Killing Time...

[Nemo]

Since there is mention of timing on another thread, I thought you might like to comment on the following...

To me, the Ripper's optimum time for selecting and attacking a victim seems to be around 3 - 4am, probably the quietest time of the night, after most people have left the pubs and gone home, and prior to the time when a lot of people got up for work

This would be true for Nichols, just after 3am, Chapman, possibly in the region of 4 - 4:30, Kelly, around 4am

The anomaly is Eddowes, killed before 2am, so something was different that evening

The major difference that night might have been that there were two murders

Is it possible that when the Ripper set out that night, he was definitely going to kill no matter what?

...and he was on the street when he heard about the Stride killing and the subsequent police searches

In his determination to kill that night, he thought it prudent not to wait until his customary 3 - 4am period, but to kill ASAP before the hunt became widespread - hence the early time of attack on Eddowes

[Howard Brown]

Nemo:

Thanks for starting what might prove to be a great thread if others offer their views.

You mention :

"The anomaly is Eddowes, killed before 2am, so something was different that evening

The major difference that night might have been that there were two murders"...

It makes you wonder what found two murders occurring as 'early' as they did.
It might be because more women were still out and about at that time as opposed to 3 or 4 A.M....if he planned to perform two murders.
I would also think that it would be a little less risky to commit murder at 3 or 4 A.M. as opposed to 1 or 2 as more people were out and about.

[Cris Malone]

I belive we have an insufficient number of murders here to rationally figure a timeline and why. It may be just as simple as this miscreant was an opportunist and found his opportunities at these times... nothing more. What would be of a more pertinent clue is the fact that none of these murders seemed to happen before the pubs closed... relevant in as much as it was after this hour that the types of women who were the targets dispersed from these more public locations and took their vigil to less traveled avenues on the routes where customers were making their way home.

It would also be a time when many of these women - revelling in what the pubs had to offer and consequently broke and desperate now for lodging - would be more careless and bold in their actions; which played right into the murderer's hand. Whoever he was, he undoubtedly knew their proclivities and their weaknesses; the time likely being more of consequence than design.

The fact than none of these women were suggested to having had intercourse on the night of their murders (Kelly was probably too mutilated to tell) points to an unsuccessful night up to the time that they met their fate.

I doubt that hearing of Stride's murder would have been a catylist because the timeline there is indeed, narrow and I can't recollect anyone involved in the Eddowes portion of the night recalling that they had previously heard of the other murder.

A likely scenerio to me, would be that Stride's killer chose to move and strike quickly again, before the alarm that was sure to be generated had made his quest untenable.

...Just my little ol' simplistic two cents worth.

[SirRobertAnderson]

Is it possible that when the Ripper set out that night, he was definitely going to kill no matter what?

...and he was on the street when he heard about the Stride killing and the subsequent police searches

In his determination to kill that night, he thought it prudent not to wait until his customary 3 - 4am period, but to kill ASAP before the hunt became widespread - hence the early time of attack on Eddowes

Of course it is always dangerous to assume a degree of rationality to JtR; the field seems to delight in assigning varying degrees of sanity to JtR and then taking it away depending on one's theory. (I.e. he'd kill two victims on the same night but not pause to write the GSG etc etc)

But I would think that IF he did not kill Stride, but only heard about it on the street, he would have had to realize the heat would be on, and big time heat at that. I mean, word of mouth might travel fast but not THAT fast, and JtR could not think he was the first to hear of it. And I would think that would have made him less inclined to hunt that night.

I think he hunted many nights without the 777s lining up on his slot machine.

On the other hand, if you think he did kill Stride - but suffered from ripper interruptus, then his blood lust would have been up, and he might just be more willing to take a greater degree of risk than was prudent, as well as prepared to really go to town on his next victim. Which appears to be exactly what happened.

Just my thoughts....YMMV.

[Phil Carter]

But I would think that IF he did not kill Stride, but only heard about it on the street, he would have had to realize the heat would be on, and big time heat at that. I mean, word of mouth might travel fast but not THAT fast, and JtR could not think he was the first to hear of it. And I would think that would have made him less inclined to hunt that night.


Hello Robert,

Seems like logical reasoning to me. However, may I add something to this thought of yours?

If a man with murder in mind was in Whitchapel when Stride was killed, then "the heat", as you put it, may not have stopped him. It would almost certainly stop him doing it in Whitechapel, because police were crawling all over the place.

To get OUT of "the heat", would be first priority. Once in a quieter area.. where he felt safer, the murdering lustfulness could again become prevelent. He would again have control. (Which is important in a murderer's psychy, if I understand correctly the psychology of murderering in cold blood.)

Looking at this objectively then, if Stride's killer (killer No.1) wasn't Eddowes' killer (killer No.2), then killer No.2 wouldn't want to be mixed up in, near or involved in something he had nothing to do with in the first place. He would have no control in the chaos around him. Plus the fact he still had the thought of murder on his mind to complete. Control seems important in all this, I believe.

I don't know. No-one does at the moment. I am far from an expert on the psychology of a murderer, but in my mind would point to the above if Stride's killer wasn't Eddowes' killer, given the proviso that Eddowes' killer was in Whitechapel when Stride was killed.

All speculation of course, but plausible, imho.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

best wishes

Phil

[Caroline Morris]

What Cris and Sir Robert said.

I always go back to my very own two Croydon examples of genuine double events in the last decade, because they offer such clear insight into the way these two killers' minds worked on nights when they were clearly determined to kill, come what may. I'm assuming here that Eddowes' killer was similarly determined, and not just taking in the night air, with his knife for company, when she stuck her unfortunate nose in, and practically had to beg him to cut it off. :smash:

In both the Croydon cases, news of the first attacks (both non-fatal due to interruptions, but completely unprovoked and terrifying for the victims) was very slow to filter through - in fact only a small handful of people directly affected would have known about them until a day or more after the news broke about the second, horrendous attacks that nobody could have survived. But then, nobody knew at the time - unlike in Whitechapel in late September 1888 - that a vicious killer was in the area and could strike at any time.

In the West Croydon case, cctv picked up the killer on the main road looking for a second victim; he found one before the night was out and took his rage and frustration out on her head with a lump of wood, after his attempt to strangle his first victim failed when witnesses saw what was happening and gave chase.

In the South Croydon case, it only emerged later that a woman had been attacked just forty minutes before the same man murdered and mutilated Sally Anne Bowman, 400 yards away. But I doubt that the killer in either case would have had a clue about the earlier attack if it had been unrelated. Word on the street, today or back in 1888, would not be that swift once the pubs and shops were closed for the night.

The earlier time for the Sept 30 attack(s) could actually be down to the lateness of the previous one in Hanbury St, which the killer may not have been keen to repeat - plus the fact that three weeks had gone by and he was champing at the bit (if the state of Eddowes is anything to go by). The lack of mutilation in Stride's case could in turn be down to her killer being too eager to get to work again but, as before, the timing, location and circumstances were far from ideal.

Love,

Caz
X

[Adam Went]

A very interesting thread.

Just to throw in my two cents, I don't think the timing of each murder is as important in the bigger picture as the days/dates of the murders are - being that all of the canonical victims plus Martha Tabram were killed on weekend nights and/or holidays.

Now that should perhaps suggest that Jack was a working man....weekends if anything would have been a riskier time to kill his victims out in public as there always have been more people out at all hours at the pubs and what not of a weekend. If he had killed on, say, a Wednesday night for instance instead, it's a fair argument that there would have been even less people around. So, maybe there was something holding him back from going out on a weeknight? Or, maybe i'm way off track and he thought more people out would mean more prostitutes out and therefore more to choose from and more opportunities? It could be either but I tend to go with the former of the two.

The timing itself is hard to judge because we have no way of knowing whether he had been wandering the streets for five hours or five minutes before he ran into his victim.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Colin Roberts]

To me, the Ripper's optimum time for selecting and attacking a victim seems to be around 3 - 4am, probably the quietest time of the night, after most people have left the pubs and gone home, and prior to the time when a lot of people got up for work

This would be true for Nichols, just after 3am, Chapman, possibly in the region of 4 - 4:30, Kelly, around 4am

The anomaly is Eddowes, killed before 2am, so something was different that evening

The major difference that night might have been that there were two murders

Is it possible that when the Ripper set out that night, he was definitely going to kill no matter what?

...and he was on the street when he heard about the Stride killing and the subsequent police searches

"Chapman, possibly in the region of 4 - 4:30"

"when he heard about the Stride killing"

I would say that you have done your best, to derail your own thread, Nemo, ... even before sounding the "All Aboard", and then rolling it down the tracks, and out of the station.

I can't imagine where this thread would be, by now, had you initiated it, at Casebook.org.

Anyway, ...

What's that?

Times of Death?

Oh, that's right ...

---

Using the following estimated times of death:

- Stride: 12:50AM
- Eddowes: 1:40AM
- Tabram: 2:40AM
- Nichols: 3:30AM
- Kelly: 4:00AM
- Chapman: 5:30AM

- Mean Time of Death: 3:02AM

- Mean Absolute Deviation: 1 Hour and 18 Minutes

- Standard Deviation: 1 Hour and 41 Minutes

---

Using a mean time of death of 3:02AM, and a standard deviation of one hour and forty one minutes; the 'primary' killing hours are estimated as being: 1:21AM - 4:43AM.

This range does not include the Stride and Chapman times of death; but this in itself does not suggest that either of the times of death is an 'outlier'.

...

So, given a perception of late November 1888 that this series of murders would continue ad infinitum; the expectation should have been that just 12.36% would occur earlier than the estimated Stride time-of-death (i.e. 12:50AM); and, that just 10.08% would occur later than the estimated Chapman time-of-death (i.e. 5:30AM).

This would suggest a perpetrator, Jon, that lived in relatively close proximity, to both the Stride, and Chapman murder-sites. The point that minimizes the total distance, to those two murder-sites, is the Median-Center, of the two sites; i.e. a point, which in this instance, lies in very close proximity ...

[SirRobertAnderson]

Thanks for your comments, Phil.

Just so I don't mistake you, are you saying that Jack would have headed to the City and Mitre Square to escape the turmoil of Whitechapel ? I like the idea but of course on the ground they are not really that far apart.

If a man with murder in mind was in Whitchapel when Stride was killed, then "the heat", as you put it, may not have stopped him. It would almost certainly stop him doing it in Whitechapel, because police were crawling all over the place.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Robert,

Thank you. There is one VERY significant difference about it. They are in different police districts. Ergo.. where were all the police from the Met H division concentrated after Stride? Whitechapel. City police, In the City police district, they have a different force and were NOT sent hunting around every back alley of Whitechapel. They got on with their usual beats...

It is near enough to get "home" to Whitechapel after the murder of Eddowes, and far enough away to avoid the throngs of coppers swarming around after Stride's murder. The man who murdered Eddowes must have that feeling of control over the situation.

Is that plausible?

best wishes

Phil

[Howard Brown]

Phil:

One quick in and out....maybe you or someone can provide an answer for the following...as there is a possible conflict in the new A to Z over who responded to what at Mitre Square.

The A to Z states on page 194 that Halse responded to George Morris' whistle blast...and yet on page 359, it states that Morris ran to Aldgate and found PC Harvey. I thought it was PC Watkins ( who stayed with Eddowes' body) who blew the whistle...but something may have been found which now shows Morris blew the whistle, ran to Aldgate, and while locating Harvey, the following three men below were spurred into action on the whistle blast from Morris and not Watkins....or maybe its a case of me not remembering that Morris stated he blew a whistle.

At the time of Eddowes's murder, three City detectives, not p.c.'s, were out together (Halse,Outram & Marriott)...at the bottom of Houndsditch near St. Botolph's Church.

You stated :

"In the City police district, they have a different force and were NOT sent hunting around every back alley of Whitechapel. They got on with their usual beats...

Wouldn't this be considered some sort of change in standard operating procedure if all three detectives were out together ? Since no murders had been committed in the City until Eddowes, would the City put three detectives out at that time of day if it wasn't a matter of the force employing preventive medicine ?
Thanks.

[SirRobertAnderson]

Thank you. There is one VERY significant difference about it. They are in different police districts. Ergo.. where were all the police from the Met H division concentrated after Stride? Whitechapel. City police, In the City police district, they have a different force and were NOT sent hunting around every back alley of Whitechapel. They got on with their usual beats...

It's very plausible, although as How notes they might well have had extra detectives lurking about.

Now, how is this for a thesis: if you are right about Jack heading that way in order to avoid the Met forces arrayed against him, one cannot hold fast to the Insane Jew Posse school of suspects. (Not that you do.)

[Howard Brown]

One thing in the Ripper's favor ( assuming here that he killed Stride) which I forgot to suggest...was that in the Dutfield's Yard murder, he didn't get much if any blood on his person as he would have recieved in the Nichols & Chapman murder...or Tabram,if you want to include that one.

So,if that is entirely true or reasonable to assume, his trek to Mitre Square wouldn't have had the added onus of blood being on his person.

True, as has been stated several times when we talk about blood being on his person, it is entirely possible that the shade of his clothes would have camouflaged the blood. Yet, in those murders where blood was on his person, he wouldn't consider that as we do from here. He'd have had to worry about it being spotted,although it may very well have blended in as we have observed in retrospect.

I think there was not quite as much risk in getting from Berner Street to Mitre Square although there was a degree of risk as in all of the murders.

[Phil Carter]

Phil:

One quick in and out....maybe you or someone can provide an answer for the following...as there is a possible conflict in the new A to Z over who responded to what at Mitre Square.

The A to Z states on page 194 that Halse responded to George Morris' whistle blast...and yet on page 359, it states that Morris ran to Aldgate and found PC Harvey. I thought it was PC Watkins ( who stayed with Eddowes' body) who blew the whistle...but something may have been found which now shows Morris blew the whistle, ran to Aldgate, and while locating Harvey, the following three men below were spurred into action on the whistle blast from Morris and not Watkins....or maybe its a case of me not remembering that Morris stated he blew a whistle.

At the time of Eddowes's murder, three City detectives, not p.c.'s, were out together (Halse,Outram & Marriott)...at the bottom of Houndsditch near St. Botolph's Church.

You stated :

"In the City police district, they have a different force and were NOT sent hunting around every back alley of Whitechapel. They got on with their usual beats...

Wouldn't this be considered some sort of change in standard operating procedure if all three detectives were out together ? Since no murders had been committed in the City until Eddowes, would the City put three detectives out at that time of day if it wasn't a matter of the force employing preventive medicine ?
Thanks.

Hello Howard,

Thanks for this input. Mitre Square, to my mind at least, is a bit of a conundrum. There is more to the actions of Mitre Square than first meet the eye. I am at present trying to put together a few things.. hopefully I can present it at a later date. Meanwhile, back at the ranch...

I did a lengthy look on the subject and presented some things here:-

http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=4871 .. including some things about timing and who was where, policemen and all. Whistle blowers included.

As far as the three policemen standing together are concerned, (Halse, Outram, Marriot) at the moment, I can only see that they just happened to meet there and were found talking together. There are other possibilities I am at present looking into.

best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

It's very plausible, although as How notes they might well have had extra detectives lurking about.

Now, how is this for a thesis: if you are right about Jack heading that way in order to avoid the Met forces arrayed against him, one cannot hold fast to the Insane Jew Posse school of suspects. (Not that you do.)

Hello Robert,

Thank you for your reply. It is one reason why I question whether there is only ONE killer only on that night. And as you correctly state, I hold no one person in my "sights" as being "the" Whitechapel murderer. I haven't even got a name, as yet. As I have often stated, I tend to look as the C5 as a 2-1-2 or a 2-1-1-1. I am probably wrong, but then again, I am not the only one, we probably all are...lol

Re:- Insane jew theory.. there was one. He got locked up for being insane, albeit temporarily. Ischensmidt. Many, including Abberline and a doctor, thought it was he responsible for C1 and C2. People question whether Stride was a "JTR" victim.. if she wasn't.. then that makes two killers. Ergo Eddowes is killed by another man. If JI is locked away, it can't be him.That is why I focus on Mitre Square. As regards Miller's Court, that could well be another ball-game entirely.

This isn't radical thinking, nor "conspiratorial". It is just a way of looking at things from another perspective. The perspective is that the police actually missed the fact that the original murderer may well have been locked away, but chose to call all subsequent murders in the C5 those being of the same hand as C1 and C2.

Posters outside every Police Station in London propositioning "one mad killer" who "writes like this".."come see and read ladies and gentlemen! Look at the horrible writing! Look at the horrible words! Do you know this man?"
(I can see it now, two old biddies staring at the poster one says "My Fred writes like that, he must be Jack the Ripper!")

Did the police accept this hoax letter and use it for their own purposes? It frightened the life out of the locals. Now why do that? The duty of the police is to protect and serve. That wasn't protecting... it was scaring the living daylights out of them. That is why I believe Anderson and Co had other agendae. That is why I believe not in "whom" JTR was, but "what" JTR was.

Apologies for the misdirection of the thread.

Great of you Robert to reply. Thanks.

best wishes

Phil

[Nemo]

Thanks for the posts guys

Sorry I've been a bit busy over the last couple of days and have only just had a chance to catch up

Some interesting thoughts here

I go with Adam that there may be some significance to the murder dates

The "pattern", if there is one, could indicate a man leaving the pub and then looking for an interaction if not a victim

Being held to only being available to kill on certain dates, may imply he would have some determination that night no matter what

I'll have a good look at that thread Colin - apologies if I'm a bit slow

The sailor theory is actually a good explanation for the timings

[Howard Brown]

Phil:

Isenschmid was Jewish ? We know he was Swiss by nationality, but I don't believe he was Jewish.

[Caroline Morris]

There is one VERY significant difference about it. They are in different police districts. Ergo.. where were all the police from the Met H division concentrated after Stride? Whitechapel. City police, In the City police district, they have a different force and were NOT sent hunting around every back alley of Whitechapel. They got on with their usual beats...

It is near enough to get "home" to Whitechapel after the murder of Eddowes, and far enough away to avoid the throngs of coppers swarming around after Stride's murder. The man who murdered Eddowes must have that feeling of control over the situation.

Hi Phil,

I don't quite follow your reasoning when you suggest that Eddowes' killer may have deliberately taken himself into City police territory, to get away from all the Met activity in the wake of Stride, if you favour a different, independent killer for each.

Dr Blackwell only began examining Stride at 1.16 am, and Eddowes was found ripped up like a pig in the market barely half an hour later. So surely this only really works if Eddowes' killer was expecting all this Met activity, as he made his way to Mitre Square, because he had just been the cause of it, by leaving a woman dead in Dutfield's Yard.

I'm looking forward to the new documentary, because I'm hoping people will get a real sense of these two locations, the tight timing involved and the general geography and numbers of people out and about. I see very little opportunity for the Mitre Square killer - if he was never in Berner Street with Stride - to have learned about her murder, or seen any frantic police activity as a result, and then used it to plan ahead in this way.

Love,

Caz
X

[Phil Carter]

Hello Caz,

The reasoning doesn't have to start with the Doc at 1.16.. it starts with the first cry of murder.. the first time the people in the neighbourhood are alerted.
Eddowes' killer could well have picked up this titbit easily by standing on a street corner for all anyone knows. My guess, and it is a guess, is that quite a few people knew of a murder in Berner Street pretty quickly. There were many people in the vicinity. If Eddowes' murderer heard one sniff of a murder, or saw one or two policemen running in a certain direction... then he'd want to get out of there quick. Not to be mixed up in it. Control. As Sir Robert Anderson has stated, there isn't that much distance between the two sites. Even if the murderer only knew about the Stride murder at 1.15 or so, he still has good time to get to Mitre Square and commit the murder. We just don't know because we just don't know if it was the same killer or a different one. I am just putting forward possibilities and see if they are plausible.
For all we know, and we dont, if it were two killers, Eddowes killer may have come from the City area anyway, or from Shoreditch.

best wishes

Phil

[Howard Brown]

It just sunk in the head o' concrete here that if the Ripper moved into the City ..it would be because nearly every swinging nightstick in the Met turf would have been alerted in some form or fashion by the time he arrived in City turf about Stride's murder. Sometimes I amaze myself in the wrong way.

For some reason I misunderstood Chris George once over this matter and my feeling was because he, JTR, went to Mitre Square because he knew hookers hung in Mitre Square, completely overlooking the jurisdictional aspect.

Stupid in Philly.

[Cris Malone]

Not stupid, but practical.

[Howard Brown]

Thanks Cris.

I want to thank my good friend & board stalwart Nemo once more for starting this thread.:sad:.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Howard, Cris,

This is exactly my point.. whether it is the same murderer or nay.. getting OUT of Whitechapel is not only sensible, but practical too, based on whether he knew of a murder having been committed, whether he himself was that murderer or not. If he didn't know... then he cannot have been C3's killer.
On Cris' point, inside the gates of the IWMEC wasn't exactly quiet... and please correct me if I am wrong.. not a known pick-up place for prostitutes to ply their trade either? (Unlike Mitre Square)

best wishes

Phil

[Howard Brown]

On Cris' point, inside the gates of the IWMEC wasn't exactly quiet... and please correct me if I am wrong.. not a known pick-up place for prostitutes to ply their trade either?

Phil...there is a newspaper report in which a constable mentions that that part of Berner Street...was not a "pick up" area for prostitutes.
I can't remember offhand which one. That might be worthwhile to look for tomorrow.

[SirRobertAnderson]

Phil...there is a newspaper report in which a constable mentions that that part of Berner Street...was not a "pick up" area for prostitutes.

The problem I have with that is that the same reason I don't believe the lovers of the victims saying they were not known to whore....not in their interest to 'fess up to what was actually going down. (No pun intended.)

IF this was the constable that was responsible for patrolling the area, is he going to state there was a meat market on his beat ? Probably not.

My honest feeling is that where men congregated, whores would tend to be found. Especially when the pubs closed.

Stride obviously thought it a good place to look for business.

[Phil Carter]

Hello Robert,

Looking at this objectively, yes, the point you make about Stride is feasable. Maybe very feasable. Fair's fair. Even though I am one who sees Stride's killing as a "one-off" in amongst the C5, I have to be fair on points that are considered feasable. More food for he old grinder..lol

best wishes

Phil

[Nemo]

If the killer of Eddowes (The Ripper) was not the killer of Stride, but was aware of the Stride murder, then by subtle implication, I feel he was compelled to kill on that date - which has further implications, mainly in regard to his time available and possible work pattern

Otherwise it would have been better to wait for another occasion rather than be rushed into an opportunist crime in Mitre Square

There are a number of possibilities and I like Phil's explorations of the variations

For example, the Ripper could actually have been on his way home, fully intending to wait until another day, but came across Eddowes alone and decided to strike

If the Ripper was not aware of the Stride killing, then again, there are a number of possibilities

In that case, he could have approached and found Eddowes from pretty much any direction and the "early" strike would be due to another factor, such as pure opportunity or a strong "trigger" etc

[Howard Brown]

Stride obviously thought it a good place to look for business. -Sir Bob

I get your point Bob. I'd like to add that it might not have been the best place to solicit, but a safer one. There may also have been something to persuade her to stand where she did instead of up on Commercial Road or other pick up spots..

[Phil Carter]

Hello Nemo, Howard, all,

Breaking this down.. difficult but here goes.. I will leave whoever murdered C1 and C2 out of this for the minute...

a) Killer of C3 is killer of C4.
b) Killer of C3 isnt killer of C4.

If a) reasons for getting out of the ensuing chaos in Whitechapel is obvious. It means we know the direction, in general, he headed from and to.

If b) then we do not know..

i) If he was in Whitechapel or not at the time of C3's murder.
ii) we do not know if he had heard or seen or been told of of said murder
iii) His motive for killing C4 is decidedly different than the killer of C3

also if (b) is correct...

X) If (i) is a positive (he was there), then we have other reasons for him getting out of Whitechapel, as stated elsewhere.

XY) If (i) is a negative (he wasn't there), there is every chance he did not know of the C3 murder having taken place.

XX) If (ii) is negative (he didnt know) then there is no reason to suggest he came from Whitechapel to Mitre Square

XY) If (ii) is positive, then we can include him possibly coming out of Whitechapel.


Also if (b) is correct..

Motive also plays a part here now IF he knew about C3's demise.

We would have to consider how he night think..

aa) He could get "done" for something he didn't do..
ab) He could get the feeling of a rival on his "manor" doing "his" "work"
bb) These above may account for the atrocious reaction in the mutilations of C4.

just some thoughts..

Plausible?

best wishes

Phil

[Phil Carter]

In other words.. If C3 and C4 killers are different, and C4 KNEW of the C3 murder... you have the mutilations of Eddowes which scream out..

Look at what I did! I, me, I am THE Whitechapel murderer, not him! How dare he kill on my patch! I'll show then. I'll show them all!

All hypothesis of course.. but linked to that word I have mentioned before.. CONTROL over the situation.

Gareth may well be the man to ask about this psychology aspect. I am nowhere near knowledgable enough on the subject. But it seems possible to me.

best wishes

Phil

[Cris Malone]

The police constable in question in a previous post was Smith and of course, the members of the club not only denied that their yard was a pick-up spot, but denied ever seeing Stride before they had to, because there she was... dead on their doorstep. Smith could have been telling the truth. There's no reason to believe otherwise but we must remember the precarious position the police were placed in when it came to dealing with street prostitutes. None of these women were ever arrested for soliciting on the nights they were killed because it had become standard policy to only arrest them if they were disturbing the peace; hince... Stride gets arrested for drunkeness and soliciting in 1884 and Eddowes for drunk and disorderly on Sept. 29, 1888. Despite what Smith said, Abberline - via Swanson - knew better and stated so in a report.

It may be well to remember the comments by Richardson in regards to the goings on at 29 Hanbury St. and how his mother quickly chastised him for his comments... and why. The Berner St. club had a neighbor that said the same thing about them.

The people and the cops turned a blind eye to such things unless a disturbance was caused. We see it now in certain areas of our own cities despite such activity being 'illegal'.

[Nemo]

I consider Phil's mention of control a relevant issue, in the scenario where JtR did not kill Stride but was aware of the crime

There are a number of implications from this scenario

I would agree that the Ripper would have to have been in the area of Berner St at the time of Stride's death

Perhaps he had waited nearly a month for police presence and vigilance to wane, resulting in his determination to kill that night, and his being miffed at a Ripper scare arising on the very night he was abroad in the streets

[Caroline Morris]

What I find odd is that the need to 'distance' the ripper from Stride's murder is so strong that arguments are now being made for him being close enough to the scene to know that a woman had just been murdered on his patch using his method ("Pssst, you there, 'ave you 'eard? Anuvver one's been found dead with 'er froat cut, not five minutes ago in Dutfield's Yard, pass it on"), sending him haring off in a westerly direction to look for a woman to rip up in City territory, away from the madding crowd of Met coppers who would surely be swarming around before you could say "kidney pie".

If the bloody man was that close to what would be extremely rare even as a single event, it makes even less sense to me to object when he is accused of doing the double.

It just sunk in the head o' concrete here that if the Ripper moved into the City ..it would be because nearly every swinging nightstick in the Met turf would have been alerted in some form or fashion by the time he arrived in City turf about Stride's murder. Sometimes I amaze myself in the wrong way.

For some reason I misunderstood Chris George once over this matter and my feeling was because he, JTR, went to Mitre Square because he knew hookers hung in Mitre Square, completely overlooking the jurisdictional aspect.

Stupid in Philly.

Not so stupid, Howie.

I'm trying to work out what fashion or form this fifteen-minute universal copper alerting process would have taken, considering they had no radios or cell phones, and beat coppers couldn't just hare off en masse if they did get to hear some distant commotion, or muffled "Oh murder", or got wind of an incident a few blocks away from a public-spirited 'runner' or series of 'runners'.

I suspect that whoever killed Eddowes did a bit of both that night - started out on his patch, succeeded in stirring up the Met coppers we know responded to the discovery of Stride, then figured that his best chance of getting home safe and satisfied was to cross the divide (not hard to work out if he knew the City was t'other side of Middlesex St, just round the corner from where he would later dump the apron piece) to where he knew there would be unsuspecting hookers aplenty and a fresh force who hadn't had the 'pleasure' of stumbling across a dead one yet.


The reasoning doesn't have to start with the Doc at 1.16.. it starts with the first cry of murder.. the first time the people in the neighbourhood are alerted.

No, Phil, but that very first 'cry' would have been around 1am (assuming anyone did actually cry out audibly), and I'm really not convinced that too many people beyond the club itself, even in the immediate vicinity, would have become aware of the murder, let alone any of the circumstances, by the time the Mitre Square killer would have needed to be in the City and looking for a suitable victim to accompany him to a suitably dark and quiet location.

Eddowes' killer could well have picked up this titbit easily by standing on a street corner for all anyone knows.

Well I'd like to see some evidence of people picking up news of the Stride murder 'easily' in this way and so quickly. And would this vicious killer really have stood around on street corners that night, ears flapping for the latest local gossip before deciding if, when or where to use his knife? I see him as very much wrapped up in his own agenda, deaf to anyone but the nearest copper, the nearest willing victim, and the nearest nosey parker witness.

Even if the murderer only knew about the Stride murder at 1.15 or so, he still has good time to get to Mitre Square and commit the murder.

You see I'm not at all sure about that. I doubt that Eddowes was standing there in the darkness of that square, looking at her watch and tutting because her killer was ten seconds overdue. And I doubt that he knew who he was going to find or where they would end up, much less that he would so soon be in luck, with a hungover Eddowes just back from the Garden of England, and therefore not as much on her guard as she ought to have been. Clearly she didn't have the foggiest notion that one of her sisters had been found murdered less than fifteen minutes' walk away.

For all we know, and we dont, if it were two killers, Eddowes killer may have come from the City area anyway, or from Shoreditch.

Well yes, but then there would be less reason to believe he had heard about the earlier murder and killed on City territory as a result. And he did go to Goulston Street afterwards, right near the border but on the Met side.

Love,

Caz
X

[A.P. Wolf]

Caz, I'm a bit rusty at mo, but some whisky should oil the works.
I believe there was a telephonic and telegraphic system established in all of the Met and City police stations by 1888, and this extended to the streets as well with primitive police call boxes; I know for a fact that all of the Met stations were in telegraphic communication with Whitehall Place and that there was already a 'hotline' telephone in place between the Met and City forces so that information about such crimes could be exchanged rapidly, almost as it happened if you like.
But street talk is still faster than a mobile phone today.

[SirRobertAnderson]

I'm not an Insane Jew Posse fan, and I would argue that this behavior points towards away from that sort of suspect.

Fans or gang? Meet the Juggalos
http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/article_8f52abae-e15e-551d-98e0-eda625c749b6.html


I suspect that whoever killed Eddowes did a bit of both that night - started out on his patch, succeeded in stirring up the Met coppers we know responded to the discovery of Stride, then figured that his best chance of getting home safe and satisfied was to cross the divide (not hard to work out if he knew the City was t'other side of Middlesex St, just round the corner from where he would later dump the apron piece) to where he knew there would be unsuspecting hookers aplenty and a fresh force who hadn't had the 'pleasure' of stumbling across a dead one yet.

[Nemo]

Hi Caz

I don't think anyone here has an agenda to distance the Ripper from Stride

This thread is to explore and discuss the reason why Eddowes was killed at a relatively early time in comparison to the other canonicals

I think it is always useful and logical to reduce the questions and suppositions to a dichotomy

Either the Ripper killed Stride or he did not

If he didn't kill Stride, when he killed Eddowes, he was either aware of the Stride killing or he was not

Each alternative scenario has its own implications

If he was not the killer of Stride, but was aware of her killing, then there is a number of reasonable and viable scenarios in regard to how this happen-stance could occur. As has already been put forward, he might not have been on the hunt for a victim when he came across Eddowes, he may have been on his way home

If the man seen at the entrance to Church passage was the Ripper, he didn't appear to be in an unsatiated rage or in a particular hurry because of the encroaching police search. Perhaps that points toward the scenario in which the Ripper did not kill Stride and was unaware of her murder. The killings would then indeed be coincidentally within a short time of each other. In this scenario he might be heading toward a safe haven or home in Whitechapel when he came across the police searching for the killer of Stride, perhaps forcing him to discard the apron in Goulston St

In this scenario, the Ripper chose of his own volition to kill at an earlier time to his other victims

I don't hold to the cutting of a prostitute's throat on the street being such a rare occurrence that it must have been the work of the Ripper

The fact that the Ripper scare was extant adds to the possibility of some other person using the same method and isn't taken into account within the statistics. There were a lot of people glad to take on the mantle of the Ripper and threatening to do women over in the "Whitechapel manner"

As for the "coincidence" of one similar murder being within a short time of another by two separate people, I've heard of and experienced more unbelievable coincidences happen on numerous occasions

I always have an open mind in this case and would happily consider Stride as a Ripper victim, but I also perceive enough differences in the method and location of the Stride killing to accept that it could well be an unrelated murder

[SirRobertAnderson]

I think it is always useful and logical to reduce the questions and suppositions to a dichotomy

Either the Ripper killed Stride or he did not



This approach of course cannot be argued with; the weightings of the probabilities of the event fork are what matter, and we must not start off with a 50/50 weighting.

Two whores got hit by lightning the same night in the same area, hitting Lucifer's Lottery so to speak.

[Caroline Morris]

Caz, I'm a bit rusty at mo, but some whisky should oil the works.
I believe there was a telephonic and telegraphic system established in all of the Met and City police stations by 1888, and this extended to the streets as well with primitive police call boxes; I know for a fact that all of the Met stations were in telegraphic communication with Whitehall Place and that there was already a 'hotline' telephone in place between the Met and City forces so that information about such crimes could be exchanged rapidly, almost as it happened if you like.
But street talk is still faster than a mobile phone today.

Hi AP,

I realise that they could not have known about Stride when they let Eddowes walk out of the nick straight into the jaws of death. But I wonder how long afterwards they were informed?

Street talk may have been fast, but I'm not sure you can have it both ways. "Someone got their throat cut? Where you been, mate? That aint news, happens every other day in this shi* hole. Wake me up when you got something juicy for me to pass on."

Love,

Caz
X

[Caroline Morris]

If he didn't kill Stride, when he killed Eddowes, he was either aware of the Stride killing or he was not

I realise that, Nemo, but I'm entitled to my opinion that in the hugely unlikely event (again, my opinion) that these were independent murders, there would have been precious little chance of Eddowes' killer being aware of a dead body having been discovered in Berner Street by the time he was preparing for his Mitre Square banquet. I see it very much a case of a hasty appetizer followed by the main course, wiping his chops afterwards with the napkin provided by the apron.

If the man seen at the entrance to Church passage was the Ripper, he didn't appear to be in an unsatiated rage or in a particular hurry because of the encroaching police search. Perhaps that points toward the scenario in which the Ripper did not kill Stride and was unaware of her murder.Now that's a reasonable supposition, if I allow for someone else having had an appetite that very night for best end of Stride neck à la Jacque. You are right, there was nothing, no blood, no agitation, no smell of fear, no anger, to make Eddowes snatch her hand back from the chest of the man she seemed to be canoodling with. But assuming it was this man who would change beyond recognition as soon as the coast became clear, and turn into a frantic butcher for the few minutes he knew he had to spare, then go on his way again as if nothing had happened, we already knew that would take one cool customer, Stride or no Stride; one who could either lose and regain control at the flick of a switch, or maintain it rigidly throughout. If he was capable of feeling unsatiated rage or frustration, he was also capable of wearing it well and making it work for him, turning it into a steely determination that didn't show on the outside.

I don't hold to the cutting of a prostitute's throat on the street being such a rare occurrence that it must have been the work of the RipperThe fatal cutting of any adult female throat, on or off the street and anywhere in England was a rare occurrence. One prostitute dying on the street from a cut throat could be called unfortunate; two prostitutes dying on the street that way on one night, and this close together in space and time, was more than rotten luck - even without Polly and Annie (sorry, Colin - Nichols and Chapman - I'm learning!) going the same way so recently.

It's easy to suggest that many people fancied using the scare to jump on the bandwagon and maybe commit a little murder of their own, but much harder to argue for a man taking it further than vague threats, who just happened to be in the right area and wanted rid of a woman who was exactly the ripper's 'type', who then obliged by going out alone and hanging around that club after midnight, not just on the same night that the ripper would be active again, but at precisely the right time - not a moment too late - for this man to swing into action, not knowing that he would be allowing for the ripper to be murdering in Mitre Square by 1.30 and be suspected of doing both.

And again, the lack of a second cut, or any ripperish slashes, argues more against a copycat, in my view, than it argues against the ripper, who was after quite a bit more than two or three quick slashes in a ripper-unfriendly location.

Love,

Caz
X

[Nemo]

Well put SRA

A computer works in that way and if we could reduce everything into a binary code, giving each fork a well calculated weighting, we may have the answer popping out the other end on the ticker tape. But the answer could be 42, or something just as meaningless until the real facts are known

Thats a set of good arguments Caz

However, the perception that the two murders so close in time are such a rare anomaly that it implies certain conditions on JtR and what went on that night is not based on known facts

The real events that night could have produced the apparent anomaly by normal means

There only has to be a Ripper who had waited 2 or 3 weeks after Chapman before setting out on that Saturday to kill. His normal night out might be from midnight to the early hours say. Happening to be in the vicinity of Berner St and hearing of a "Ripper murder" he bolts home to get off the street with the knife, coming across the opportunity of killing Eddowes on the way

Or as per SRA's explanation , there must still remain a small possibility that the murders were actually totally unconnected at least by perpetrator

The Ripper may have just been in the vicinity of Mitre square and attacked Eddowes because it was so opportune at that time, and been amazed himself when he found out that another throat cutting had taken place shortly before his attack

It might have been the latter discussion of what denotes a Ripper killing that encouraged him to make such a mark at Dorset St so that there would be no doubt

Either of these scenarios would produce the same outward evidence of the two murders that appears at first glance to be an anomaly, but without the need for any particularly extraordinary event, so aren't they just as likely to be the correct scenarios as a double killing JtR, having supreme control of his actions between Berner St and Mitre Square etc etc?

You might think I'm speculating on a very outside possibility occurring but I think your arguments though more than valid are necessarily based on a string of assumptions because there is a dearth of known facts

You could fit a two man Ripper team into the known events just as easily as a double killer

I think the locations of the Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly killings are isolated relative to Dutfields Yard and not a place the Ripper intent on mutilation would have chosen, but that's just my weighted opinion at the moment

[SirRobertAnderson]

A
The fatal cutting of any adult female throat, on or off the street and anywhere in England was a rare occurrence.

Which Colin Roberts has definitely demonstrated.....the numbers don't lie.

BIt's easy to suggest that many people fancied using the scare to jump on the bandwagon and maybe commit a little murder of their own,

If you hold A to be true, then B cannot hold.

Or as per SRA's explanation , there must still remain a small possibility that the murders were actually totally unconnected at least by perpetrator

Of course. One cannot, and should not, rule it out. Just recognize it is highly unlikely.

[Colin Roberts]

The anomaly is Eddowes, killed before 2am, so something was different that evening

The major difference that night might have been that there were two murders

Is it possible that when the Ripper set out that night, he was definitely going to kill no matter what?

...and he was on the street when he heard about the Stride killing and the subsequent police searches

"The anomaly is Eddowes, killed before 2am, ..."

"... and he was on the street when he heard about the Stride killing ..."

What I find odd is that the need to 'distance' the ripper from Stride's murder is so strong that arguments are now being made for him being close enough to the scene to know that a woman had just been murdered on his patch using his method ...

"... arguments are now being made for him being close enough to the scene to know that a woman had just been murdered ..."

Hi Caz

I don't think anyone here has an agenda to distance the Ripper from Stride

This thread is to explore and discuss the reason why Eddowes was killed at a relatively early time in comparison to the other canonicals

"... why Eddowes was killed at a relatively early time in comparison to the other canonicals"

And, what of Stride, Nemo?

Wasn't she murdered earlier, in the morning, than was Eddowes?

Or, does she not count, as being one of the so-called "canonicals"?

Apparently, ...

"The anomaly is Eddowes, killed before 2am, ..."

"... and he was on the street when he heard about the Stride killing ..."

... she does not!

I don't hold to the cutting of a prostitute's throat on the street being such a rare occurrence that it must have been the work of the Ripper

"... being such a rare occurrence that it must have been the work of the Ripper" (My Emphasis)

Neither does anyone else, Nemo!

But, I do "hold" - very firmly, in fact - to the notion that murders of female adults, by way of 'Cut Throat', throughout England, during the decennial registration period, 1881-1890, were such an uncommon occurrence; that the so-called 'Autumn of Terror' must be regarded as having involved an extraordinary set of circumstances; and, that the so-called 'Double Event' must be regarded as having involved a hyper-extraordinary set of circumstances.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/4864755694_16f8567c42.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/septic_blue/4864755694/sizes/l/in/photostream/)
Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Cut Throat': 1881-1890 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/septic_blue/4864755694/sizes/l/in/photostream/))

Registered Deaths of Female Adults (Ages 20 - xx) throughout England, Classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Cut Throat'
1881: 3
1882: 0
1883: 2
1884: 5
1885: 3
1886: 3
1887: 9
1888: 15
1889: 6
1890: 7

---

Range: 0 - 15
- Mid-Range (i.e. 'Range Mid-Point'): 7.50

- Median: 4.00

- Mean (i.e. 'Average'): 5.30

- Year, in which We are Most Interested (i.e. 1888): 15.00

The extraordinary natures of these circumstances, in each instance (i.e. the so-called 'Autumn of Terror', and the so-called 'Double Event'), are most easily explained, by the presumption of a single perpetrator, of the five murders, most widely attributed to 'Jack the Ripper'; i.e. those of the 'Macnaghten-Five' victims: Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly.

The fact that the Ripper scare was extant adds to the possibility of some other person using the same method and isn't taken into account within the statistics.

But, what is "taken into account within the statistics", Nemo, is the simple fact that murders of female adults, by way of 'Cut Throat', can occur, only, at the hands of eager and capable perpetrators. And, those were clearly in short supply, throughout the whole of England, during the period under consideration.

There were a lot of people glad to take on the mantle of the Ripper and threatening to do women over in the "Whitechapel manner"

"... threatening to do women over in the 'Whitechapel manner'" (My Emphasis)

Talk is cheap, Nemo.

As for the "coincidence" of one similar murder being within a short time of another by two separate people, I've heard of and experienced more unbelievable coincidences happen on numerous occasions

"... I've heard of and experienced more unbelievable coincidences happen on numerous occasions"

That doesn't amount to much, at all, Nemo, if you don't perceive a 'Double Event', involving two independent murders (i.e. committed, by two different perpetrators), as being particularly "unbelievable", from the onset.

It is, therefore, imperative that we attempt to quantify various degrees of 'unbelievability'.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2499/3997951037_8eb1041fcc.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/septic_blue/3997951037/sizes/l/in/photostream/)
Cumulative Probability Distribution (From Murder-Site Mean-Center, i.e. Green Dot; To Extent of Greatest Deviation, i.e. Mary Ann Nichols Murder-Site) (Circular) (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/septic_blue/3997951037/sizes/l/in/photostream/))
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

Assuming a mathematical 'expectation', at the onset of 1888, that 4.40* murders of female adults, by way of 'Cut Throat', would occur throughout England, during the coming year, ...

* The mean number of registered deaths of female adults (ages 20 - xx) throughout England, classified as 'Murder', by way of 'Cut Throat': 1883-1887, i.e. the five-year period, preceding 1888.

...

That Two Independent Murders, of Female Adults, by way of 'Cut Throat', would Occur; within the depicted Color-Shaded Circular Region, and during a particular One-Hour Period:

- Perceptual Probability: 0.000000083812%

- Perceptual Chance: 1 -in- 1,193,142,903.19

- Perceptual Odds: 1,193,142,902.19 -to- 1

- Frequency, with which Such an Event Should Have Been Expected to Occur: Once -in- 6,042.30 Years*

* Allowing for 'continuously' sequential one-hour periods, as time-frames, within which the event could possibly have occurred: i.e. the one-hour period, ending at 1:00AM; the one-hour period, ending at 1:01AM; the one-hour period, ending at 1:02AM; the one-hour period, ending at 1:03AM; etc ...

The perceptual odds - of the occurrence of a 'Double Event', involving two independent murders (i.e. committed, by two different perpetrators) - that should have prevailed, at the onset of 1888, are, indeed, astronomical!

- They are slightly greater than the odds of thirty (30) sequential tosses of a coin, landing entirely on 'Heads'.

- They are significantly greater than the odds of ten (10) sequential tosses of a single die, landing entirely on '1'.

Have you ever witnessed a sequence of thirty tosses of a coin, Nemo, that landed entirely on 'Heads'?

What about a sequence of ten tosses of a single die, that landed entirely on the same number (i.e. '1', '2', '3', '4', '5', or '6')?

I always have an open mind in this case and would happily consider Stride as a Ripper victim, but I also perceive enough differences in the method and location of the Stride killing to accept that it could well be an unrelated murder

"... I also perceive enough differences ... to accept that it could well be an unrelated murder"

That it "could well be an unrelated murder", Nemo?

I am sorry, Nemo; but, you seem thoroughly convinced that it plainly and simply was!

You seem to be embracing the forgone conclusion that Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes each died at the hands of a different eager and capable 'Cut Throat' murderer!

However, the perception that the two murders so close in time are such a rare anomaly that it implies certain conditions on JtR and what went on that night is not based on known facts

Oh? It isn't?

... , there must still remain a small possibility that the murders were actually totally unconnected at least by perpetrator

If I had to quantify that "possibility", i.e. 'probability', I would give it about 33.33% (i.e. one chance, in three), objectively speaking; and, about 25.00% (i.e. one chance, in four), subjectively so.

... - even without Polly and Annie (sorry, Colin - Nichols and Chapman - I'm learning!) ...

:kiss:

[Howard Brown]

The other day, a couple of us were talking about the three City detectives out on Houndsditch Street ( Halse,Outram, and Marriott) at 2:AM on the night of the Double Event.
My question is...what were three detectives doing out at that time of morning other than responding to what A.P. suggested in his post on this thread...a telephone call from one police force to the other ?

If Outram and the other two were in the station ( Not Bishopsgate, but Old Jewry Street ) when a phone call arrived, that might explain their presence, wouldn't it ?
If not,then did detectives prowl the streets at 2 AM in City jurisdiction ?

[A.P. Wolf]

My word, Colin, I always admire the power and weight of your posts, but just to toss a cat into the pigeons, you will remember that I found a man who attacked two prostitutes with a knife in London the very night before the double event supposedly took place. Now I'd like to know the odds on that one.
If we examine the telephone conversations between differing policing organisations that are coming out just now concerning the last terrorist bombings in London I think we can get a better picture of the confusion, and police protectionism of 1888,

[Mags]

Doesn't the Sgt. White story suggest that City detectives were assigned to some hot spots?

I'm very impressed by the statistics and probibility calculations. I'm a mild Stride doubter myself, although her inclusion doesn't change any major issues for me.

I was impressed to see Tabram in consideration, though.

[Corey Browning]

Hello All,

Well seeing as I do not post on here much often, I am taking a leap with my wild theories.:phone:

Anyhow, I think of the 'double event' as a web, each event causing the next after it. A good example is dominos. A couple of key points lead me to believe that Eddowes was murdered by the same hand that killed Stride.

The first point is that in the case of a killer failing in such a profound manner(assuming Jack the Ripper killed Elizabeth Stride)as that of the failure in Dutfield's Yard, we would expect the murderer to do one of two things. 1) To try again at a later date and, 2) to look for another victim. It is obvious option two was chosen. Also, we would expect to see some form or injury that would indicate rage, assuming that Eddowes was the product of a failure, and this is easily found in the first case of facial mutilations. Also, the way at which the abdominal cavity was opened was very jagged, indicating a very quick and haphazardous cut.

The second point is as Colin expressed so professionaly, is the time index, and rarity of these kinds of crime. They were found about 45 minutes apart, and less than a miles distance from one another, the method at which the killer forced submission was almost exactly the same, and the victim choice was identicle.

Just my views.

[Howard Brown]

Mags:

White was in H Division...Met Police.

A.P.

You mean this assault ? Because I see a mountain where you see a molehill of difference between any C5 assault and this one.

North-Eastern Daily Gazette
Wednesday, September 26, 1888
*************************
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/October%202010/am.jpg

[A.P. Wolf]

No, not that, How, I was referring to the American waiter who attacked two prostitutes over the river, the night before the double event, and was released because he was vouched for as a good chap.

[Howard Brown]

This story speaks for itself. Johnson didn't attack them, its the other way around.

The man was accosted by the two women. Its not the first, nor would it be the last time we'll read about cases like this.

Daily News
Saturday, September 29, 1888
***********************
http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/October%202010/jj1.jpghttp://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/HowieNina/October%202010/jj2.jpg

[Monty]

The other day, a couple of us were talking about the three City detectives out on Houndsditch Street ( Halse,Outram, and Marriott) at 2:AM on the night of the Double Event.
My question is...what were three detectives doing out at that time of morning other than responding to what A.P. suggested in his post on this thread...a telephone call from one police force to the other ?

If Outram and the other two were in the station ( Not Bishopsgate, but Old Jewry Street ) when a phone call arrived, that might explain their presence, wouldn't it ?
If not,then did detectives prowl the streets at 2 AM in City jurisdiction ?

Telephone call How? Surely you mean telegram.

The 3 City detectives seemed to have been on routine duty in Aldgate. We have a similar presence on during the Coles murder which, to me, if far more curious than Halse & Co

Monty
:)

[A.P. Wolf]

My advice, How? Do not dismiss the Johnson case as lightly as you do. The import is enormous.

[Nemo]

Hi Colin

I certainly am not convinced that Stride was not a Ripper killing, I'm just considering that possibility for the purpose of this thread

Astronomical odds would seem to imply that the event is extremely likely NOT to occur, and that may be so, but there are numerous examples in life when events do occur against "astronomical odds"

My point is that there are a number of circumstances under which the double event might have come about, none of which can be taken into account within your figures

Your figures are qualified only by the number of similar murders occurring within a certain time frame, which is all well and good, but they in no way reflect what may have occurred that night to create the apparent anomaly

Once the Stride murder had occurred, the rest may have followed quite logically and, indeed, against the odds of two murders occurring within a short space of time from each other - I have no problem with that at all

The Stride murder occurring at an early time is precisely my point. If the Ripper was abroad, the Stride killing may have been the catalyst that caused him to kill Eddowes at that time and place

It is by no means obvious that he he hunted for a further victim after being disturbed in Berner St

Why didn't he seek further satisfaction after the Nichols killing in which he was possibly also disturbed before he entered the body? Was it too late in the morning to find another victim? Or was he able and prepared to go home and try again on another evening?

[Howard Brown]

Neil :

Thanks for the correction....I should have said telegram. A.P. didn't say telephone call, but for some reason I thought telephone call.

A.P.

The importance in the incident in question escapes me. I see none.
I see two women, one known for their accosting of men... bugging some man and things got out of hand. Hopefully,they got lumped up for their efforts when they hit the pavement.

[Howard Brown]

By the way, if anyone sees any similarity between this case and any of the individual WM murders... or the one from 1889 where a woman accosted a man, screamed holy hell, a riot nearly took place, and the man was released after being the actual victim and the 1888 murders...please chime in here.
Thanks.

A.P....or anyone else :

What should one be looking for that is inherent in both the WM and either of the two cases ( The Johnson case in 1888...or the one Bachert was involved in in 1889) ?

Thank you.

[Nemo]

If I could just clarify...

It was not my intention to discuss whether Stride was killed by the Ripper or not. That has been done adequately elsewhere

For the purpose of this thread I am assuming that he was not Stride's killer and investigating (speculating) the possible circumstances that would cause the Ripper to kill within one hour of Stride's murder

These include among others...

1) He was aware of the Stride killing and having a determination to kill on that night or the near future, the false Ripper scare from the Stride murder may have caused him to have to wait weeks before the police presence was reduced enough again - he hunted quickly for his own victim and found Eddowes, whether by purpose or design in the territory of a different police force

2) He was aware of the Stride murder, his "lair" lay in the direction of Mitre Square and he was on his way there when he came across Eddowes in an opportune circumstance

3) He was totally unaware of the Stride killing, killing Eddowes at that time and place of his own accord, and ventured toward the police hunt after killing Eddowes

etc

If anybody feels very strongly that the Ripper did kill Stride, then they may not wish to enter into such speculation and that is their prerogative

Regards

Nemo

[Caroline Morris]

Hi Nemo,

As you know, I just think the time was far too tight for your 1) to be a realistic possibility. That is separate from my views on the likelihood of two murderers acting independently that night.

You wrote earlier:

'It is by no means obvious that he hunted for a further victim after being disturbed in Berner St.'

Maybe not, but it's fairly evident that he was hunting for a further victim after Chapman in Hanbury St, just three weekends previously: he found Eddowes.

'I think the locations of the Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly killings are isolated relative to Dutfields Yard and not a place the Ripper intent on mutilation would have chosen, but that's just my weighted opinion at the moment'

Arguments can of course be made for every one of these locations being very far from ideal, in a number of ways. The killer trod a fine line between bold and foolhardy on each occasion, probably getting away by the skin of his teeth. Whoever killed in Dutfield's Yard was taking a huge risk, and the approaching pony and cart put a clearly defined limit on how long he could have hung around after delivering the fatal cut. But what keeps getting missed is that the ripper and his victims may well have met in far less isolated places before moving on together to the murder location, where he took a chance and stayed to inflict the damage.

With Stride, there is reason to believe that her killer similarly encountered her in a less isolated place, with the difference this time being that she stayed exactly where she was, so he was compelled to cut her throat there, regardless of the risk. I say compelled, because he did cut her throat, and quite deliberately, brutally and efficiently, and it's clearly not something that every Tom, Dick and Harry did on Saturday nights whenever a woman annoyed them.

Love,

Caz
X

[SirRobertAnderson]

With Stride, there is reason to believe that her killer similarly encountered her in a less isolated place, with the difference this time being that she stayed exactly where she was, so he was compelled to cut her throat there, regardless of the risk.

I can't help but wonder if Jack approached Stride from within the yard, and when she balked at going further back, he cut and ran.

It's not only the pony cart that might have caused ripper interruptus; the location of the body right outside a bunch of dwellings with doors opening into the Yard wasn't conducive to his work, either.

So you have a situation - IMHO - where Jack approaches Stride, who was on guard against him, having turned down one client already and been roughed up by another, and she balks at going down into the dark yard. He cuts her throat - expertly - and leaves, knowing she is as good as dead and can't possibly live to identify him.

[Mags]

You make a good point, Sir Robert, as right inside the gate in Dutfiels's Yard does seem- even for this risk taking guy- a stupid place to do his thing.

Farther back would have been ideal but between the gate/street and the door to the crowded Club where people were no doubt going in and out for some fresh air all the time, seems the riskiest site of the lot to me.

[SirRobertAnderson]

Farther back would have been ideal but between the gate/street and the door to the crowded Club where people were no doubt going in and out for some fresh air all the time, seems the riskiest site of the lot to me.

That's my thought as well. He had to get her deeper into the Yard if he was to go to town on her. She balked, he slashed and got out of Dodge.

[A.P. Wolf]

I believe, How, that one must always remember in the Johnson case that his evidence was believed by the police and courts because he had been vouched for as a 'gentleman', whilst the evidence of the women he attacked was disregarded simply because they were working prostitutes well known to the police. Such disregard by the police and courts for the evidence of working prostitutes has clouded and coloured many a modern case, and we would do well to contemplate that in a series of murders involving working prostitutes in 1888 it is highly likely that such evidence had been ignored, disregarded and eventually led to further murders taking place. And meanwhile someone vouched for a 'gentleman' who was actually an extremely violent killer of innocent unfortunates.
Just cleaning the streets eh?

[Colin Roberts]

I am proposing "astronomical" odds, ...

... , there must still remain a small possibility that the murders were actually totally unconnected at least by perpetrator
If I had to quantify that "possibility", i.e. 'probability', I would give it about 33.33% (i.e. one chance, in three), objectively speaking; and, about 25.00% (i.e. one chance, in four), subjectively so.

... whilst allowing for a chance of 1 -in- three.

I am, so it would seem, contradicting myself.

That is because the "astronomical" odds that should have prevailed, in this instance, at the onset of 1888, are perceptual, as opposed to being actual.

I have returned the discussion of 'Double Event' odds, to a more appropriate thread.

---

... just to toss a cat into the pigeons, you will remember that I found a man who attacked two prostitutes with a knife in London the very night before the double event supposedly took place. Now I'd like to know the odds on that one.

I'm only concerned with the real deal, AP.

- Savage Butchery
- Lack of Apparent Motive
- Lack of Apparent Attempt, to Conceal Corpus Delicti

---

By the way, ...

Welcome Back!

I have always enjoyed your colorful input!

[A.P. Wolf]

Thanks Colin, I might be colourful, but you are the best in the business!

[Howard Brown]

I believe, How, that one must always remember in the Johnson case that his evidence was believed by the police and courts because he had been vouched for as a 'gentleman', whilst the evidence of the women he attacked was disregarded simply because they were working prostitutes well known to the police. Such disregard by the police and courts for the evidence of working prostitutes has clouded and coloured many a modern case, and we would do well to contemplate that in a series of murders involving working prostitutes in 1888 it is highly likely that such evidence had been ignored, disregarded and eventually led to further murders taking place. And meanwhile someone vouched for a 'gentleman' who was actually an extremely violent killer of innocent unfortunates.
Just cleaning the streets eh? --A.P. Wolf


With all due respect A.P....whether this Johnson could be considered a suspect involved in any subsequent murder based on this court case and is similar to comparable cases of which you are inferring where the testimony of known prostitutes may or may not have been taken as factual in a court of law are two different things.
Johnson had positive bona fides, whereas the women were known for this particular sort of behavior. I see no reason whatsover to doubt those character references.
I consider the potentially violent scenario Johnson might have found himself in had the two harpys convinced a mob out of the vision of a constable that he had been the instigator the real issue.
We know it was a practice among street prosses to use the Whitechapel Murders to obtain whatever filthy lucre they could from innocent men or men who initially took the bait but eventually rejected it only to be faced with accusations of assault and making overt threats to these women.

[Nemo]

My apologies Colin, I've just re-read my first post and realise I didn't make it clear initially that I was assuming Stride was not a Ripper victim before I described the time of Eddowes' death as the anomaly

I hope my suppositions are a bit clearer at this late juncture

Regards

Nemo

Caz, just as an example, a person who had been infected by Stride, or had some other strong objection to her could easily have been her killer

BS may have been trying to force her home and off the street, disgusted that she was plying her trade when infected, killing her when she refused to go home, the method of killing inspired by the real Ripper

As I've tried to explain in my inadequate manner, the murder of Eddowes happening a short time later may be a direct consequence of this murder occurring, so the time being tight for two independent killers to strike is an illusion

Cris - there doesn't need to be anyone else beside the Ripper in the vicinity of Mitre Square who had knowledge of the Stride killing

Most people who heard of Stride would be gathering around Berner St, not making their way to Mitre Square

[Colin Roberts]

..., I might be colourful, but ...

Thank You, AP!

..., I've just re-read my first post and realise I didn't make it clear initially that I was assuming Stride was not a Ripper victim before I described the time of Eddowes' death as the anomaly

Thanks, Nemo.

I think we can now read from the same sheet of music.

[A.P. Wolf]

How, I can relate to the point you are making in that I myself have come across many cases from Whitechapel in the LVP where 'unfortunates' have done exactly as you suggest; and it has always been my contention that the killer would not have approached his victims but rather they would have approached him in an effort to extract some form of cash payment.
That is why I have always thought the popular image of a savage stalker hunting his prey down in the dark alleys of Whitechapel to be mildly ridiculous, for he had no need to, they would come to him, just like the two girls approached Johnson.
But that is not the point I was attempting to make, rather I was trying to reinforce the fact that the victim class itself in these crimes made any sort of successful criminal investigation into the murders nigh on impossible.

[Howard Brown]

A.P.
I recall a year or two ago when Colin Roberts suggested elsewhere that the victims ( not necessarily all, but perhaps a few) may have been begging at the time they were murdered. That might in fact have been an original intention when one or more met their killer, but I think their killer would have desired a quid pro quo for any monies they handed over rather than handing it to them outright and recieving nothing in return.

Having said that and the reason I said that at all, is that I agree with you about that class of female...homeless,beggar, and prostitute... having a reasonable chance of a complaint being addressed, would be difficult.

Good point, old bean.

[A.P. Wolf]

We agree to agree, How? Must be a full moon or something like that!
:faint:

[Howard Brown]

Not really,A.P. We agree on more things than you appear to think we do.:becky:
We just cover a lot of issues on which we have a varying degree of opinion about.

[Cris Malone]

Is it possible that when the Ripper set out that night, he was definitely going to kill no matter what?

...and he was on the street when he heard about the Stride killing and the subsequent police searches

In his determination to kill that night, he thought it prudent not to wait until his customary 3 - 4am period, but to kill ASAP before the hunt became widespread - hence the early time of attack on Eddowes

Hi Nemo,

My original answer to this last part was assuming that if there were two different killers out that night, Eddowes' murderer would have been unlikely to have heard of the previous one because there is no record of anyone connected with it mentioning that they had heard of the Stride murder previous to the discovery of Eddowes' body; thus, no, I don't think he heard of Stride's killing and then hurried to get a victim as a result... unless he was indeed around Berner St. when Stride was killed. That would be an even greater anomily if he didn't kill Stride too.

SRA,

On the idea that Stride may have been reluctant to go to the back of the yard with her muderer... The front of the yard was the darkest spot. The back was better illuminated and would offer him no escape. It is likely to me that the muderer and the victim were comfortable with the spot that she was found dead. For the killer, it offered him an out through the gate if things went wrong. For a seasoned veteran such as Stride, the front of the Yard offered 'perceived' security. The fact that the street and the club's side door was nearby meant nothing to a street prostitute or anyone coming upon her in her activities. Semi privacy was the best that any of these women could hope for if they weren't as fortunate as Kelly. Folks paid it no mind whatsoever and looked the other way. The front of Dutfields Yard was just as likely a place for a pros to service a client as any of the other spots. The backyard of Hanbury St. was a more precarious location by far.

I mentioned this some time back, but I once found a MEPO report where a man was complaining about prostitutes servicing clients right outside his window. The police's solution to the problem was to simply erect a street lamp there. They almost never bothered these women unless they did what Eddowes did by causing a disturbance.

It is no surprise to me that the IWMEC members probably lied about what their yard was used for; same as Mrs. Richardson at 29 Hanbury St... though her son had slipped up and admitted about what routinely went on there. This was the way the game was played. Its like finding a dog turd on the sidewalk. Everybody walks around it and ignores it until someone steps in it and has to scrape it off of their shoe.

[Nemo]

My initial thinking was that despite the scenario, there is nearly always an element of determination to kill on that date, above and beyond any compulsion to kill

ie He was displaying control and premeditation and he was constrained by that date, that Saturday in some way

[Caroline Morris]

Caz, just as an example, a person who had been infected by Stride, or had some other strong objection to her could easily have been her killer

It's certainly theoretically possible and within the laws of physics, Nemo. I'll give you that much. And if this kind of thing happened a lot, with broadly similar consequences for the strumpet concerned - or even one confirmed case would be something, either before, during or after the WM series - I might consider it not so staggeringly unlikely on this particular occasion.

But to happen so soon after two other local 'strumpets' had been cut down using the same method, for senseless reasons, and so shortly before one would hit the City dust for the first time, I would need something fairly tangible that would make it even more unlikely for the same man to have been responsible. He was certainly more than capable, had done it before and had no conceivable alibi, as we know he was within easy walking distance just minutes after Stride's life was pronounced extinct. We also know about documented double eventers whose behaviour is strikingly similar to what we see here, but without nearly as much similarity between their individual events - not even the same MO or weapon from first to second victim.

As I've tried to explain in my inadequate manner, the murder of Eddowes happening a short time later may be a direct consequence of this murder occurring, so the time being tight for two independent killers to strike is an illusion

No, you explained it perfectly well. I'm just not buying that there was enough time for the killer, wherever he was, to have learned about a fatal female throat cutting in Dutfield's Yard and to have decided - as a direct consequence - to seek out a likely victim of his own; to have found Eddowes; and to have lured her, or been led by her, to Mitre Square; and to have ripped her up and left by 1.45 at the very latest.

The time was tight for all that to have happened. How is it an illusion? It was tight enough for a single killer, instantly aware of what he'd just done and what he was determined to do next, never mind one whose plans only took shape when something entirely unexpected happened - another prostitute murderer on his turf using his method.

Two throat cutting killers who didn't know about each other when they murdered that night is for me the kind of whacking great coincidence that I would only contemplate if the evidence for it was too strong to ignore, or there was no reasonable alternative. The coincidence would, I agree, be an 'illusion' if the killer only murdered Eddowes as a direct result of someone else's earlier murder. But I see this as not only terribly unlikely for the practical reasons I have given, but quite unnecessary, since he could have murdered Eddowes as a direct result of his own earlier murder not going quite as well as he had hoped.

In short, I need a damned good reason for favouring a two-killer possibility, or putting it anywhere near as likely as a double-eventer.

I know that I may as well ring a bell and call out "unclean" whenever I go down this road, but if our man was aware that a certain letter had just been received, promising some more of his trademark handiwork, he might have felt compelled to deliver as quickly as possible, to not let the weekend go to waste and another idle week go by, in which case quality could have temporarily suffered, with quantity putting things right.

Love,

Caz
X

[Cris Malone]

The time was tight for all that to have happened. How is it an illusion? It was tight enough for a single killer, instantly aware of what he'd just done and what he was determined to do next, never mind one whose plans only took shape when something entirely unexpected happened - another prostitute murderer on his turf using his method.


Exactly.

However, I would be careful in regards to your hypothesis on the 'Dear Boss' letter. He probably just wanted to finish the job he set out to do that night.

[SirRobertAnderson]

The front of the yard was the darkest spot. The back was better illuminated

I don't believe I've ever read that before your comment. Live and learn! Can you point me towards a source, Chris? Thanks.

[Cris Malone]

Hi Sir Bob,

There are many sources that describe the yard. Sugden's book gives an excellent description; albeit a secondary source. Several papers on the day after the murder described some of the detail of the yard ( it was more like a small alley). Inquest testimony is a good source. Morris Eagle was actually called first to give the jury a layout of the premises. Diemshitz had to get down from his cart and light a match to see what the pony had shied from. PC Lamb gave a good description; as well as of the lighting in the street. There was no lamp directly across from the yard.

At the front, the opening to the 'yard' was approximately 9' 2" wide wth two 4 1/2 ft. wooden gates... so narrow that a six foot tall man could lay down across it, stretch out his arms, and almost touch both sides. No. 40, on the left (South) was two stories. The club building on the right was three; both shadowing the area even in daylight, except at or near mid-day.The photo in Phil Hutchinson's book gives an excellent example.

For 18 ft back, there were no ground floor windows on either side; the first available light being from the partly open kitchen door of the club. The first floor windows of the club shined only on the opposite wall of No. 42. To quote Sugden, "Here, for a distance of some 18 feet from the street, anyone entering the yard had to pass between the dead walls of Nos. 40 and 42. Here, after sunset, the darkness was almost absolute".

On the club side (North) past the kitchen was Morris Eagle's printing shop with a ground floor window that illuminated the back of the yard. On the opposite side, there were no ground floor windows ( or windows at all, for that matter) until it turned a corner to the left about 2 feet. Beyond that were 3 tenament cottages with ground floor windows opposite of Eagle's office. In the back was a workshop belonging to Hindley's sack manufactory and a stable that was no longer in use. Thus, the rear of the yard benefited from the lighted windows from each side but the front had none.

I'm actually glad you brought the subject up Sir Bob, because I believe that many misconceptions about Stride's murder stem from a lack of being able to visualize the layout of Dutfield's Yard. When ones sees how the scene was actually constructed, it is easier to understand why Stride was there and how it was a perfect spot for a street pros to quickly do business; especially in light of the other murders. The club's major business was over. She knew that. Anyone left coming or going through the side door would have just walked on by; minding their own business. This happened all of the time on the streets in the East End. Folks were just as used to it as people are today in certain neighborhoods of our major cities. If necessary, she could have wedged herself and her client between the open gate and the wall. She was found dead right up against that wall; her head only inches away.

Some people make a big deal as to what direction she was facing - either towards the back of the yard or towards the street - implying that she had to be facing the street; given that she was attacked from behind and her feet facing that direction... suggesting that she may have been walking away from her assailant when she was attacked. Well, that's not necessarily so. Whether she was facing the wall or had her back to it, there was a good chance she would have fallen in that direction anyway... given that the perpetrator was trying to get her to the ground quickly for the kill. There was little chance to struggle or escape when pinned against the wall; and she was found on her left side facing that wall. This killer took advantage of the most vulnerable position a prostitute could be in... preparing to service a customer. He didn't have to wait for her to lift her skirt. All he had to do is get her against the wall.

Mary Nichols was found next to a gate... as was Kate Eddowes. Chapman was in a corner between a wall and a fence. Even Tabram was killed on a small landing surrounded by walls. None of these women were killed in the open street or the middle of a court. The reason why is clear. It was like shooting fish in a barrel.

[Nemo]

Hi Caz

Let's say I have a firework in my possession on the street and a man 50 yards away lets off a firework

Because he has done so, I decide to let off my firework also

It would be incorrect for someone to assume no connection between the two incidents and declare "Would you believe it, a man let off a firework, and only 2 minutes later, another completely separate person let off a firework. What are the chances of two people having a firework, out of all the possible places in England, being within 50 yards of each other when they decided to let off their firework? The obvious conclusion would be that these two men are connected and possibly in cahoots, Hell! it's likely to be the same person if you take probabilities into account!"

[Caroline Morris]

I'm sorry, Nemo, I've only just returned to this thread and seen your post.

And I'm also sorry because I don't understand your analogy.

You don't have to be in any way an exceptional human being to carry fireworks anywhere in the UK and let them off, or to imitate this behaviour, especially at certain times of the year. And one person's reasons for letting one off will probably not differ fundamentally from the next person's. Make the first man's firework customised to sear into the flesh of a selected victim, and yours to go off when inserted into a selected victim's brain via the ear, and you will have two exceptional human beings with exceptional tastes in pyrotechnic behaviour, each inspiring the other.

The ripper was out that night with his knife and he used it on Eddowes in truly exceptional ways. But we know it happened and it was made slightly less exceptional in that place and that specific period of time, by the recent similarly exceptional murders of Tabram, Nichols and Chapman. Stride was killed in that context, unless the person who did it had been living in a cave at the time. And whoever killed her was acting in an exceptional way by doing so.

Of course I agree that two (exceptional) murderers could have been out that night, and the laws of physics may have allowed the second to have heard about the first's behaviour in time to be spurred into doing his own thing in Mitre Sq. I also agree that if there were two killers, we could not assume there was no connection at all between the incidents; there would have been, if only because the first man could hardly have been unaware of the implications of cutting a Whitechapel prossie's throat in late September 1888.

But that, to my mind, is yet another consideration before I could favour any two-killer scenario you care to offer me over a single killer. While Stride's killer was happy to adopt some of the ripper's methods for whatever reason, he didn't follow them up with any ripping, which he could have done if any design was involved. So if not the ripper, what did he imagine everyone would make of this new atrocity - one that would inevitably be described as 'another' prostitute murder, by the people on the street who were better qualified than anyone today to know what was exceptional in criminal terms and what wasn't?

Love,

Caz
X

[Phil Carter]

Hello Caz, Nemo, all,

Something just occured to me in all of this. I tend to sway towards a two killer scenario, but am not convinced by it.. however.. I was just thinking.

If the murderer of Stride was the same man as Eddowes, then we have a man clearly bent on mutilating his victim.
The choice of location therefore, the noise all around and relatively near, the amount of people around... this was a pretty poor place to choose this victim in order to satisfy his desires. There were hundreds of other places with no doubt many other women dotted around the area.. so the first question is why Stride and why there?

If that particular victim herself isn't the goal, then anyone will do for this form of satisfaction, no?
So if the victim, Elizabeth Stride, isn't the specific woman he was after, then the place he chose comes into focus.

Now if it is one and the same killer, all the way through the C5, then this man is clever in his choice of place. So clever that he chooses out of the way places and quiet spots to kill women.
He did that with Nicholls, Chapman, Eddowes and Kelly. He CHOSE those places very carefully, I think. So that puts his choice of the Stride location into focus because it stands out as against his MO. Not quiet, not secluded and no security from being disturbed.

Now if Dutfields Yard isn't the place of choice... then we open up for a two killer scenario. Because the "mutilator" is cunning enough to avoid noise, crowds and aims for quiet places. Therefore, the focus is asking again about the victim. Did it have to be Stride? If so, then we have the answer as to why his MO went haywire. If not? The MO goes out of the window, location wise.

I still believe that Stride was just a throat slashing. Never meant for anything more either. (A slash'n'dash I once heard it called) But that, of course, is as we know, argued by almost everybody interested in the subject.

You see, for me, changing the MO so drastically location-wise, from safer, quieter areas, is the same change as George Chapman, mutilator to poisoner.

best wishes as always

Phil

[Chris G.]

Hello Phil

Inebriation might be part of the picture in terms of location as well. He takes a chance in Dutfield's Yard because he's drunk and his desire is high to kill another woman. He might have thought that because he was killing the woman in the shadows and nobody had come into the yard for some minutes he could take a chance. Also the thrill of doing it with people nearby, out on the street or in the club, might have been the attraction of the location. If it was the same killer for Stride as for Eddowes, with the second murder of the night he might have gone back to his first inclination to choose a secluded location, for the mutilation that he had hoped to accomplish with Stride but was unable to carry out.

All the best

chris

[Caroline Morris]

What Chris said.

Love,

Caz
X

[Phil Carter]

Inebriation might be part of the picture in terms of location as well. He takes a chance in Dutfield's Yard because he's drunk and his desire is high to kill another woman. He might have thought that because he was killing the woman in the shadows and nobody had come into the yard for some minutes he could take a chance. Also the thrill of doing it with people nearby, out on the street or in the club, might have been the attraction of the location. If it was the same killer for Stride as for Eddowes, with the second murder of the night he might have gone back to his first inclination to choose a secluded location, for the mutilation that he had hoped to accomplish with Stride but was unable to carry out.

Hello Chris,

Thank you for the reply. Inebriation isn't the stock answer here. Firstly, we have no evidence at all that this killer even had one drink, let alone being drunk. If you are talking how inebriated a person is, then look at the control he exibits in the killings. This man is silent. Drink causes noise, scraping of boots against brick, feet scuffling in roadways, shoulders brushing against walls...just minor examples. Them the "placing, by desgn" of the entrailments. Drunk people are far less likely to place, I opine. They would be more likely to scattter, or throw. Less control.

Additionally, the thrill of doing it near people is also supposition. For if he then decided upon "going back to his first inclination" then that is also inclination of a person in control. A drunk person does not think that clearly, I opine.

best wishes

Phil

[Caroline Morris]

Sorry Phil, you deserved a fuller response than the one I gave you earlier.

We don’t know that location choice was under the killer’s control, or that he was particular clever about only going into attack mode in ‘out of the way places and quiet spots’. He may have simply approached a likely looking victim, relied on where she was (or wasn’t) prepared to go with him, and then had to decide at the last minute whether to commit himself to murder or behave himself this time.

The four other murders you mention may only have represented the few occasions when the killer felt secure enough to attack and go on to mutilate. These locations were not particularly secluded or secure, judging by how quickly the bodies were (or could have been, in the case of Chapman and Kelly) discovered. And certainly in the cases of Chapman and Eddowes, it would appear that they picked up their killer in a less secluded location than the one in which he was finally able to mutilate them.

The same would have applied in Stride’s case if her killer only expected her to pick him up on Berner St, before taking him somewhere more suited to ripping. If he trawled the main roads waiting to be approached by women, he may have chosen Commercial Road this time if Whitechapel Rd had netted him Nichols and Commercial St Chapman. But with the scare he had been causing lately he may have had no luck initially and wandered down Berner, only to see Stride - a woman on her lonesome by the club entrance - and thought “well it would be rude not to”. :) Let’s face it, any man could have been forgiven for thinking she might be bought for the price of the bed she wasn’t in yet. If her killer thought the same and was eager to take advantage, he probably assumed she would take him somewhere quiet enough for a spot of how’s yer father.

Your focus, if I may be so bold, is still on the killer, and not the victim, when you talk of a drastic change in MO ‘location-wise’, and suggest it’s comparable with going from mutilation to poison. It’s as though you see the ripper’s victims - uniquely among women - as puppets, dead wood with no input of their own and no influence on the situation. I would expect the ripper to see ’em that way, but not you. And he would have come unstuck eventually, because all women are not the same. What if he saw Stride standing there and thought his luck was in? What if this one said: “It’s here or nowhere, mush, take it or leave it” and he got ever so slightly cross because he’d had it so damned easy with Three Times a Doss Lady Nichols and Last Legs Chapman, and how dare this toothless tart answer him back?

What then?

Alternatively, she could have been giving him all the chat earlier down the pub, where there was safety in numbers, and he could have followed her to Berner, meaning to get what he felt was due to him. Can’t rippers be Saturday night arses too?

By the way, if you want an example of a double eventer with several pints inside him plus two lines of cocaine, exercising the most incredible control, look up Mark Dixie. He took specific trophies from his second victim (including her bra and knickers) after mutilating her and having sex with her dead body. But first he waited in the darkness for signs of anyone having heard him commit the actual murder and coming to investigate. He had left the sofa in his friends' house to seek out his victims, returned to it afterwards and they didn't even know he'd been gone.

Love,

Caz
X

[Phil Carter]

Hello Caz,

A very compelling reply, thank you.
You may make so bold, as we know each other enough to know that no offence is taken, nor given. (see what the price of a drinkee-poo or two does?)..lol..anyway, I digress.

No, we do not know the location was under the control of the killer. Neither do we know that the compelling scenario that you put forward is correct either.. (I know that sounds like poor counter-argument, it isn't meant quite that way)

Yes, my focus was on the killer, because I was looking at it from the perspective of the killer(s). I agree, from the victims perspective, it changes course, and alternatives will differ.

Mark Dixie, I would opine, is very much an exception. Because of the immense amount of control, that you mentioned. Yes, it is possible. No, I don't throw it out flat. But on balance, control, as I have mentioned before way back when in the thread, is to me, a word that needs a ring around it. It is the key to much of this.

Are we talking of a man in or with, no control(thought-wise), normal control, abnormally strong control, or someone a la Dixie. The insane person that sits around in gutters bashing the bishop with a five-knuckle shuffle in public is demonstrating either no control, or conversely immense control, depending on whether it is self-control during self abuse or not, whilst people walk on by....well dear old Kossi for example doesn't fall into the catagory of a controlled person, methinks..

(I bet Burt Bachache hadn't thought of that scenrio when he wrote that wonderful tune (Walk on by) ... unlike The Stranglers, and "Peaches"..:bathbaby:)

best wishes

Phil

[Caroline Morris]

Nice post, Phil.

The thing is, we don't know. All we can do is look at the crimes themselves, for clues about the amount of control the killer had at the time. Three types of control to judge here: a) control over himself and his own behaviour, b) control over his victims and their behaviour and c) control over his surroundings and the circumstances, eg potential witnesses and disturbances.

To have any degree of control over streetwise, feisty women like Stride and Eddowes appear to have been, he had to have a certain amount of control over himself first. That's assuming there was some kind of preamble, and he didn't just overpower them physically before they knew he was even in their presence.

All I was doing with Dixie was using him to illustrate what his type of offender is capable of, when high on drink and/or drugs. The ripper may not have been a Dixie type, but there are some extremely strong parallels between Dixie's double event and the murders of Stride and Eddowes when considered as a pair. The second crimes in each case have parallels in their own right, while the first attacks are uncannily similar (apart from the fact that Dixie's first victim survived - he was disturbed by a passing taxi). But it is actually Stride's murder that contains striking elements of both Dixie's attacks, which were on perfect strangers and entirely unprovoked. That is hard for me to ignore when I hear arguments that she was a one-off, murdered for different reasons by someone who knew her.

Moreover, the two Dixie attacks were far more dissimilar from each other than can be said about Stride and Eddowes, yet there is no doubt that the same man was responsible for the former pair. Forty minutes and 400 yards separated Dixie's victims, and Croydon wasn't even in the middle of a serial killer scare at the time. For me, that rings enough alarm bells, without Colin's statistics showing us just how exceptional fatal knife attacks on adult women were, anywhere in England, in the 1880s - apart from the second half of 1888 that is.

Love,

Caz
X

[Jon Simons]

(I bet Burt Bachache hadn't thought of that scenrio when he wrote that wonderful tune (Walk on by) ... unlike The Stranglers, and "Peaches"..:bathbaby:)


Phil, The Stranglers were just walking along minding their own business.

[Phil Carter]

Phil, The Stranglers were just walking along minding their own business.

Hello Jon,

"If the money's no good, get a grip on yourself...."

best wishes

Phil :wave: