/pizer
Chapman- issenschmidt
Stride-club conspiracy/diemshitz, spooner etc.
Eddowes-Fenian nationals
Mary Kelly-Sickert

All connected to the royal conspiracy of course.

Get a grip Abby!

What about those pesky Freemasons and their Illuminati buds?

Regards

Herlock

[c.d.]

"Are serial killers consistent? Was Sutcliffe consistent in respect of Victimology, for instance? Levels of skill?"

I think the same question can be asked for pretty much any kind of criminal activity. Take house break-ins for example. A robber might enter through a window the first time and might enter through a back door of another house. He might take a computer or tv at the first house and jewelry from the second house. Does this inconsistency automatically lead us to conclude that it could not possibly have been the same robber at both houses even though other aspects of the two robberies are the same?

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

Now you're just being silly, Abby.

Lol!!!

[Harry D]

No no no. You got it all wrong!


Nichols-leather apron/pizer
Chapman- issenschmidt
Stride-club conspiracy/diemshitz, spooner etc.
Eddowes-Fenian nationals
Mary Kelly-Sickert

All connected to the royal conspiracy of course.

Now you're just being silly, Abby.

[Abby Normal]

Isenschmid killed Nichols & Chapman, Kidney killed Stride, Eddowes was assassinated by an Isenschmid copycat, and Joseph Barnett butchered Mary Kelly. Nothing to see here, folks. Cases closed.

No no no. You got it all wrong!


Nichols-leather apron/pizer
Chapman- issenschmidt
Stride-club conspiracy/diemshitz, spooner etc.
Eddowes-Fenian nationals
Mary Kelly-Sickert

All connected to the royal conspiracy of course.

[Harry D]

Isenschmid killed Nichols & Chapman, Kidney killed Stride, Eddowes was assassinated by an Isenschmid copycat, and Joseph Barnett butchered Mary Kelly. Nothing to see here, folks. Cases closed.

[Herlock Sholmes]

David,

I've just finished reading your articles and I'm afraid that you've erred.

You have fallen into the trap of employing meticulous and exhaustive research. You've strangely chosen to use reason and logic in your work and you have foolishly avoided flights of fancy and leaps of faith. Also, for some reason you appear unwilling to see mystery where none exists.

You will never get to the truth using those methods Mr Orsam.

Regards

Herlock

[Herlock Sholmes]

If 4 or 5 murders of this type were committed today all within a similarly small area where all the victims were women of a certain occupation who would the police or anyone with an interest in the case suspect do we think?

a) a homicidal madman who either got sexual pleasure from killing or hated women in general or prostitutes specifically

or

b) a conspiracy that involved members of the government or a cabal of high ranking police officers?

Answers on a postcard please.

Regards

Herlock

[John G]

The part I highlighted above was to emphasize what Ive been talking about here,...the 5 Canonical Victims were not all "slashed and mutilated in the street". There is no legitimate argument for the inclusion of other victims since the pattern, (you know, the thing that clues investigators into seeing killings as a "series" in the first place,.. like repetitious Methodology, Victimolgy, Signatures....such as double throat cut/pm mutilations... ) is not consistent and is irregular in all relevant categories. Including that of knife skill, something that was at one time in these investigations, of great important to the people searching for the killer. And I say searching for the killer... singular, because it seems to me that each investigation appears to have been constructed around the premise of a continuing spree of one killer. I would have expected extensive data on Michael Kidney, Liz's recent employers, for example.....or Joe Barnett and who the second Joe might be,...and John Kelly, when the obvious lies he told indicate some deception.

What Ripperologists do is look for a guilty party they can connect to these five murders, but what the data says is that they were most probably not all by the same hand anyway. Seems contradictory.

Motives revealed are killers revealed, and it is highly speculative and unproductive to presume that no apparent motive means that its absent. There are circumstantial elements aplenty in all of these cases, and not one of these cases was more dangerous to the public safety than the Parnell Commission could have been.

Are serial killers consistent? Was Sutcliffe consistent in respect of Victimology, for instance? Levels of skill?

We're reliant on the medical reports, which are open to different interpretations. Moreover, there was disagreement as regards Eddowes, therefore we are not entitled to conclude that another doctor would necessarily have agreed with Llewellyn in respect of Nichols, or Phillips in respect of Chapman.

Dr Phillips' somewhat contradicted himself when determining the level of skill exhibited by Chapman's killer.

[John G]

Hi David,

I could ask you the same about your posts.

Five murders, five different murderers.

Yes, but there is a connection.

And it ain't Jack the Ripper.

Regards,

Simon

Is this a conspiracy theory?