Originally Posted by Michael W Richards
I believe that there exists a very real possibility that the motives for one or more of the murders could be found,... a letter, missing police report, personal memorandum, which would allow us to focus on the more likely grouping of murders. Maybe narrowing the search from everyone who had a pulse in East End London in the Fall of 1888 to something more manageable. Might lead to new research involving as yet unknown, or overlooked, players. There are far more murders committed for emotional or financial reasons than there are ones that involve the killers madness. Why eliminate the majority when looking for probabilities?
We know a few Canonicals can be seen travelling the same haunts as others, maybe there is something to be found there.
I don't think I would bother with this if I believed that nothing can be solved or illuminated, and I don't believe the current configuration and count for a single killer is accurate. There is always hope.
Each murder should be examined individually, that's standard protocol, and one that was taken at the time. However, in lieu of any identifiable suspect or motive, it soon became apparent to the police that they were dealing with a new breed of criminal, one that would later be dubbed a 'serial killer'. I know that you don't subscribe to that belief, you think serial killing was an anachronistic concept back then, even though the signature elements of the crimes correspond with other well-known serial killer behaviour. The human condition hasn't changed that much
in 100 years.
If Eddowes, for example, was not murdered by the same man who killed Nichols & Chapman, why the overkill? If she was silenced for whatever reason, why didn't the killer stop at slitting her throat? Why did he needlessly increase the risk involved by mutilating her remains and stealing organs? Do you really think someone will resort to such extreme lengths just to cover their tracks? And you're presuming the killer needed to cover their tracks in the first place. He didn't.
Admittedly there is some room for doubt with someone like Stride. Although the odds of two cutthroat murders occurring independently of one other in such close proximity are staggering, particularly when murders such as these were a rare occurrence prior to 1888.
I don't know what else to tell you, Mike. I believe we've reached an impasse. You want to reinvent the wheel when the facts speak for themselves.