Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Discussion : What Do We Underestimate In The Whitechapel Murders Case ?

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

  • Discussion : What Do We Underestimate In The Whitechapel Murders Case ?

    Thread for discussing what we, as long time researchers or even newcomers to the Case, feel are underestimated events, statements, deeds, or possibly clues in the Whitechapel Murders ?

    Do we place too little emphasis on Sir Robert Anderson's pronouncements ? If so, then how or why ?

    Do we place too little emphasis on some newspaper accounts....let's use the one Cris Malone brought up which appeared in the Star on the day after the Double Event. Should we keep a more open mind to reports like that one ?

    " Even though this came from the Star - Oct. 1st edition, and should be considered with caution, I've always found this intriguing for obvious reasons, even though the timing would be a little off. But what if, in this instance, this was true. Too bad we'll never know, but if there was some validity to it... it would be one hell of a clue:

    From two different sources we have the story that a man when passing through Church-lane at about half-past one, saw a man sitting on a door-step and wiping his hands. As every one is on the look out for the murderer the man looked at the stranger with a certain amount of suspicion, whereupon he tried to conceal his face. He is described as a man who wore a short jacket and a sailor's hat.


    Thread open for discussion............
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact [email protected]

  • #2
    Let me throw one or two out here....

    Does anyone feel that Nichols' murderer was the fellow who approached night watchman Patrick Mulshaw ?

    Does anyone think there's something to James Blekingskop's statement about someone approaching him near Mitre Square and asking whether he saw a man and woman go through the area ?
    To Join JTR Forums :
    Contact [email protected]

    Comment


    • #3
      The idea that Jack was just a lucky sod not to get caught. With all the old Royal and conspiracy theories some people may think there was a big brain behind the murders. I just think the killer had a good local knowledge and was very lucky.

      Comment


      • #4
        2 points (horns?)

        Hello Howard. Another good idea for a thread.

        "Does anyone feel that Nichols' murderer was the fellow who approached night watchman Patrick Mulshaw?"

        OK. Why would he have approached him?

        "Does anyone think there's something to James Blekingskop's statement about someone approaching him near Mitre Square and asking whether he saw a man and woman go through the area?"

        Sure. Sounds like the tecs were doing their job just after a murder.

        Cheers.
        LC

        Comment


        • #5
          Lynn:

          Reason I asked the question about Mulshaw & this alleged encounter...was whether anyone thought the killer might have been cocky enough to do something like that.
          To Join JTR Forums :
          Contact [email protected]

          Comment


          • #6
            Good night, old cocky.

            Hello Howard. Thanks.

            I understand. That's rather expected by some.

            But do you think, as I do, that cocky killers are often nabbed?

            Cheers.
            LC

            Comment


            • #7
              I agree Jon.....its likely that the Ripper wouldn't stand out as some may think in an environment like Spitalfields/Whitechapel.

              Lynn....I think many get caught from either laziness or exaggerated ego.
              Take the case of Maury Terry....the St. Louis serial killer....who sent "Dear Boss" like missives to the police/press....and a Google map of where one of his victims was dumped.
              Technicians in the police department nailed him by checking out all the IP's that accessed that particular page on Google within a short period of time....and ran him down.
              Some killers get nailed because they get so used to success, they get lazy.
              To Join JTR Forums :
              Contact [email protected]

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Lynn Cates View Post
                Hello Howard. Thanks.

                I understand. That's rather expected by some.

                But do you think, as I do, that cocky killers are often nabbed?

                Cheers.
                LC
                Nabbed and released, you mean?

                So was the Britannia-man, and in our day, Sutcliffe was interviewed nine times.
                Some of these killers found amusement in being so close to the investigation, yet just out of reach. I guess there is a parallel there with a killer who murders right under the noses of sleeping tenants.
                Regards, Jon S.
                "
                The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
                " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
                Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

                Comment


                • #9
                  letters

                  Hello Howard. Thanks.

                  Can't disagree. But personally I have no reason to believe in an egomaniacal killer.

                  Of course, if any of the letters should prove genuine . . .

                  Cheers.
                  LC

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    deep down

                    Hello Jon. Thanks.

                    "Some of these killers found amusement in being so close to the investigation, yet just out of reach."

                    Absolutely. And if we assume that kind of killer here, the conclusion would follow at once.

                    But I have no reason to assume that.

                    On the other hand, deep down, I am a bit of a romantic.

                    Cheers.
                    LC

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think we underestimate how much the police knew, and how broad the investigation was.

                      I think we underestimate how busy the streets were, both day & night.
                      Regards, Jon S.
                      "
                      The theory that the murderer is a lunatic is dispelled by the opinion given to the police by an expert in the treatment of lunacy patients......."If he's insane
                      " observed the medical authority, "he's a good deal sharper than those who are not".
                      Reynolds Newspaper, 4 Nov. 1888.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        On Post 2 of this thread, Howard spoke of a statement made by a man named James Blekingskop.

                        I know my memory isn't as good as it used to be. But still, I don't remember this Blekingskop guy at all or where his statement about Mitre Square was made. Perhaps somebody can briefly steer me in the correct direction on this. Thanks.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          He was a nightwatchman looking after works in St.James Place.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi, D.J.

                            Don't you think we underestimate the Ripper's age?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Joe Chetcuti View Post
                              On Post 2 of this thread, Howard spoke of a statement made by a man named James Blekingskop.

                              I know my memory isn't as good as it used to be. But still, I don't remember this Blekingskop guy at all or where his statement about Mitre Square was made. Perhaps somebody can briefly steer me in the correct direction on this. Thanks.
                              Originally posted by D.J.Adams View Post
                              He was a nightwatchman looking after works in St.James Place.
                              I don't think any official record of his evidence survives. It was reported briefly by the Star on 1 October 1888. There's a transcript on Casebook:
                              https://www.casebook.org/press_repor...r/s881001.html

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X