I don't think it's as simple as that, Trevor. I don't agree with Christer, but the argument, concerning Chapman, Kelly and Jackson, is not easy to break [and Dr Biggs, for instance, doesn't even consider it]. It really isn't.
History is there to be challenged not readily accepted without question, especially where the ripper murders are concerned.www.trevormarriott.co.ukk
Indeed! And I actually challenge it - the suggestion that the Ripper and the Torso killer are one and the same is a prime example of that.
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott
If Jackson was not a murder victim and Kelly’s heart was not taken away and the organs not taken away from Eddowes and chapman it opens up a whole new ball game does it not, and we do have evidence in support of the above.
Even if you don’t agree with all it still weakens your similarities and you cannot compare with any certainty www.trevormarriott.co.ukk
Sorry, but no. I am not speaking about these matters at all. I am speaking about how there are very clear similarities. Proven similarities. Factually and historically recorded similarities.
You are doing something totally different - you are asking "what if" about a number of things that have nothing at all to do with my reasoning.
"What if" you are wrong, Trevor? "What if" your kind of reasoning has no place in this discussion?
There is nothing illogical in suggesting that people who sustain the same kind of damage, damage that is furthermore extremly rare, are in all probability victims of the same killer. It is claiming that these similarities are of no importance at all that lacks logic.
Furthermore, the topic has not been done to death by any means. Just wait and see.
You may of course say "no" and put your head in the sand, but to be quite frank that is of no consequence at all.