Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Hasn't the Case Been Solved?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Maria Birbili
    replied
    Originally posted by How Brown View Post
    What I do consider possible is that Kozminski might have been identified by someone but only in regard to that particular murder.
    Wow, ALL this research about a particular suspect overwhelmingly present and documentedly messing up the investigation on Berner Street, and How Brown is not yet convinced! Wow, wasn't expecting this... :-(

    Leave a comment:


  • Howard Brown
    replied
    So you believe that the Jewish witness who refused to make an identification was Schwartz instead of Lawende? I had no idea you are tending towards Kozminski-philitis of lately!! __________________

    I don't maintain any concrete position, Maria, regarding the i.d.
    What I do consider possible is that Kozminski might have been identified by someone but only in regard to that particular murder.
    I'm a nosuspectphile...I don't believe the man's name who committed the Nichols,Chapman,and Eddowes murders has surfaced.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jonathan Hainsworth
    replied
    In terms of historical methodology a contingent solution has always existed, in terms of the police identifying the fiend.

    You just have to convincingly explain why the police disagreed, and why a single opinion -- say Anderson -- trumps the others in terms of reliability.

    It was subsequent, colourful writers like William Le Queue and Leonard Matters who rebooted the whole case as a 'mystery', whose solution was known to these writers but unknown to anybody at the Yard.

    A strong case can be made -- actually several -- that the primary sources trump the secondary sources, as some secondary sources have argued (Cullen for Macnaghten and Druitt, Evans and Gainey for Littlechild and Tumblety, Sudgen for Abberline and Chapman, and Begg for Anderson/Swanson and Aaron Kosminski -- apologies for putting it a bit crudely.)

    Leave a comment:


  • Maria Birbili
    replied
    Originally posted by How Brown View Post
    Maria:
    I think its possible that what Anderson claimed regarding the "case" being solved...the Polish Jew and all that.... refers to Berner Street alone...and he might have been on the money.
    Since he was of the view that the Berner Street murder was a Ripper murder, that meant any positive identification made by the witness for that crime, this meant that all the other murders could be attributed to the same person.
    So you believe that the Jewish witness who refused to make an identification was Schwartz instead of Lawende? I had no idea you are tending towards Kozminski-philitis of lately!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Howard Brown
    replied
    Maria:

    I think its possible that what Anderson claimed regarding the "case" being solved...the Polish Jew and all that.... refers to Berner Street alone...and he might have been on the money.
    Since he was of the view that the Berner Street murder was a Ripper murder, that meant any positive identification made by the witness for that crime, this meant that all the other murders could be attributed to the same person.

    I'm on the fence about Berner Street ( not that it matters ) being a Ripper murder.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maria Birbili
    replied
    Originally posted by How Brown View Post
    I would suggest that it is possible that the Berner Street mystery has been solved, but all the other murders {...}
    So, am I to understand that you currently consider Stride as non canonical, How? ;-)

    I've voted at least 4 reasons in this poll, which amounts to:

    - Due to logistical reasons and to the perp having constituted a new phenonenon of an “impersonal“ serial killer attacking unknown victims, it was very difficult for the contemporary police to investigate the case without bias and to document it accurately.

    - Ripperology started too late, when most of the sources were already discarded or lost.

    - If JTR was an unknown local, which is still the most plausible possibility, there might be no evidence or information ever collected on him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Phillip Walton
    replied
    A lot of the crucial evidence was destroyed or lost. It's unlikely ever to be solved.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Originally posted by Chris G. View Post
    Hello Karen

    No doubt there will be many discoveries to be made, although I somehow doubt whether any will reveal who Jack was. After 123 years of not knowing, including the years that the police were actively investigating the case, and still no definitive answer, I doubt if there will be one. In fact to think that there may be some sudden discovery of the key to the case seems entirely a romantic notion, in my view. But I suppose that is one of the allures of the Great Victorian Mystery!

    Cheers

    Chris
    I agree with you Chris, that it is unlikely we will ever conclusively discover who the Ripper (or indeed Rippers) was, but I'm sure there are other little gems to find that will spark more debate and keep the mystery alive.
    That is my hope anyway

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris G.
    replied
    Originally posted by Karen Sweet View Post
    I, like most people with an interest in this case would love to think there is more evidence to be discovered out there and I honestly feel there will be more interesting, related discoveries made.
    Hello Karen

    No doubt there will be many discoveries to be made, although I somehow doubt whether any will reveal who Jack was. After 123 years of not knowing, including the years that the police were actively investigating the case, and still no definitive answer, I doubt if there will be one. In fact to think that there may be some sudden discovery of the key to the case seems entirely a romantic notion, in my view. But I suppose that is one of the allures of the Great Victorian Mystery!

    Cheers

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • admin tim
    replied
    Some other opinions.....

    http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=176236

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I, like most people with an interest in this case would love to think there is more evidence to be discovered out there and I honestly feel there will be more interesting, related discoveries made.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chris G.
    replied
    "Because critical evidence, which does exist, remains undiscovered."

    -- This is very hopeful, and probably unrealistic considering that we know that the case files are missing, so it's problematic to say that there is evidence "which does exist" -- the opposite is probably true.

    Look at it this way: even if we had those case files, the answer might not be obvious since it was not obvious to the original police officers who investigated the case and who had that information.

    To me the best answer is "Because the murders were executed by an unknown for which no evidence or knowledge has ever existed."

    Best regards

    Chris

    Leave a comment:


  • Stephen Thomas
    replied
    Oh, OK. #7 it is for me then.

    Leave a comment:


  • admin tim
    replied
    Originally posted by Stephen Thomas
    You missed out 'the case was solved and covered up'.
    That was intended to be covered by #7, which I have since clarified.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stephen Thomas
    replied
    You missed out 'the case was solved and covered up'.

    Does MM imply that JTR is still on the loose?

    As in he is sitting at home drinking tea with his feet up?

    Ready to begin his business again any time?

    Errrrr, no MM doesn't.

    And if not why not?

    Answer (duh), because the case was solved and covered up.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X