|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2581
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 12:22 pm: |       |
Oh and I forgot...
Yes, Dave.
It certainly is time to republish Chisholm's paper.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971 |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2582
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 30, 2004 - 12:30 pm: | |
RJ,
"This is a bit loose, Glenn. Abberline made his opinions known in an article in the Pall Mall Gazette; he responded in a second article ( a week later) to critics of the theory. So it wasn't merely a 'one off' statement."
That's true indeed. I forgot about that one.
Although I suspect he did the second one since he received some criticism for his views.
And still... we're only talking about a week between the two interviews and Chapman was still hot news (at this particular time more than Tumblety). We can't possibly know with complete certainty how he felt about Chapman a year after that, since he himself never said anything on the matter.
"Abberline never wrote an autobiography. As for his 'interest in Chapman surviving' , H.L. Adam wrote: "Abberline never wavered in his firm conviction that Chapman and Jack the Ripper were one in the same." (1930). We don't know on what this statement is based, but Phil Sugden argues that this can probably be traced to George Godley, who knew Abberline."
That is of course a possibility, yes.
I know he didn't write an autobiography, RJ (expressed myself a bit sloppy there, I guess) but something tells me that he would have if he knew who the killer was, but that is of course only speculation. Or else he just simply had a lot of integrity, who knows?
Still, the question is not IF he really believed in Chapman as a suspect (I think he did), but why...
All the best
G, Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on December 30, 2004)
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971 |
Adam Went
Detective Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 104
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 5:50 am: | |
Hi all,
Glenn, you wrote:
"Well yes, we seem to agree on that latter part. I am glad you seem to share that thought, since some prefer to think that the Ripper was responsible for all crimes in 1887-1890 in the area. I am glad to hear you say this."
Thanks, Glenn.
I think the notion that the Ripper was responsible for every single murder between 1887 - 1891 is plainly ridiculous and almost impossible.
I do strongly believe in Martha Tabram as being a Ripper victim, and a strong probability of Alice Mackenzie, and a maybe for Ada Wilson and Emma Smith, but that's all. None of the others like Millwood, Mylett, Coles, etc I consider to be Ripper victims.
"However, I have previously been rather reluctant to include Chapman (no strangluation, the murder rather seem to be performed in rage and frenzie rather than methodical handling with the knife, too short time frame between Chapman and Nichols in order to suddenly invent a signature that he then uses for several murders etc. etc.), but now I am not so sure. I am even at this point inclined to consider Ada Wilson, but once again, we can't know this -- it's only speculation."
Chapman is actually the victim I consider to be the most interesting out of all of them. Whilst the characteristics of her murder are slightly different to the others, the cut throat and mutilations are fairly consistent. Also, you mentioned the speed he seemed to be working with in her case. I think that can be explained by the fact that it was getting to be somewhat daylight when she was killed (5:30 AM.) People were on their way to Spitalfields market, and others from inside 29 Hanbury Street were on their way to work. He was in danger of being caught - Long saw him, Cadosch probably heard him, and others would be walking by around the time. So I think he would have been in a hurry to kill and mutilate her before someone walked in.
As for Ada Wilson, I give her about 60% chance of being a Ripper attack - on a Maybe - Likely level. To me she seems like an early attack when the Ripper was still in his early days. She was stabbed in the throat, as the later victims were cut. She was fortunate enough to survive, but I believe it was probably him and he attacked again. Same with Emma Smith, though she died from her wounds the next day. It's like a scale of escalating brutality, if you know what I mean.
"Could be a coincidence, though, and I still say the whole thing with Chapman is a rather unlikely scenario anyway. But I prefer not to stress this point. I want to read and see what Paul Begg says anything about him (if he does) too first before I jump to conclusions here either way."
IIRC, (and I may be wrong), doesn't Paul Begg believe Kosminski was the Ripper? Though I am glad that you are taking more consideration into Klosowski anyway. Remember, open minds though - don't rely too much on what you read to decide what you believe in.
"I absolutely agree, Adam. I believe it's those things, together with the Victorian foggy alleyways and gas lights and the fact that he was unidentified, that has made him special. He acted at the right time and at the right place."
That's exactly true, Glenn. I think it's not only the unsolved mystery that lingers on, but also when I think about it atleast, it brings images into your mind of Victorian London, and a different era, society and kind of life. And I think that's another large reason it is well known as well - all of the images it evokes in your mind when you think about it.
"I think he would have continued to stress this point in interviews and in his autobiography if his interest in Chapman had survived, but that's just me."
But why?
Chapman had been hanged. If Abberline truly believed he was the Ripper, well, he had been hanged anyway. He had been punished. It may have been a different story if he had received a prison sentence instead of a sentence of execution, or something.
Abberline seems to have lived the quiet life after 1903 until his death in 1929, and rightly so. He had been in the spotlight numerous times in his life, had been much publicised, so it's no wonder he wanted to rest for the last years of his life. Why should he throw himself back into the spotlight to argue the case for an already executed man so many years after the murders had happened, after he had already retired? He'd definitely cop some flak then.
Besides that fact, the Jack the Ripper case was one he couldn't solve. It might even be called his failure. Why dwell on it?
To illustrate this point, let me take you back to my other interest again, the Titanic.
Mr. J Bruce Ismay was the Chairman of the White Star Line at the time, and he sailed on the ship on her first and only voyage. He saved himself in one of the last lifeboats, when so many other men had to die. (Including the Pall Mall Gazette editor, W.T. Stead). He was severely criticised for this. He lived for another 25 years after the ship sunk, and in those entire 25 years, he enjoyed hearing his shipping news but forbade anyone to mention the Titanic in his presence.
So you see, it's not unreasonable to believe that Abberline rarely spoke about it because he considered it as a major failure of his. Though I admit that the circumstances are different.
"I think it's quite possible, though, that there exists personal writing or letters between the officials that still havent been discovered, like between Abberline and Neil or Neil and Godley. After all, the Swanson marginalia came to light by pure accident more or less after quite many years, so who knows what the time brings?"
That's very true. Detectives like Neil, Godley and even Dew lived for a long, long time after the murders, and even in their retirement, it's entirely possible that each of them kept in touch with their old 'chums.' It would be interesting to see any correspondence of theirs.
"And some of them I find more inviting than others, Bury is one of them and it has nothing to do with Abberline but by other circumstances, although there are some problems with his candidacy as well. All I can establish from my own analysing is that the killer was a local man, probably rather grey and common in his appearance and possibly (without any shred of proof) a paranoid schizofrenic and not a psychopath, but I would never mention one certain name I'd call my pet suspect."
I guess your way is probably a pretty good way to go about it, because atleast then you are not tied to defending your particular suspect and constantly raising points about why you think they are good suspects. I agree with your general description of what the killer might be like, but I'm just wondering about one part:
"probably rather grey"
I'm just wondering where you drew that from? I assume you're referring to hair colour, yes? (well, what else could it be?). So do you then think the Ripper was someone that was older, thus more likely to be grey, or just someone who aged earlier? Can you fill me in a bit more on that?
"Criminal cases have a short life span and in this case no existing witnesses or any other person is alive today, and the information is incomplete and scattered. (I can already hear Stan Russo sharpening his knives in the background...)."
Yes, beware of Stan!!
It really is a pity that nobody is living from that era now. So all we are left with to investigate the case is dusty old documents that lay buried for decades before seeing the light of day again. And, of course, the newspaper reports, which I wouldn't trust very much.
"I will, Adam, I will. I'l do my best.
I think you have already changed quite a bit from how you started as well. Makes discussions way more interesting."
Thanks Glenn, I am very pleased to hear that. Because, you terrify me when you get angry! Really, I wondered what had hit me when I read a couple of your earlier responses to me. So, I must try and remain on your good side as much as possible. As long as I nod and say "Yes" to everything you say, it'll be fine. ; - )
Nah, just kidding, you know the boards wouldn't be the same without our disputes!!
CB, I'll post the transcription of Abberline's interview tomorrow, that way we can analyse what he was saying much better and easier.
Phil, you wrote:
"I respect your resilience and "charm", if nothing else."
Thanks for that, Phil. Though we don't agree on too much, you are a smart and informative poster yourself, and post some good info.
"a) the difference between Abberlines '03 comments and Littlechild's letter '13 - is that we know the context of the latter. In evaluating evidence, as a historian, context is all."
That's very true. Still, Littlechild wrote his letter later on. A fair while later on.
So do you think what Abberline said could have been misconstrued, or simply that it would be more credible if he had written it himself?
"b)on suggesting candidates - i suggest you read the thread on changing our minds. Most of us have, in the past, had a suspect we favoured, but experience has taught us that in JtR studies, that is a dangerous thing. As I have said to you several times, the only sensible approach is to treat the case like a jigsaw, or a mosaic, to which you have lost the picture. You remain open minded. If you feel sustaining one candidate, puts you at a disadvantage here - no one asked you to take the approach you do."
I have both read and posted several times on the "Changing our minds" thread, and it's interesting to read how things have changed for various people. I do take a much more open minded view over the last couple of weeks, much softer to when I first came here, and allow myself to suggest and think about new ideas and theories. I am fairly set on Klosowski as a strong suspect, and yes, my favourite one, but I am now much more willing to discuss and take into consideration other theories.
Once again, Happy new year everyone!
Regards,
Adam.
The Wenty-icator! |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2633
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 10:14 am: | |
Hi Adam!
"Chapman is actually the victim I consider to be the most interesting out of all of them. Whilst the characteristics of her murder are slightly different to the others, the cut throat and mutilations are fairly consistent."
OUCH!!!!! I've made a terrible sloppy mistake here. I naturally meant TABRAM, not Chapman!!!!!!
Tabram had no cut throat, and the crime seems more frenized rather then methodologcial.
"As for Ada Wilson, I give her about 60% chance of being a Ripper attack - on a Maybe - Likely level. To me she seems like an early attack when the Ripper was still in his early days. She was stabbed in the throat, as the later victims were cut. She was fortunate enough to survive, but I believe it was probably him and he attacked again. Same with Emma Smith, though she died from her wounds the next day. It's like a scale of escalating brutality, if you know what I mean."
I agree with you totally on Ada Wilson, and for the very reasons you give. And I give her 60% chance as well.
However, I totally rule out Emma Smith. We know that gangs operated in the area, and we have no real reason to assume that she was lying when she said that she was attacked by a gang of young hooligans. I most certainly don't consider her an early Ripper victim.
" I agree with your general description of what the killer might be like, but I'm just wondering about one part:
"probably rather grey"
I'm just wondering where you drew that from? "
Hehe... maybe an expression only used in Scandiavia, perhaps...
No, I meant that he probably was someone who didn't draw attention to himself. I should have written "plain" instead, but couldn't come up with it. Damn, this second hand language thing....
"It really is a pity that nobody is living from that era now. So all we are left with to investigate the case is dusty old documents that lay buried for decades before seeing the light of day again. And, of course, the newspaper reports, which I wouldn't trust very much."
Yes, I am quite used to study old cases here at home, and it's always the same frustrations involved with missing files, no witnesses alive etc... much is left to interpretation and ones personal "nose". And as you rightly say, the news paper reports should indeed be taken lightly.
"I have both read and posted several times on the "Changing our minds" thread, and it's interesting to read how things have changed for various people. I do take a much more open minded view over the last couple of weeks, much softer to when I first came here, and allow myself to suggest and think about new ideas and theories. I am fairly set on Klosowski as a strong suspect, and yes, my favourite one, but I am now much more willing to discuss and take into consideration other theories."
It sounds really promising, Adam, to start off the new year with this tone of words. Yes, I believe it works both ways as well.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971 |
Maria Giordano
Inspector
Username: Mariag
Post Number: 240
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 12:18 pm: | |
Hi, guys
Adam, I'm glad to hear that you're willing to consider other opinons now because I enjoy your posts and feel that you'll be valuable in a wider range of areas.
Glenn- I understood the "grey" reference. You communicate so well in English that I forget you're not a native speaker.That's pretty darned impressive to an ignorant American!
Mags |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2635
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 1:02 pm: | |
Mags,
Thank you; I doing my best although it sometimes feels a bit awkward and it takes a bit longer to post than in my native language.
And yes, I enjoy Adam's posts as well -- and particularly those he'd produced these recent days.
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971 |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1227
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 4:01 pm: | |
Hi Glenn,
oh dear I just thought of something whilst sobering up.
Ada Wilson was the same age as Tabram..... 39.
Now theres a thought.
Actually could be wrong by one year, although there is a definate report she was 39 years of age.
Did our killer work in a public records office.?.
Dont worry its all tonque in cheek banter.. Hmmmm.
Richard.
/
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2640
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 5:44 pm: | |
Ouch, Richard...
Don't go there. 
Still, regarding Public Record Office... if we believe some of the witnesses may have seen the Ripper, some described him as a "clerk"...
All the best
G, Sweden
(Message edited by Glenna on January 01, 2005)
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971 |
Adam Went
Detective Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 111
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 6:22 am: | |
Hi all,
Glenn, you wrote:
"OUCH!!!!! I've made a terrible sloppy mistake here. I naturally meant TABRAM, not Chapman!!!!!!
Tabram had no cut throat, and the crime seems more frenized rather then methodologcial."
Glenn, I am disgraced by such mistakes! It really is unacceptable! Hehe...nah, just kidding with you, you know I don't mind. But I'll bet you deliberately did it just to confuse me.
But I agree with you about Tabram, it was quite different to the other Ripper murders, but like Ada Wilson, I feel that it was the work of the Ripper in his 'early days.'
"I agree with you totally on Ada Wilson, and for the very reasons you give. And I give her 60% chance as well.
However, I totally rule out Emma Smith. We know that gangs operated in the area, and we have no real reason to assume that she was lying when she said that she was attacked by a gang of young hooligans. I most certainly don't consider her an early Ripper victim."
Glad you agree with me about Ada.
As for Emma, I didn't mean it to sound like I thought she was lying about who attacked her, not at all, but it wouldn't surprise me if the Ripper wasn't part of the gang that attacked her. If he failed in his attempt to kill Ada, it's not unreasonable to think that he would want to succed the next time, and so would help others in order to do it. As it was, she lived for a while after that. It was very brutal, though. Emma is perhaps not as likely as Ada, I admit, but I don't entirely discount her as a possible victim.
"Hehe... maybe an expression only used in Scandiavia, perhaps...
No, I meant that he probably was someone who didn't draw attention to himself. I should have written "plain" instead, but couldn't come up with it. Damn, this second hand language thing...."
OHHH I see...sorry, my bad.
Don't be ashamed about not getting some English exactly perfect, for someone who speaks it as a second language you are remarkably good at it.
Gawd, you wouldn't want to hear me trying to speak Swedish!
I know about 5 words which probably don't even go into sentence form together, and I wouldn't get the pronounciation right anyway because of my Australian accent.
So, hats off to you for what you do know!!
"Yes, I am quite used to study old cases here at home, and it's always the same frustrations involved with missing files, no witnesses alive etc... much is left to interpretation and ones personal "nose". And as you rightly say, the news paper reports should indeed be taken lightly."
That's very true. The newspaper reports aren't to be trusted at all, because unfortunately many newspapers were just out to make a good gossip story in those days. It's a pity that often newspapers are all we have to fall back on due to loss of files, etc, though.
"It sounds really promising, Adam, to start off the new year with this tone of words. Yes, I believe it works both ways as well."
That is my New Years' Resolution then!
Hehe..."Must behave self on Casebook at all times." Better stick to it then. A couple of my posts already haven't been exactly...exceptional.
"And yes, I enjoy Adam's posts as well -- and particularly those he'd produced these recent days."
Well thank you, Glenn. I'm glad to hear that you enjoy my posts more - a promising sign!
Maria, you wrote:
"Adam, I'm glad to hear that you're willing to consider other opinons now because I enjoy your posts and feel that you'll be valuable in a wider range of areas."
Thanks for the compliments, Maria. I just noticed my post tally - this will be my 111th post, and I only joined this forum 3 weeks ago! WHOA! Where does the time go?
No wonder my keyboard is getting a little rusty in the keys.
Regards,
Adam.
The Wenty-icator! |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2649
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 12:06 pm: | |
Hi Adam,
"But I'll bet you deliberately did it just to confuse me."
No, but I sure managed to confuse myself.
"If he failed in his attempt to kill Ada, it's not unreasonable to think that he would want to succed the next time, and so would help others in order to do it."
Nah, I don't know about this. Doesen't sound right.
Serial killers hardly ever work in groups or are social enough in order to function in a gang, and judging from his crimes I'd say it's questionable that he could have functioned in such a context -- so far I only know of the Hillside Stranglers, who worked as a duo. I think this is to stretch things a bit.
Id say it's more credible that she was attacked ny one of those gangs -- who I assume were rather brutal -- that operated in the area. I can't see why the Ripper should be involved at all.
"Gawd, you wouldn't want to hear me trying to speak Swedish!
I know about 5 words which probably don't even go into sentence form together"
I would like to hear those...
(Swedish is not an international language anyway, so nobody could blame you -- English is, however. But thanks anyway.)
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971 |
Adam Went
Detective Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 117
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 6:59 am: | |
Hi Glenn,
You wrote:
"No, but I sure managed to confuse myself."
Now you confused everyone, Glenn. Sheesh!
"Serial killers hardly ever work in groups or are social enough in order to function in a gang, and judging from his crimes I'd say it's questionable that he could have functioned in such a context -- so far I only know of the Hillside Stranglers, who worked as a duo. I think this is to stretch things a bit."
I can offer you one other example of duo serial killers....
The Moors Murders.
Myra Hindley and Ian Brady, though a couple, also worked together and killed I think it was 5 people, all except 1 were young children.
I don't know if they would be the only ones either. And I don't think it's entirely out of the question that the Ripper wanted help in finishing off the woman he attacked on the second attempt. Ada Wilson was lucky to survive, and Emma Smith did for a short time. Then came Martha Tabram and the stabbings. As I've said before, I think it signifies an escalating brutality level, until he eventually goes completely mad and goes for the mutilations as in the later victims, especially Mary Kelly.
"I would like to hear those...
(Swedish is not an international language anyway, so nobody could blame you -- English is, however. But thanks anyway.)"
Let me see....OK, I've thought of 4 words, I think all that are Swedish:
Om, Mig, Var, Kroner. No idea what any of them mean except the last one, which I know is the currency. Are they even Swedish? No hope of getting them into a sentence together though, I am assuming.
Regards,
Adam. }
The Wenty-icator! |
Alan Sharp
Chief Inspector
Username: Ash
Post Number: 711
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 7:32 am: | |
Actually there are many examples of serial killers working in pairs or groups. As well as the ones mentioned we have Fred and Rose West, Leonard Lake and Charles Ng, Laurence Bittaker and Roy Norris, Henry Lee Lucas and Otis Toole, the Washington Snipers and of course Burke and Hare, and groups such as the Manson Family, the Gecht Gang in Chicago, the Dutroux Paedophile Ring.
I always feel strangely ambivalent about Myra Hindley. She was an extreme submissive personality who had the misfortune to fall in love with a sexual sadist with an extreme dominant personality. If he had fallen for anyone other than Ian Brady it is likely she would have lived a perfectly normal, productive life, but instead she had her face plastered on every newspaper in the land for three decades proclaiming her "the most evil woman who ever lived."
"Everyone else my age is an adult, whereas I am merely in disguise." |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 2653
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, January 03, 2005 - 8:17 am: | |
True, Alan and Adam,
Seems that there were more examples of this than I can remember.
I think I do rule out this in the case of the Ripper, though.
During the actual Ripper scare, we have no witness indications on that the victims were seen together with more than one person. I don't see any reason for the Ripper to be a member of a gang prior to this either.
Since there were ordinary brutal gangs operating anyway I think it's a mistake to lay all of the activities on the Ripper. He was hardly the only violent criminal in East End at the time, and if gangs operated we should see some result of this activity. To assume that the Ripper also did their work (as a member) makes no sense.
"Let me see....OK, I've thought of 4 words, I think all that are Swedish:
Om, Mig, Var, Kroner. No idea what any of them mean except the last one, which I know is the currency."
Yep, it's Swedish alright.
om = if; mig = me; var = were, was; kronor = Sw. currency (crowns)
All the best
G, Sweden
"Well, do you... punk?"
Dirty Harry, 1971 |
Phil Hill
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 02, 2005 - 3:51 am: | |
Glenn, you English is superb - I consistently forget that it isn't your mother tongue. When first on the Board I thought that you were British but living in Scandanavia!! That's intended as a compliment by the way!!
On it's being a shame that there is no one around today, who was living in 1888, I really wonder whether it makes much difference.
You'd have to go back to Matters time (1920s) to talk to those who had been adults in 1888 - he speculates whether some of the same people were still living in Buck's Row (by the Durward St) - though I note that there is no indication that he knocked on doors or tried to speak to anyone.
As we have discussed on Casebook before, oral history can be very misleading. If Kitty has indeed done research in the East End, then the likely distortion over time, faulty memories and the building up of myths are things she will need to factor in to her analysis.
Even in the 1920s many of the principals had departed. Those surviving were old. We see doubts expressed here (not ones I altogether share, I might add) about Swanson's memory etc. Would they have wanted to speak to a researcher? Would they have "spun" the story? Who knows.
I think what we need to develop are approaches to the press testimony that are both more general and more detailed. Akin, if you like, to scholarly textual criticism.
Are there things we can take away from press reports (we know they can be distorted) of a general nature - mood; feelings etc. Can we trace how an idea might have developed locally? is there a relative concensus on a detail that is not dependent on one witness being called by 3 names in 3 papers!!
On the memoirs, these need to be seen IMHO in the context of when they were written, and of the character of their writers.
Ripper-studies lacks good research work on the lives of Warren, Anderson, Munro etc which would allow us to assess their reliability, integrity, likely biases etc.
Second World War memoirs of major military figures (and political) form a dialogue as they seek to score points; or answer issues raised in a previous author's work. How true is this of our senior policemen in the JtR case? Much good work could be done here.
I have always thought that close comparative and textual analysis of andersons words and the different versions of his memoirs would be useful. So too with MM's memorandum. What Do the words mean. How do the phrases add up? Why and when were changes made - and how do these affect the overall thrust of the document/book?
Just some thoughts, inspired by this thread,
Phil |
Adam Went
Detective Sergeant
Username: Adamw
Post Number: 121
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 3:47 am: | |
Hi all,
Alan, you wrote:
"I always feel strangely ambivalent about Myra Hindley. She was an extreme submissive personality who had the misfortune to fall in love with a sexual sadist with an extreme dominant personality. If he had fallen for anyone other than Ian Brady it is likely she would have lived a perfectly normal, productive life, but instead she had her face plastered on every newspaper in the land for three decades proclaiming her "the most evil woman who ever lived.""
That can always be used as an excuse - "He told me to do it" - even when it comes to murder, apparently. I don't think it's a legitimate argument at all that she (Myra Hindley) was under his spell and that's why she helped committ the crimes. Yes, there were those even back then who apparently led a campaign for her release, claiming she had "reformed." Reformed or not, she assisted in the killings of several young children with their whole lives ahead of them, which is inexcusable. She died only fairly recently, and based on what I know about her and what she did, I'm glad she spent the rest of her life behind bars.
Glenn, you wrote:
"I think I do rule out this in the case of the Ripper, though.
During the actual Ripper scare, we have no witness indications on that the victims were seen together with more than one person. I don't see any reason for the Ripper to be a member of a gang prior to this either."
Well, there was Liz Stride and the 'second man' Schwartz reported. But I believe he was just a passer-by, and I agree that there's no doubt that it was only 1 person in the rest of the killings.
I just think that since he failed the first time, he might want to make sure it went the way he wanted it the second time, and after that he carried on on his own. And Emma Smith was half-conscious, she may have even confused some of the details.
"Since there were ordinary brutal gangs operating anyway I think it's a mistake to lay all of the activities on the Ripper. He was hardly the only violent criminal in East End at the time, and if gangs operated we should see some result of this activity. To assume that the Ripper also did their work (as a member) makes no sense."
Not overall in groups, no, I agree with that, but I think it is worth looking into Emma Smith and the possibility of the Ripper being responsible, or partially responsible. If he did attack Ada Wilson, could he have waited to strike again for those few months in between, and then struck down 5 or maybe 6 in 3 months? I think there must have been an attack somewhere in between, and Emma Smith is a potential candidate, though the fact that she described an attack by 3 youths (IIRC) knocks a hole in that.
I don't believe in her as much as Ada Wilson and Martha Tabram, but she seems the only candidate even plausible in between Wilson and Tabram. It's not really by choice that I think she may have been a victim, simply that there is nobody else likely.
"Yep, it's Swedish alright.
om = if; mig = me; var = were, was; kronor = Sw. currency (crowns)"
Very interesting, thanks. Well, atleast it was Swedish!
Regards,
Adam.
The Wenty-icator! |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page