Whiggishness and the anti-Anderson Lobby

[Paul]

I'm not sure of the extent, to which this would account for the abundance of estranged women, specifically in the Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields.

The proximity of the docks doesn’t account for the number of estranged women, but perhaps accounts for the number of prostitutes.

As above, however, I believe that you should be addressing Jeff.

Sorry, but you seemed pretty emphatic in your response to Jeff that there was no evidence from the crime scenes to indicate where the murderer lived, whereas we can perhaps deduce from the crime scenes that the murderer was familiar with the area and that the apron suggests that he was moving away from the City into the East End. This reasoning is open to alternative interpretation however, but we must then allow in the knowledge of serial killers gained over the years since 1888 and ask whether there is evidence that many serial killers travel from a distance to their killing grounds.

The remarkable lack of dispersion, between the applicable murder-sites, could - that's could, Jeff - be indicative of a perpetrator that was intimately familiar with the immediate vicinity of the 'killing field', but much less familiar with its broader surroundings. A perpetrator that resided 'locally' would, presumably, have been quite familiar with the broader vicinity.

As I understand it, the lack of dispersion isn't "remarkable" and does not allow one to infer that the murderer was unfamiliar with his surrounding geography. As I understand it, most serial killers live in or very close to their killing “comfort zone”, but one cannot infer from that that they are unfamiliar with the surrounding geography. Today serial killers travel to work, go the shops, to social activities, and to all the places that non-serial killers do, so they have much the same knowledge of their location as anyone else, yet they still kill within their “comfort zone”. In 1888 ordinary people had less reason to travel far from their home, so we'd need to know how knowldgeable they might be of the world beyond their own perhaps limited geography.

[Colin Roberts]

I'm not sure of the extent, to which this would account for the abundance of estranged women, specifically in the Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields.

The proximity of the docks doesn’t account for the number of estranged women, but perhaps accounts for the number of prostitutes.

You have missed both facets of the point that I was attempting to convey.

- Estrangement, in many of the specific instances, with which we are familiar, e.g. Tabram, Nichols, and Chapman, led to destitution, which in turn, led to prostitution.

- A tremendous portion of London's 'East End' was in much closer proximity to the docks, than was the Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields.

As above, however, I believe that you should be addressing Jeff.

Sorry, but you seemed pretty emphatic in your response to Jeff that there was no evidence from the crime scenes to indicate where the murderer lived, ...

And, I am still just as emphatic.

Again; ...

The apron provides a direction of regress, from Mitre Square: No more; no less.

The deductions that you have made, on the basis of that direction of regress, are indeed very sensible.

But, I would contend that Jeff's enthusiasm for the significance of the direction of regress, is in need of a bit of tempering.

The remarkable lack of dispersion, between the applicable murder-sites, could - that's could, Jeff - be indicative of a perpetrator that was intimately familiar with the immediate vicinity of the 'killing field', but much less familiar with its broader surroundings. A perpetrator that resided 'locally' would, presumably, have been quite familiar with the broader vicinity.

As I understand it, the lack of dispersion isn't "remarkable" and does not allow one to infer that the murderer was unfamiliar with his surrounding geography. As I understand it, most serial killers live in or very close to their killing “comfort zone”, but one cannot infer from that that they are unfamiliar with the surrounding geography. Today serial killers travel to work, go the shops, to social activities, and to all the places that non-serial killers do, so they have much the same knowledge of their location as anyone else, yet they still kill within their “comfort zone”. In 1888 ordinary people had less reason to travel far from their home, so we'd need to know how knowldgeable they might be of the world beyond their own perhaps limited geography.

The lack of dispersion is 'remarkably remarkable', and most certainly allows one "to infer that the murderer was unfamiliar with his surrounding geography".

The average deviation, from the murder-site mean-center¹ was a mere 505 yards.

The 'standard deviation', - a statistical measure of dispersion - from the murder-site mean-center¹ was a mere 612 yards.

The greatest single deviation (i.e. the Nichols murder-site), from the murder-site mean-center¹ was a mere 843 yards.²

¹ i.e. the 'average' of the six most applicable murder-sites (Tabram + the 'Macnaghten-Five'): The southwest corner of Wentworth Street / Osborn Street

² Hence, the interrogative that I posed above: "Would he (Aaron Kosminski) have been anchored to the southwest corner of Wentworth Street / Osborn Street, by way of an 843-yard chain?"

The six murder-sites under consideration, can be circumscribed by an irregular convex pentagon, having an area of just 0.25 square-miles.

0.25 Square-Miles!

The 'killing-field' of 'Jack the Ripper' can be justifiably described as having been a mere quarter, of a square-mile.

Again; ...

The lack of dispersion is 'remarkably remarkable'!

Would Aaron Kosminski, George Hutchinson, or any other 'local', have needed Mommy & Daddy to hold his hand, when venturing outside of his quarter square-mile playpen, i.e. his quarter square-mile "comfort zone"?

Philip Hutchinson, who commutes to the 'killing-field' of 'Jack the Ripper', on a very regular basis, knows that quarter square-mile, like the back of his hand. But, he is not particularly familiar with its broader surroundings.

In 1888 ordinary people had less reason to travel far from their home, so we'd need to know how knowldgeable they might be of the world beyond their own perhaps limited geography.

Where was Aaron Kosminski cited, for walking his dog, without a leash?

Charles Lechmere, aka 'Charles Cross', traversed the entire 'killing field' of 'Jack the Ripper', - and some - twice, each day.

You earlier mentioned the proximity of Spitalfields, to the major docks, e.g. St. Katharine Docks, London Docks, West India Docks, etc.

A dock laborer, residing in Spitalfields, would have departed the quarter square-mile 'killing-field' of 'Jack the Ripper', by a long-shot, each morning, when walking to work.

[Colin Roberts]

The lack of dispersion is 'remarkably remarkable', and most certainly allows one "to infer that the murderer was unfamiliar with his surrounding geography".

The average deviation, from the murder-site mean-center¹ was a mere 505 yards.

The 'standard deviation', - a statistical measure of dispersion - from the murder-site mean-center¹ was a mere 612 yards.

The greatest single deviation (i.e. the Nichols murder-site), from the murder-site mean-center¹ was a mere 843 yards.²

¹ i.e. the 'average' of the six most applicable murder-sites (Tabram + the 'Macnaghten-Five'): The southwest corner of Wentworth Street / Osborn Street

² Hence, the interrogative that I posed above: "Would he (Aaron Kosminski) have been anchored to the southwest corner of Wentworth Street / Osborn Street, by way of an 843-yard chain?"

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)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

Red: Accumulation of Probability Distribution, from the Murder-Site Mean-Center, to the Extent of Greatest Deviation, i.e. the Nichols Murder-Site
- Standard Deviations from Murder-Site Mean-Center: 1.38
- Radius: 843.50 Yards
- Area: 0.72 Square-Miles
- Accumulation of Probability Distribution (Murder-Site 'Population'), as Calculated: 77.30%*
- Accumulation of Probability Distribution (Geographic Profile Model), as Calculated: 42.56%**

* Given a perception of late November 1888 that this series of murders would continue ad infinitum; the expectation should have been that 77.30% would occur within the specified circular area, i.e. within 1.38 Standard Deviations of the murder-site Mean-Center (green dot).

This can be loosely interpreted to mean that in late November 1888, the perceived probability of any impending subsequent murder occurring within this circular area, should have been 77.30%.

** My Geographic Profile Model would suggest a 42.56% probability that the perpetrator(s) of these crimes operated from a base that was situated within the specified circular area, i.e. within 1.38 Standard Deviations of the murder-site Mean-Center (green dot).


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)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

The yellow circle is the 'Circumcircle' of the murder-site distribution. Its center (yellow dot) is the 'Circumcenter' of the murder-site distribution, i.e. the point, from which the extent of greatest deviation is minimized.*

The 'Circumcircle' is, therefore, the smallest circle, with which the murder-site distribution can be circumscribed. It is, effectively, the two-dimensional 'Range', of the murder-site distribution.

* The center of the red color-shaded circular region (green dot) is, again, the 'Mean-Center' of the murder-site distribution, or the 'average murder-site'; i.e. the point, from which the sum of the squared deviations is minimized. This point can also be referred to as the 'Center of Mass', of the murder-site distribution.

The Tabram murder-site, is the 'Median-Center' of the murder-site distribution, or, more formally, its 'Center of Minimum Distance'; i.e. the point, from which the sum of the deviations is minimized.

Most geographic profilers believe that in the general-case scenario, there is at least a 50.00% probability that the perpetrator has operated, from within the 'Circumcircle'. This general-case 'rule of thumb', so to speak, is typically referred to as 'Circle Theory'.

~~~

The six murder-sites under consideration, can be circumscribed by an irregular convex pentagon, having an area of just 0.25 square-miles.

0.25 Square-Miles!

The 'killing-field' of 'Jack the Ripper' can be justifiably described as having been a mere quarter, of a square-mile.

The 'Killing Field' of 'Jack the Ripper': Convex Hull Polygon, i.e. Irregular Convex Pentagon - 0.25 Square-Miles (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

~~~

I must clarify the fact that I am not lobbying, for the acceptance a non-local offender!

In fact, I perceive a probability of at least 66.67%, i.e. two thirds, that 'Jack the Ripper' resided 'locally' to the murder-sites that bore his signature.

Of course, that doesn't amount to much, in the absence of a set of parameters that define the term 'local', as it would apply, to this particular case of serial murder. I will, therefore, attempt to explain the parameters that I have chosen, in good time.

That, for which I am lobbying, is simply the relaxation of Jeff's absolute, matter-of-fact insistence that the number of relevant factors is, indeed, quite minimal, i.e. that it's all so very simple. It's not!

Cumulative Probability Distribution (0.00 - 3.00 Standard Deviations) (Elliptical Perspective) (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

The overall 'Profile Focus'* that I would recommend:

* That's Focus! Nothing more; nothing less! Focus; which is all that any profile should generate!

Primary Focus:
- Male
- Aged 28-38
- Gentile
- Charles Booth's Classifications C & D ("Poor"), E & F ("Above the 'Line of Poverty'")
- Residing within One Standard Deviation (Red) of the Murder-Site 'Mean-Center'

Secondary Focus:
- Male
- Aged 23-43
- Gentile, or Sephardic Jew
- Charles Booth's Classifications B ("Very Poor"), C & D ("Poor"), E & F ("Above the 'Line of Poverty'"), G ("Lower Middle Class")
- Residing within Two Standard Deviations (Red/Orange) of the Murder-Site 'Mean-Center'

Tertiary Focus:
- Male
- Aged 18-48
- Gentile, Sephardic Jew, or Ashkenazi Jew
- Charles Booth's Classifications A ("Vicious" (i.e. 'Vice-Ridden'); "Semi-Criminal"), B ("Very Poor"), C & D ("Poor"), E & F ("Above the 'Line of Poverty'"), G ("Lower Middle Class"), H ("Upper Middle Class")
- Residing within Three Standard Deviations (Red/Orange/Yellow) of the Murder-Site 'Mean-Center'

~~~

Any continuation of this discussion would be better placed in the thread, from which the following quotation is derived.

JTRForums Debating Society - Week 3/4

It's not 1888; rather it's 1868. But, it is telling, nonetheless.






H Division - 'Whitechapel', Metropolitan Police Force, 1888 (Click Image, to Enlarge in flickr)
Underlying Aerial Imagery: Copyright Google Earth, 2007
Overlying Plots, Labels and Color-Shadings: Copyright Colin C. Roberts, 2010

In 1868, H Division's jurisdiction consisted merely of the 'upright', i.e. 'vertical', western portion, of its 1888 jurisdiction, as seen in the above imagery. At that point in time, the eastern 'abutment', of its 1888 jurisdiction, as seen above, fell within the jurisdiction of K Division.


Jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Police, 1837
(Click Image, and Utilize the 'Zoom' Feature, to Enlarge in the British Library 'Online Gallery')

While the constabulary of K Division may have been burdened with a greater number of known prostitutes, in 1868, their H Division counterparts were forced to contend, in all likelihood, with a greater concentration of the same.

I would certainly think that a fair few of H Division's known prostitutes, in 1868, and for that matter, in 1888, emanated from the western-most reaches of the Parish of St. Matthew Bethnal Green; particularly the area known as "Friar's Mount" (being, perhaps, also known as the 'Nichol' - at least internally so)². But, I would seriously doubt that many - if, for that matter, any at all - of these prostitutes, were the sort with whom 'Jack the Ripper' would have dared to tangle.

² I have yet to see a pre - A Child of the Jago reference, i.e. a pre-1896 reference, to either the 'Nichol', or the 'Old Nichol'.

I would also certainly think that many of H Division's known prostitutes, in 1868, and for that matter, in 1888, emanated from the Middlesex portion of the Parish of St. Botolph without Aldgate, as well as the western portions of the Parishes of St. George in the East and St. John of Wapping. These prostitutes, in many - if not most - instances, would have been "sailors' wenches", who, like their western Bethnal Green counterparts, to the north, were probably not the sort with whom 'Jack the Ripper' would have risked outright physical confrontation.

Finally, I would certainly think that many of H Division's known prostitutes, in 1868, and for that matter, in 1888, emanated from the 'rookeries' of the Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields; particularly those 'rookeries' that were centered on Dorset Street and Flower & Dean Street. Many of these prostitutes were vagabonds that had been born into better circumstances, in other parts of London, or for that matter, other parts of the United Kingdom; having somehow become nothing more than wretched, alcoholic, vagrant 'dollymops'. As these prostitutes constituted what may have been the greatest concentration of estranged female desperation and vulnerability, in the whole of London's metropolis, in 1888; they might have been "Jack the Ripper's" 'cup of tea', so to speak.

There are restaurants to be found, in great number, throughout London. However, were I to have a particular affinity for Bengali cuisine, I believe that I would direct myself toward Brick Lane, on a very regular basis; whether I emanated from East London, West London, North London, South London, or for that matter, Blackheath.

Wretched, middle-aged 'dollymops' might have been "Jack the Ripper's" affinity. And, he might have known just where to find them.

"I would certainly think that many of H Division's known prostitutes, in 1868, and for that matter, in 1888, emanated from the 'rookeries' of the Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields; particularly those 'rookeries' that were centered on Dorset Street and Flower & Dean Street. Many of these prostitutes were vagabonds that had been born into better circumstances, in other parts of London, or for that matter, other parts of the United Kingdom; having somehow become nothing more than wretched, alcoholic, vagrant 'dollymops'. As these prostitutes constituted what may have been the greatest concentration of estranged female desperation and vulnerability, in the whole of London's metropolis, in 1888; they might have been "Jack the Ripper's" 'cup of tea', so to speak."

"As these prostitutes constituted what may have been the greatest concentration of estranged female desperation and vulnerability, in the whole of London's metropolis, in 1888; they might have been "Jack the Ripper's" 'cup of tea', so to speak."

Estrangement, in many of the specific instances, with which we are familiar, e.g. Tabram, Nichols, and Chapman, led to destitution, which in turn, led to prostitution.

I have been trying to make the point that 'Jack the Ripper' may have had an affinity for a particular type of prostitute: One, which was, in all likelihood, more heavily concentrated in the 'rookeries' of Spitalfields, than in any other setting, throughout the London metropolis, of 1888.

Birds of a Feather Flock Together:

- Martha Tabram: The Borough
- Mary Ann Nichols: The City
- Annie Chapman: West London
- Elizabeth Stride: Sweden
- Catherine Eddowes: Wolverhampton
- Mary Jane Kelly: Ireland (?)

None of these women emanated from the Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields, or, for that matter, London's 'East End'.

Yet, something lured them to that particular enclave.

Was it the prevalence of the four-penny doss house? Perhaps, it was!

But, as I have already suggested:

The wretched, alcoholic, vagrant 'dollymops', of the Spitalfields 'rookeries', constituted what may have been the greatest concentration of estranged female desperation and vulnerability, in the whole of London's metropolis, in 1888; and 'Jack the Ripper' - regardless of his place of residence - might have been well aware of that set of circumstances.

I shall add another 'factor', to the above assertion, and clarify its significance, later today, in the aforementioned, more appropriate thread:

The wretched, alcoholic, vagrant 'dollymops', of the Spitalfields 'rookeries', constituted what may have been the greatest concentration of non-indigenous, estranged, female desperation and vulnerability, in the whole of London's metropolis, in 1888; and 'Jack the Ripper' - regardless of his place of residence - might have been well aware of that set of circumstances.

[Jeff Leahy]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Leahy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Roberts
I have not proposed a "theory". I have proposed a distinct possibility, which, despite your protestations, bears a great deal of "LOGIC".Its probability we are dealing with...
You've lost me!

No I didnt. You go on to answer it:In fact, I perceive a probability of at least 66.67%, i.e. two thirds, that 'Jack the Ripper' resided 'locally' to the murder-sites that bore his signature.

Of course, that doesn't amount to much, in the absence of a set of parameters that define the term 'local', as it would apply, to this particular case of serial murder. I will, therefore, attempt to explain the parameters that I have chosen, in good time.

That, for which I am lobbying, is simply the relaxation of Jeff's absolute, matter-of-fact insistence that the number of relevant factors is, indeed, quite minimal, i.e. that it's all so very simple. It's not!

Statistically the chances are that Jack lived locally as you agree. I think your figures are actually way low...What type of serial killer are they based on?

You can go on muddying the waters with endless statistics about Jacks prey but the only thing you require to know is that it was readily available over a wide area but Jack choose to kill in a very small one.

So what statistics you actually require is statistics about serial killers in relation to there victims...site Mungo Irland, Peter Sutcliff, The Camden killer and the Ipswich ripper.

All these Disorganised killers lived very close to the kill zone....

Unfortunately good statistics are unavailable and American profiling tends to be after 'Jacks' time and presume the killer is travelling by car...



Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Leahy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Roberts
If a fisherman knows where the fish are most likely to take the bait, i.e. 'bite', then he will invariably head for that particular part of the pond.If we're going to use hammy analigies, then I'd say its NOT likely for a potcher to go near his favourite fishing spot when its crawling with Game keepers. Especially when the fish are plentiful all over London and not just in one small area.
"Especially when the fish are plentiful all over London ..."

You're parroting Gareth Williams!

Who better than to try and emulate?

I have been trying to make the point that 'Jack the Ripper' may have had an affinity for a particular type of prostitute: One, which was, in all likelihood, more heavily concentrated in the 'rookeries' of Spitalfields, than in any other setting, throughout the London metropolis, of 1888.

Birds of a Feather Flock Together:

- Martha Tabram: The Borough
- Mary Ann Nichols: The City
- Annie Chapman: West London
- Elizabeth Stride: Sweden
- Catherine Eddowes: Wolverhampton
- Mary Jane Kelly: Ireland (?)

None of these women emanated from the Parish of Christ Church Spitalfields, or, for that matter, London's 'East End'.

Yet, something lured them to that particular enclave.

Was it the prevalence of the four-penny doss house? Perhaps, it was!

But, as I have already suggested:

The wretched, alcoholic, vagrant 'dollymops', of the Spitalfields 'rookeries', constituted what may have been the greatest concentration of estranged female desperation and vulnerability, in the whole of London's metropolis, in 1888; and 'Jack the Ripper' - regardless of his place of residence - might have been well aware of that set of circumstances.

As for prostitutes of all shapes and sizes:



It's 1868, not 1888! But, it is quite telling, nonetheless!

Gareth Williams has misinterpreted the data, and thus concluded that it indicates a greater concentration of prostitutes in 'Stepney', than in 'Whitechapel'.

What do you think, Jeff? How would you interpret the data?

I'd say Jack didnt care about being cault, he waited his opportunity and his victims just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and where vunerable....You really are over complicating everything


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Leahy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Roberts
Yes! I propose that you dispense with the absolute insistence of your minimalist assertions!

There is a great deal of color, in this world. It is not simply 'black & white'.I've never claimed that it is, simply that some things are best NOT over complicated. Anyone proposing a commuting serial killer as Jack has to jump through lots of complicated hoops to explain why...when the fish were so plentyful and all over the place...that he'd want to head into the most dangerous place where the fish would be on guard.
Why would Aaron Kosminski have headed "into the most dangerous place where the fish would be on guard"; rather than having headed for Shadwell, Ratcliff, Limehouse, or the eastern reaches of Mile End Old Town?

Hmmm?

Would he have been anchored to the southwest corner of Wentworth Street / Osborn Street, by way of an 843-yard chain?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Leahy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Roberts
But, in any case, it would be helpful to clarify your use of the term "area".Walking distance to the murder sights. My personal favourite is Old Montigue Street
'Walking-Distance' is a very ambiguous term, and the concept does not suffice, as a worthwhile parameter.

Araon Kosminski Walked to the end of the road, he was on Whitechapel High street. The murder distribution suggests he used Old Montigue Street....I very much doubt he gave any more a damn about parish bounderies than I do.

Harry Cox talks about following a suspect in St George in the West, a man who takes long walks at night and doesnt kill on every trip.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Leahy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Roberts
Did William Bury live in the "area", in 1888? What about James Kelly?Is this some kind of strange test in basic Ripperology?
No! It is a very straight-forward question.

I believe that there is no rational justification for the assertion that either lived 'locally'!

What do you think?

I think you should buy the Definitive Story DVD which now has Bill Beadle discussing William Bury.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Leahy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Roberts
It was suggested, in your recent television documentary, that Greenfield Street, Hamlet of Mile End Old Town, was ... at the "epicenter" of the applicable murder-sites, or words to that effect.

You couldn't justify that assertion, if your very life depended upon your being able to do so!

And, either way, Chris Phillips has suggested that Aaron Kosminski's most likely residence, during the latter half of 1888, was in Yalford Street, Hamlet of Mile End Old Town; not Greenfield Street, of the same.

Do you not keep up with the most recent research discoveries that pertain, specifically, to your 'pet' suspect?http://forum.casebook.org/showthread.php?t=1455&page=6

Grand mother and suck
"Grand mother and suck" ?????

Well, ... Greenfield Street or Yalford Street? Which, of the two?

They followed a suspect who was resident at a number of residencies..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Leahy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin Roberts
No evidence was discovered at any of the applicable murder-sites, that suggests anything, at all, regarding the perpetrator's place of residence; be that in the vicinity of Whitechapel, or on the planet Mars.Apart from the bloody apron you mean
No, not "apart from the bloody apron"!

The apron provides a direction of regress, from Mitre Square: No more; no less.

Perhaps, upon dispensing with Catherine Eddowes, 'Jack the Ripper' decided to go on holiday, in Colchester.

Or even IPSWICH

All the murders were essentially in the 'Evil Quarter Mile' of the East End, where social reformers had called for the greatest concentration of action and help.

Bernard Shaw noticed this, as did others, and wrote his wicked piece, 'Blood Money', about how a sly 'social experimentalist' was 'abroad' in the East End, and who had converted the property class to a primitve form of Socialism by murdering a few 'dregs'.

If only 'Jack' would off a Duchess, the Irish wit mused?

Therefore the 'comfort zone' may well have been for somebody who knew the area well, say as a visiting Oxonian there to help. Who had a terroristic mission to force the 'better classes' to face the systemic poverty of lives already smashed before he strangled them.

Hi Jonathon, OK nice idea but what examples of other serial killers can you offer that fit this pattern?


That, for which I am lobbying, is simply the relaxation of Jeff's absolute, matter-of-fact insistence that the number of relevant factors is, indeed, quite minimal, i.e. that it's all so very simple. It's not!

Yes it is... stop complicating everything

Why would Aaron Kosminski have headed "into the most dangerous place where the fish would be on guard"; rather than having headed for Shadwell, Ratcliff, Limehouse, or the eastern reaches of Mile End Old Town?

Hmmm?

Would he have been anchored to the southwest corner of Wentworth Street / Osborn Street, by way of an 843-yard chain?


He went for walks at night...he suffered a psychotic episode that lasted about 16 weeks (this is average) he killed when the opportunity occurred.

[Colin Roberts]

I think your figures are actually way low...

Then, perhaps you would care to reveal your figures.

The murder distribution suggests he used Old Montigue Street....

Once, again, you are parroting Gareth Williams.

Are you familiar with the definition of the word 'parroting', Jeff?

Old Montague Street?

The murder-site distribution?

I DARE you to try to explain that, to the readership, of these forums.

I very much doubt he gave any more a damn about parish bounderies than I do.

Who said anything about parish boundaries?

I think you should buy the Definitive Story DVD which now has Bill Beadle discussing William Bury.

Let me guess:

- Bury lived in Bow.
- Bury was 'local', and was, therefore, familiar with the 'Whitechapel' area.

"That, for which I am lobbying, is simply the relaxation of Jeff's absolute, matter-of-fact insistence that the number of relevant factors is, indeed, quite minimal, i.e. that it's all so very simple. It's not!"

Yes it is... stop complicating everything

And, to think that 'Ripperology' is not considered a legitimate academic discipline!

Imagine that!

I shall add another 'factor', to the above assertion, and clarify its significance, later today, in the aforementioned, more appropriate thread:

The wretched, alcoholic, vagrant 'dollymops', of the Spitalfields 'rookeries', constituted what may have been the greatest concentration of non-indigenous, estranged, female desperation and vulnerability, in the whole of London's metropolis, in 1888; and 'Jack the Ripper' - regardless of his place of residence - might have been well aware of that set of circumstances.

I don't think that I will bother.

My illogical arguments don't stand a chance, in the face of such intellectual prowess.

[Howard Brown]

Keep it nice gents...no need for insults.

How

[Jeff Leahy]

Then, perhaps you would care to reveal your figures.

Ah! a double bluff. As far as I'm aware there are NO accurate Statistics (or generally world wide accepted) on serial killer behaviour. Only individual case studies. Which is why I suggested someone like Stan might be best to comment as individual cases are his area of expertise.

I do know from my own research that there is some contradiction in excepted figures. Also serial killers split into distinct groups and it is not always easy to catigorize them....this in turn leads to generalizations.

But basically this type of killer is so rare that it is difficult to estimate how many when or where they opporate. How ever it is these illusive figures that would be useful in accessing Jack.

The number of Dolly mops as you put it is also speculative. Especially given the Historical perspecive. there was no social security and all women on low income must have faced prostitution as a daily hazard. We are not discussing sex workers as we would understand the concept today.

http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/streiber/273/inf_stats.htm

Once, again, you are parroting Gareth Williams.

am I ? only by happy chance surely.

Are you familiar with the definition of the word 'parroting', Jeff?

Old Montague Street?

The murder-site distribution?

I DARE you to try to explain that, to the readership, of these forums.

Yes if you like...Dear forums..my long held beleif that Old Montigue street holds the key to Jacks movement comes from many years of walking rthe area with an interest in JtR and filming at the locations. Walking up and down Old Montigue street it soon becomes apparent that you are never far from any of the murder sites or Goulston street...I have no idea what Garth has said on the subject but if he thinks this is Jacks main walking/stalking ground it is well thought out.

Who said anything about parish boundaries?

Let me guess:
- Bury lived in Bow.
- Bury was 'local', and was, therefore, familiar with the 'Whitechapel' area.

I never said I agreed with Bill. I find the Jack in a horse and cart theory most improbable.

And, to think that 'Ripperology' is not considered a legitimate academic discipline!

Imagine that!.

I don't think that I will bother.

My illogical arguments don't stand a chance, in the face of such intellectual prowess.

I think your confusing complex with accademic. some of the most profound ideas..like the origin of the species have been fairly simple in there wording.

I simply fail to see how complex arguments about local demograpghy have any bearing on the behaviour of a serial killer.

What we require is hard info on serial killers and that is difficult to both obtain and to accurately access

Yours Pirate

[Jonathan Hainsworth]

Anderson and Druitt?

Somebody asked if Anderson knew about the 'Drowned Doctor'?

I think yes of course he did, but did not know that Montague Druitt lay behind it, or rather that two suspects went into his making: Druitt plus Tumbelty.

My theory is that Anderson never mentioned this Super-suspect of Griffiths and then Sims because it made him uncomfortable.

Like Littlechild he thought it was some terribly garbled version of Dr T?

Eg. a middle-aged, affluent, under-employed doctor, who had been the subject of a police dragnet and whose fleeing coincides with the end of the murders -- once that is, in 1898, Major Griffiths established Kelly rather than Coles as the last victim of 'Jack' (which came from Macnaghten).

Anderson may also have 'believed', wrongly, that Tumblety later killed himself, if that is whom Littlechild means in his letter to Sims?

On the other hand, from Anderson's point of view, it was a tale which, for once, made the Yard look quite good, so he just let it go -- but didn't lie about it by confirming what is clearly a very 'muddled' tale.

I do not think Anderson ever knew that it was a semi-fictional creation by his despised ex-subordinate, Macnaghten; a deliberate muddle to hide two embarrassing suspects and to exploit them for propagandist purposes (Mac arguably does something similar with the Camp murder) to make the Yard look better.

[Jeff Leahy]

Somebody asked if Anderson knew about the 'Drowned Doctor'?

I think yes of course he did, but did not know that Montague Druitt lay behind it, or rather that two suspects went into his making: Druitt plus Tumbelty.

My theory is that Anderson never mentioned this Super-suspect of Griffiths and then Sims because it made him uncomfortable.

Like Littlechild he thought it was some terribly garbled version of Dr T?

Eg. a middle-aged, affluent, under-employed doctor, who had been the subject of a police dragnet and whose fleeing coincides with the end of the murders -- once that is, in 1898, Major Griffiths established Kelly rather than Coles as the last victim of 'Jack' (which came from Macnaghten).

Anderson may also have 'believed', wrongly, that Tumblety later killed himself, if that is whom Littlechild means in his letter to Sims?

On the other hand, from Anderson's point of view, it was a tale which, for once, made the Yard look quite good, so he just let it go -- but didn't lie about it by confirming what is clearly a very 'muddled' tale.

I do not think Anderson ever knew that it was a semi-fictional creation by his despised ex-subordinate, Macnaghten; a deliberate muddle to hide two embarrassing suspects and to exploit them for propagandist purposes (Mac arguably does something similar with the Camp murder) to make the Yard look better.

The 'super' suspect idea is deffinately interesting, and I'm surprised noone has suggested it before.

How would you marry the fact that Anderson received a letter of introduction to a family member of someone they believed was Jack the Ripper, which he kept all his life?

Yours Jeff

[Jonathan Hainsworth]

The Crawford Letter:

For sure, it might refer to Kosminski -- I doubt it has anything to do with Druitt -- and, what is more, Aaron Kosminski might have been Jack the Ripper.

That's all possible.

My reading of the sources, however, is that the letter, frustratingly undated, is probably nothing significant at all. It just got loaded into a pile of other bureaucratic debris.

Anderson never even alludes to a story about the Polish Jew coming to his attention because of a tip-off by a clan member -- in fact quite the opposite.

It hardly compares, as a significant source, to the 'West of England' MP source, discovered by Keith Skinner in August 1991 -- which is arguably the second most important source of the entire mystery.

Nor is it as significant -- in my lonely, leper-colony opinion -- as the 'North Country Vicar' story of Jan 1899, the latter which provides an explanation as to why Macnaghten, so ultra-discreet and reticent, is disseminating a semi-fictionalized fusion of Tumblety and Druitt, via a Tory and a Liberal, at all?

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jonathon

As you may know I've never had much time for cover up or conspiracy theories.

But your idea of Cock-up, confusion and miss information is something I'm much more familiar with..

THe idea that Anderson was wrong has never troubled me, he clearly did make misstakes, thats different from telling porkies

good luck with your research

Jeff

[Caroline Brown]

Hi Jeff, Colin, Paul,

Have a look at the case of Colin Ireland when you have a moment.

He only targeted gays in one pub in Fulham, West London. And he came up by train from Southend in Essex to do it, even though he was unemployed and had to steal money from one victim to pay for his train fare to pick up the next.

The LVP was very much the age of the railways. Do not underestimate the wit and the means of our Jack to have taken advantage of his own modern times to target a very small and specific area of dolly-moppery for his idea of fun. He may once have known it well but managed to crawl out of this gutter and move elsewhere to scrape a better living, using the same wit and cunning that later bagged him his victims.

Love,

Caz
X

[Colin Roberts]

Have a look at the case of Colin Ireland ...

You're muddying water that is crystal clear!


~~~

It is plainly and simply an absolute fact, that a liar is a liar, is a liar, is a liar!

Anyone that would lie about this, would invariably lie about that! Period! Full Stop!

Schizophrenia bears absolutely no relevance, whatsoever, to any of this; and, I am quite certain that Anderson gave even less of a damn about the condition, than do I.

Let's not muddy the water, when it is so remarkably crystal clear!

Case Closed!

Anyone that has approached this mystery from any other angle, has completely wasted every ounce of effort that he has exerted, as well as every minute of time that he has invested! Period!

It's that simple! Let's not complicate the issue!

Again; ...

Case Closed!

~~~

What would you think, Jeff, if I, or anyone else, were to assume such a position?

~~~

The LVP was very much the age of the railways. Do not underestimate the wit and the means of our Jack to have taken advantage of his own modern times to target a very small and specific area of dolly-moppery for his idea of fun. He may once have known it well but managed to crawl out of this gutter and move elsewhere to scrape a better living, using the same wit and cunning that later bagged him his victims.

"He may once have known it well ..."

Or, perhaps, he continued to have "known it well".

Charles Lechmere, aka 'Charles Cross', for example, traversed the entire 'killing field' of 'Jack the Ripper' - and some - twice, daily.

And, judging from his use of Buck's Row, on the morning of 31 August, 1888; it can be reasonably assumed that he used the thoroughfare Wentworth Street / Old Montague Street¹ as his main traversal 'anchor'.

But, were he to be our 'man', he would be classified as a 'commuter'.

¹ Old Montague Street, Jeff: Old Montague Street!

I agree with you, Jeff! At least, in part.

The thoroughfare Wentworth Street / Old Montague Street would appear to have been one of the perpetrator's key avenues of mobility.

I tend to believe that the portion of Wentworth Street that extended from the west side of Commercial Street, to the east side of Brick Lane / Osborn Street, served as a 'hub' or 'anchor', through which the comings and goings of 'Jack the Ripper' and his victims, alike, typically passed.

[Jeff Leahy]

Hi Jeff, Colin, Paul,

Have a look at the case of Colin Ireland when you have a moment.

He only targeted gays in one pub in Fulham, West London. And he came up by train from Southend in Essex to do it, even though he was unemployed and had to steal money from one victim to pay for his train fare to pick up the next.

The LVP was very much the age of the railways. Do not underestimate the wit and the means of our Jack to have taken advantage of his own modern times to target a very small and specific area of dolly-moppery for his idea of fun. He may once have known it well but managed to crawl out of this gutter and move elsewhere to scrape a better living, using the same wit and cunning that later bagged him his victims.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caroline

I know the case fairly well...coming originally from Leigh-on-sea, it was one I was familiar with and did some research at one point..I'll see if I can find anything...

But yes you raise a good point that serial killers are individuals and act in different ways....Jack is quite rare in the number of kills and in the time scale.

However I think it fair to draw general conclusions from what is known in general about serial killer behaviour, while keeping one eye on such contridictions.

Again I would reference Colin back to PROBABILITY..

But it looks as if we are in accord about Wentworth Street and Old Montigue street.

Yours Jeff

PS found this on Crime Investigation...it seems even Colin Ireland was aware of what I was saying:


In early 1993, at age 39, a fraught and rage-filled Ireland who had, until this point in his life, only committed minor offences, made a New Year’s resolution to become a serial killer. He was fascinated by serial killers and had spent many hours meticulously studying them. He was aware of Geographic Profiling that helps investigators locate the killer, who usually commits the crimes in a certain radius (about 7 miles) from where they live. For this reason, Ireland chose London as his ‘murder ground’, deliberately misleading the police and keeping them far away from his Southend-on-Sea home.

The Coleherne pub in Brompton Road, West London had a reputation in the gay community as a place to easily find a partner for the night. Punters would wear colour-coded handkerchiefs to indicate their sexual proclivities, making cruising easy and avoiding misunderstandings. Ireland said, “I went to the Coleherne that evening and I felt that if I was approached by one of the group that tended to trigger feelings in me – masochistic men – I felt there was a likelihood I would kill.”

[Colin Roberts]

Again I would reference Colin back to PROBABILITY..

I very seriously doubt that anyone has devoted as much thought, as I, to the probabilities that should be perceived, on the basis of the particular murder-site distribution that is under consideration.

I am obsessive-compulsive, Jeff. I think obsessively, and I behave compulsively.

I will turn a door-lock twelve-to-fifteen times, before achieving satisfaction that the door is, indeed, locked.

I will read a single sentence, or a caption underneath a photograph, twelve, fifteen, eighteen times, before achieving satisfaction that I have processed its content, in a fluid manner.

Sometimes, that sort of satisfaction ends up being unattainable, and I have to force myself - somehow - to drop everything, and simply walk away from it all, lest I begin to pull my own hair, out of my head.

I can count with the fingers of a single hand, the number of books that I have read, from cover-to-cover, during the course of my life, thus far. Needless to say, I have yet to read a single 'Jack the Ripper' book, in its entirety.

I would be embarrassed for anyone to know the amount of time that I spend, compiling a typical message-board post.

~~~

I am obsessed with deriving as much as is practical¹, - in terms of the probabilities that should be perceived - from the spatial relationships that exist, between the six murder-sites most closely associated with 'Jack the Ripper': Tabram, Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, and Kelly.

There is a Google Earth image, depicting these six murder-sites, permanently emblazoned in the foreground of my thoughts: Regardless of where I happen to be; regardless of what I happen to be doing.

It is always before me.

¹ I am a very firm believer in the ideals of Criminal Geographic Profiling. However, I am also a firm believer in the notion that the practical realities of this particular 'art', are such that the major 'players', - e.g. Kim Rossmo, David Canter, and Ned Levine - would effectively 'milk' this set of six murder-sites, for infinitely more than it is worth, i.e. infinitely more than it is able to tell us.

...

The presentation of my Geographic Spatial Analysis project has not progressed, during the course of the last eighteen months. Admittedly, the compilation of applicable presentation material has not progressed, either, during that same period. However, as a result of its perpetual presence, in the forefront of my thoughts, the project has most certainly progressed.

Its presentation will materialize, somewhere, along the way. In fact, it is my intention to start from the beginning, - so as to incorporate several revisions of chosen parameters - in a piecemeal manner, in the "Colin's Corner" sub-forum, of my individual forum. But, I have yet to begin the process.

~~~

Anyway, ...

My point, in saying all of this, Jeff, is to communicate the fact that the absolute insistence of your one-line, matter-of-fact, minimalist assertions has not moved me; and it's not going to do so, either. Trust me!

I honestly believe that I am able to speak, about this particular facet of the mystery of 'Jack the Ripper', with greater authority, than anyone else involved, in this, our field of interest. It is, therefore, incredibly frustrating, to have to contend with the approach that you have chosen, in the instance of this particular debate.

You speak, as if you have a certain degree of authority, in this particular arena, Jeff; and, as if I have none.

I am afraid that you don't!

And, I believe that I most certainly do!