| Author |
Message |
    
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1274
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 4:05 am: | 
|
Hi Guys,
The names adding is just a tonque in cheek observation,a bit like i believe Roberts brain wave taking the word JUWES and taking the number in the alphabet one has 10,21,23,5,19,which equals 78, taking into account this was after a double event 78 divided by two =39.
All clever stuff.
Believe me i am not that gullible to suggest that the killer discovered the precise names to form this pattern.
Long Liz however is not a surname , but in the area of spitalfields this was the name she was commonly known as, even a letter to the police mentioned that Nickname.
Just analyse my basic 39 theory that being the dates of the murders, and the connection to a certain Mr Barnett.
Regards Richard. |
Jfripper
Sergeant
Username: Jfripper
Post Number: 23
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 6:15 am: |
|
Hi All,
If you want to find coincidences in the victims names how about this:
The Canonical Five
Nichols, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, Kelly
Rearranged these letters spell out the word NECKS
Cheers,
Michael |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1277
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 7:22 am: |
|
Hi,
you can also get Dorset street, by using a couple of the letters twice....
Richard. |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 274
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 11:34 am: |
|
The problem with using combinations of numbers, positions etc, is that it's relatively easy to find coincidneces after the event.
However trying to plan murders to take account of these events is practically impossible. That is one reason why the theory of the killer leaving the corpses to form a pattern, black magic or otherwise is nonsense. Try it for yourself.
Pick five people you know of. Plot a shape on a map using five points. Now try and get these five people ( without telling them what you are doing of course) to position themsleves at these five points.
Now imagine you are trying to lure them there to kill them! It gets worse.
When the theory of patterns first came about several years ago, I drew up a grid with 1 cm squares. I then numbered them off across the top and along the side so that I could define each individual square by a numbered reference.
I then used a Random Number Generator ( available on the internet) to pick a series of numbers. In just over 60% of the time the patterns formed were identifiable, as squares, triangles , circles and other geometric shapes.
This showed that there is a greater chance of patterns being formed randomly than not.
Bob |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1278
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 16, 2005 - 12:58 pm: |
|
Hi Bob,
I agree with your points, however it is relatively simply to venture out on preplanned nights and kill a person, i am not suggesting that the killer tried to kill these women on prearranged locations, just went out and looked for women that he knew had some connection with a source.
I believe the whole murderous campaign was aimed at what turned out to be a fruitless attempt to frighten Mjk Into ceasing prostitution, and to put it in a nutshell because this failed the killer slayed the person he held responsible.
The killer had no reason to continue this quest once she was gone, infact by blaming Mary kelly for these deaths he shifted responsibility off himself, and was never murderous again.
Goes against modern knowledge one might say, but in this circumstance possible.
Regards Richard.
|
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 275
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 6:02 am: |
|
COINCIDNCES?
The trouble with coincidences is that they are by their very nature random occurrences. The problem arises when you have several of them and some people try to establish a link between them, which because they are random is fruitless.
For example take the number 39. Martha Tabram was stabbed 39 times and Dr Crippen lived at no 39 Hilldrop Crescent.
Take the year 1888. If you add up all the integers you get the number 7 ( 8+8+8+1= 25. 2+5 =7 which just happens to be the number of prostitutes killed in the East End at that time. Smith, Tabram and the canoniacal five. So what?
When you start trying to find a geographical pattern in the position of the bodies you run into real problems. Some will argue the positions are vital because they form a certain shape.
Such assertions are usually accompanied by some mind boggling statistic such as 'The chances of such a pattern being formed by accident are 37 billion to one - which is nonsense.
For a start I do not know of any statistical model that could arrive at such a conclusion, secondly the odds are much shorter than we may think.
For example. Let us say that the average person is 5.75 feet high and 1.5 feet wide. This gives a body a total area of 8.625 square feet. For ease let us call this 8.5 square feet. If we then draw up a grid of 1 million squares each representing 8.5 square feet and randomly select a square the chances of you picking the right one is a million to one against.
If you have three bodies discovered in a straight line then the odds of this happening are 1m (3)against. Now these seem like fantastic odds - until you start to plot them on a map.
You see a grid is empty of all features and would only work if you were plotting the positions in the middle of a desert or an ocean.
Once you start plotting them on a map of a built up area the whole scenario changes. There are certain areas that it is impossible to leave a body.
You cannot leave a body high up on a roof, or in a space occupied by a wall, or a river or any other obstacle. If you work out the total are covered by these no go areas you will find that your million squares suddenly become severely whittled down.
In the case of the Ripper his mo was to attack people in the streets ( with the single exception of MJK) Therefore your possible dumping grounds are further restricted.
Finding three bodies in a straight line now becomes very probable if for example that straight line happens to be a road.
Bob |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1287
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 21, 2005 - 5:18 pm: |
|
Bob,
With respect you are making the 39 theory scenerio more complicated then it should be.
Obviously if one ponders long enough, one can make a case out for many 39s to do with murder connected to this case or in respect of Crippen not.
To kill on certain favourable dates is not hard to do, to stab a person 39 times is not impossible, to walk out on a victim[ Barnett ] on a certain preplanned day is not hard to do, and to kill her on a preplanned day is not also.
I still believe that the number 39 was relevant to the killers mind, and intresting the only letter arriving to the police mentioning that number, came from a telegram which stated the killer lived at 39 Cutler street, two streets away from Mary Kelly.
Obviously my specualtion may be well out, but cannot be dismissed out of hand.
Richard. |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 276
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 8:08 am: |
|
Dear Richard,
I'm sorry if you thought my post was a 'dig' at you - it wasn't. I'm trying to show that many theorists who try to come up with patterns are really clutching at straws.
I would dispute its easy to stab someone 39 times. Try it for yourself. To stab someone an exact number of times takes considerable control, bearing in mind you would have to take an exact count of the number of blows struck - whilst presumably your victim was not helping you to do this.
A large number of stab wounds indicates a frenzied attack, keeping an accurate account of the number of wounds indicates exactly the opposite.
In any case if the number of blows struck had some special meaning to the killer why were not all the victims similarly dispatched?
What I am pointing out is that if you start with the idea that a certain number of wounds, or a particular pattern formed by the corpses is relevant then it is very easy to find elements in the case that back your theory.
What an investigator should be doing is to start with a clear mind and see if a pattern emerges, not start with a pattern and try and make everything else fit.
Bob
PS Will you be at the conference this year - I really would like to introduce myself.
|
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 277
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 8:15 am: |
|
Point 2.
I would also dispute the contention that it is not hard to kill someone on a particular date, especially if you intend to use a close quarter weapon like a blunt instrument or a knife.
Killing someone requires certain conditions. You have to be there, the victim has to be there, and no witnesses can be present. You have a certain amount of control over the first two but the third is outside the control of the killer.
Don't forget Son of Sam went out practically every night looking for victims but rarely did he find it possible to do so.
Bob |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1288
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 1:49 pm: |
|
Hi Bob,
Regarding the conference, yes at this moment in time i shall be there its only twenty miles from where I live, which could not be any more convenient.
Regarding the dates in question.all of the murders [Kelly?] were slain between 1am-Dawn on the dates that are relevant to the 39 theory.
The killer had to wait untill approx 2am to despatch Tabram, 330am to kill Nichols, 530am to kill Chapman, he was more lucky with Stride and eddowes.
He was obviously keen to kill on that particular date, and roamed the area until a person that was relevant to him became visable.
In Chapmans case, he must have walked the area from midnight onwards before a suitable victim became availiable, therefore why would he not call it a night, if he had no pattern to work to.
Regards Richard. |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1936
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 22, 2005 - 6:05 pm: |
|
It would be wonderful to make all this fit a pattern of course,very mathematical and perfect........sadly things dont work (most of the time) like this
As to the number of stab wounds who the hell was there to count them and how at the end of the day didnt they notice that one or two may have gone the way of the last one.....so we may be looking unwittingly at 41 or so.
As to the geographical 'positioning' thats crazy, but think again geographically as in David Canter's profiling...then maybe looking at where the killer lived ,as opposed to where he killed then it may be relevant.
I agree Bob you can never account for the 'odd' witness, sadly we don't have enough reliable ones.or at least not on the same day /night!
Blunt weapons at dawn eh ............
Suzi}
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 195
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 9:15 pm: |
|
"I would also dispute the contention that it is not hard to kill someone on a particular date, "
Bob, I have a question for you, something that came up on another thread. How difficult is it to strangle someone, particularly with an eye to not letting the victim cry out?
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 1988
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 4:08 pm: |
|
Hi Sir Robert
I'm sure Bob will be able to answer this,a tad worrying but I'm sure he'll have your answer......just off the top of my rather daft head Id imagine that a 'friendly' hands around the throat and then a squeeze...God what a hideous thought! would do it tho,once pressure is put on and the 'victim' is under 'control' then I feel that things would go on from there, I feel that once pressure is on the windpipe and the Bruises on the chin and cheeks of the victims (well at least a couple of em!) prove this to be the case it would more than likely be impossible for the victim to utter a sound!)
There may be a short moment which may explain Annies cry of 'No!'....who knows..
Wasnt it Keith Simpson in a restaurant who thought that self strangulataion was possible and demonstrated this in the Gents with a borrowed ladies stocking!!!!! Then had to be revived and returned to his table!Gosh what a thought! I must be going to the wrong restaurants!
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2006
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 2:50 pm: |
|
Could hear a pin drop here...........................
Suzi |
Bob Hinton
Inspector
Username: Bobhinton
Post Number: 278
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 7:56 am: |
|
Dear Sir Robert,
When you say strangle do you mean to kill someone by applying pressure to the neck?
There are two main methods of killing someone in this way.
One is to cut off the air supply to the lungs. this is the classic type of strangulation where the victim is usually seized by the throat from the front and pressure is applied to crush the windpipe and stop air reaching the lungs. This takes a lot of strength and is usually indicative of a blitz type attack.
The victim takes a fair amount of time to subdue and is fighting and threshing about while it is happening. Voice noise is usually not present but there will be thrashing about, grunts etc. The victim will have severe bruising to the neck and will often show the imprint of the killers hands and fingers.
The killer will often have scratches to the back of the hand, bruises to the shins and thighs and possibly bruises to the side of the face.
The counter to front strangulation is to grip the assailants little fingers and snap them backwords.
The second is to cut off the oxygen supply to the brain by applying pressure to the carotid arteries. The attack is usually made from the rear.
If you are right handed. The right arm goes round the neck with the victims chin in the crook of your arm. This arm is locked in place by your left arm which comes across cupping the victims nose and mouth in your hand.
To kill simply twist your right forearm inwards, this rotates your arm forcing the blade of your forearm into the victims carotid artery. Unconciosness usually occurs within a few minutes (3) and death soon afterwards.
This doesn't require a lot of strength and is practically soundless.
There will be very few marks on the killer and the victim will have slight brusing to the side of the neck.
The counter is to sink immediately the arm goes round your neck which throws your assailant forward and off balance. Reach back for the testicles and wrench.
Bob
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2045
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 8:53 am: |
|
Gosh!....seriously impressive there Bob.,On the second reading there I would suggest that the 2nd described method was that employed by chummy!
It strikes me that these methods are taught to members of 'Secret Services', shall we say and although relatively accessible now,where would these 'tactics' have been learnt in the 1880's,...although I guess the Thugees etc in the Indian Mutiny of the 1840's knew of such things and so did the militia of the day.Wonder where our man learnt them???...Indian Harry?...................
Remind me never to fall out with you Bob!!
Suzi |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 3027
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 9:46 am: |
|
Bob, Suzi,
I agree. I'd say the second method clearly must be the one used here, unless there are others we dont know of.
We would see more distinctive marks on the victims' throats if it was the first method, among other things.
Impressive knowledge, Bob, although... erh... a bit disturbing... 
All the best
G. Andersson, author
Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 30, 2005)
The Swedes are the men That Will not be Blamed for Nothing
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4010
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 9:53 am: |
|
Suzi, I think Bob's thinking of a man with a military bearing seen standing opposite Miller's Court.
PS It doesn't matter if you fall out with Bob, as he's told you the counter moves - one of which would be very painful for Bob.
Robert |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2047
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 10:29 am: |
|
Right!!!! careless that 'eh!!!!,..... Military 'Ball Bearing' maybe!!!!!!
At the risk of being a tad serious here.....(first time for everything!)
...would this 2nd method involve the hyoid bone being broken?....if not.....great....but if it did then why was this not picked up post mortem?
Yes Glenn it is worrying isnt it!! He He!
Well?
Suzi |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 292
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 11:59 am: |
|
Thanks for those counter moves, Bob. I feel safer already!
The killer wouldn't necessarily have to use either of these techniques til the victim was dead, remember, just til she was unable to resist, then he lays her on the ground and slits the throat. I'm interested in the two cuts that appear in some victims. The one shorter and first as I believe to kill them by "bleeding out" and the second below it deeper and apparently an attempt to decapitate.
Mags
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2054
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 3:53 pm: |
|
Mags....!!!!!!!!!!!
As I read it...the 'techniques' to which you refer were used to render the victim unconscious!!!!!!!
Once that had happened and I have good reason to believe it would,then............basically the killer could do anything he/she liked!!
Once the victim was unconscious then the windpipe could be cut preventing any post carotid pressure protest!!!!
As to the 'decapitation' all we have here is Phillips's report when he says that''The muscular structures appeared as though an attempt had been made to separate the bones of the neck' and there had been been 'an evident attempt to separate the bones' This does not amount to decapitation and if it had of course would have put Annie's murder out of the frame as in the others there is no evident attempt to make a thing of this in any of the other killings.
Suzi |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 298
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 7:42 pm: |
|
Yes, Suzi, I'm saying that he strangled or in some other way rendered them at least partially unconscious then put them on the ground and cut the throat. Eddowes and Kelly's throats were both cut down to the vertebrae as well. Once the blood was let, and the heart stopped beating, the killer could perform the mutilations.
So, I'm saying that the strangling didn't need to kill them and in fact didn't at least in the cases of
Chapman and Kelly where we can see blood spray patterns on the fence and partition.
Mags
|
Sir Robert Anderson
Inspector
Username: Sirrobert
Post Number: 202
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 11:15 am: |
|
" Reach back for the testicles and wrench. "
And if you are being strangled to death by a woman? That's my main worry...
Seriously, thanks for the explanation, Bob. It would be seem obvious that the killer used the latter, carotid method.
Sir Robert
"I only thought I knew"
SirRobertAnderson@gmail.com
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2059
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 31, 2005 - 3:54 pm: |
|
God I wish (or not! ) enough about this!! Bob!!!!!!!!
Mags
Although I can work this carotid theory through and know it to be true ..Once that had happened |I'm sure that a swift swipe with a knife following the 'slump' shall we say ...there would easily have been the odd spurt of blood as seen on site....and may explain Polly at scene of death
Then Sir Robert.....DONT!
There are of course no mentions of the hyoid bone being snapped in the post mortem descriptions of the girls.but was that known then as a positive for strangulation???
Suzi
|
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4022
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 - 5:10 am: |
|
Suzi, I may be wrong here but isn't the hyoid business easy to miss? Given the primitive conditions under which the post mortems were carried out, could they have missed it? And then, where would the knife have been going relative to the hyoid?
Robert |
Jennifer D. Pegg
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Jdpegg
Post Number: 1730
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 - 7:45 am: |
|
This is a very weird thread!
Jenni
"What d'you think about that? Now you know how I feel"
|
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2066
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 02, 2005 - 1:17 pm: |
|
Weird! yes Jenny .......I know it is BUT there's a lot of weird things here and the manner of killing HAS to be relevant even down to the minutiae!
Suzi |
Suzi Hanney
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Suzi
Post Number: 2071
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 03, 2005 - 5:41 pm: |
|
A N Y W A Y !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Where were we all??????
Seem to recall I was rattling on about the hyoid bone..
Robert= I see your point here
Seriously though,strangulation must MUST have been the 'shut up' method surely!
Otherwise we start to get into stuff like wasn't murdered at the scene etc etc....PLEASE NO!
Suzi |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page