|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Peter J. Tabord
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 5:29 am: |       |
Hi AP, Monty.
Puzzling. All the killings, though in places that were risky, were also in the kind of place where the lowest class of prostitute might do 'business'. (Except MJK, and for the moment I can accept either a different killer for her, or JtR got lucky and was let right into the playpen.) I had imagined JtR being propositioned on the street, accompanying the woman to her 'place' , and then something triggering the attack before sexual intercourse. I had a theory that it was either the request for money or the nature of the buisiness offered that triggered him - I'm not convinced there is any evidence of actual sexual activity (apart from what went on in the guy's head)
But I definitely think the absence of money, whether it never changed hands or was recovered by Jack, is a significant clue.
I suppose the recovery theory would at least explain that none of them had any money at all - Mary Kelly at least seems to have been 'active' earlier in the day and would be wanting to hang on to the money to pay the rent. I can't see it as a conscious removal of a clue though, maybe more part of the ritual? I wonder if it was maybe the same money every time, or he was so broke that the robbery was important, albeit an afterthought? So little time at some of the scenes though...
Regards
Pete |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 1:48 am: | |
Hi Peter,
I feel that once a sucluded spot was found He just struck. Maybe even before she could ask for the money. I dont believe that the asking for the money caused the ripper to kill. I believe the ripper went out and was looking for a prostitute. I do believe it is possible that the ripper waited untill he was confronted by a women and that is how he picked a victum.
Hi Wolf,
I know that homosexual male serial killers do not normally kill women. They kill men. However, is it possible that the ripper was a homosexual who could not come to terms with his homosexuality and he took out his frustrations on women. By cutting away the womb he takes away the part of the body that disgusted him and in a way takeing the part of the body that made her a woman? I dont have the experiance that you do in cases like this and I was wondering if youhave ever heard of such a case were a homosexual male killed women.
Thanks for letting me pick your brain. Take care,CB |
Rosa
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 10, 2004 - 10:08 pm: | |
Monty:
Controlling a victim by killing her in enviroment inwhich he has no control over, isn't much control. His actions are still very dependent on luck. How quick he is. He wasn't quick enough with Catherine.
Rosa
|
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 721
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 9:16 am: | |
Hi Guys,
Yeah, killings were in risky places…but never in places where escape was impossible. The only exception maybe being Kelly scene.
Ive mentioned it before. Chapmans stuff was laid out (which to me indicates a ‘sorting through’). Eddowes stuff was rifled through. There must have been a reason for this…why ? Also how long do you think this act would take ? Hardly rushing in my eyes. Not if you consider the nicking of Kates eyelids as well.
Rosa,
Thank you for clearing that for me. I agree……apart from not being quick enough with Kate. My reasons ? see above.
Monty
 |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 626
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 9:55 am: | |
Guys,
With regards to the lack of cash on the victims does anyone else think that maybe it's possible that Jack saw them in a pub and then followed them out and killed them. This would explain the lack of money as I think these women only tended to leave a pub when they had no money to spend.
Sarah |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 727
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 12:05 pm: | |
Sarah,
I think its possible. Very possible. If I remember correctly Caz had a similar idea.
Very plausable also. Girls all spent out. He knew they'd be looking for trade....ker-pow !!
Monty
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 728
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 12:18 pm: | |
Hi AP,
You think Jack could have been frightened and confused by all these prossies approaching him when he happened to be walking the same streets as them in the early hours?
More a case of Jack being in the wrong place at the wrong time then?
Why would a scared and confused Jack the lad have allowed one of them to lure him to the back yard of 29 Hanbury Street, after his terrifying experience in Bucks Row? And again with the predatory Eddowes in Mitre Square? And finally, let himself be dragged into Kelly’s room by the scruff of his neck so she could scare the living daylights out of the poor nerd?
Talk about once bitten four times shy but not to the point of retiring!
Love,
Caz
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 835
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 1:25 pm: | |
I aint about to let you get away with that, Caz.
I have never seen it like you, as you know; when I look in particular at the situation of 29 Hanbury Street I am almost persuaded that the lady either entered the yard there either with a trick unconnected to the crime, but more likely to take a leak off the street. And hey presto Jack the lad hopped over the fence - which was his normal method of travelling around Whitechapel, via the backyards and alleyways - and fell right on top of the poor woman, or even that he was silent witness to her behaviour and then attacked her. As ever I don’t see the shape of events and things like you, and cannot be easily persuaded to always run with the crowd. Regarding Eddowes and Mitre Square, again I am not easily persuaded that events were as you describe, you know that I believe Eddowes had a destination that night when she left BPS and I do believe that destination was the Kearly & Tonge warehouse in Mitre Square.
I don’t think Jack was lured that night, I think Eddowes was, and it wasn’t by Jack.
I’m almost tempted to say that I don’t believe Jack the Lad killed MJK, but I’ll resist that temptation for a bit longer as it is still a ‘three pipe’ problem in my head and I must puff and blow on it awhile.
You know where I’m going Caz, if you read the poetry thread.
Good points though, you really ought to drop that dead donkey of a diary and write a real book. You good at it.
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 836
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 1:39 pm: | |
Peter
Puzzling is right.
Your talk of ritual puts me in mind of a certain young man who had the bizarre habit of snipping pieces of cloth from the posterior region of lady’s dresses. He may have got away with this strange behaviour with young and vulnerable Victorian ladies, but I do ponder what the reaction of an old boiled whore would have been to have found a young upstart snipping away at their hard-earned cloth without paying for that rare privilege, and then in turn I do ponder what that lad’s reaction might have been had he been thwarted about his strange purpose by an aggressive prostitute.
But there is probably a simpler explanation for the lack of cash in hand. Today it is very common for prostitutes to hand cash over to their pimp as soon as it is put in their hand by the punter.
But for some strange reason we appear to be ‘pimpless’ in Whitechapel at that time. This is also something that bothers me greatly.
|
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 837
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 1:45 pm: | |
CB
I'll have to dwell on your post and get back to you. I do know that recent statistics from Home Office studies here in the UK do indicate that many men who are serving prison sentences for sexually related offences against women are in fact confused about their sexual identity and this has proved the 'motive' in such cases.
Bizarre but so.
I'll drink some and get back to you. |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 1:05 pm: | |
Elementary my dear Sarah,
I could not agree more. I am not sure if he followed them out of pubs but he found them soon after they left a bar or after they were released from jail because they were drunk. I agree they spent most if not all the money they earned on gin.
All the best,CB |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 634
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 6:35 am: | |
AP,
Don't you think that if he had jumped over the fence in the backyard of 29 Hanbury Street that the neighbour would have noticed since he was supposedly in his backyard at the time.
Monty, CB,
Glad to have actually had a good idea, even if Caz had a similar one before, I hadn't read all of the above so I probably had missed her idea on it.
Sarah |
rosa
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 10:45 pm: | |
greetings:
I don't think there was a trigger I think Jack went hunting. Considering the amount of violence that was involved Jack would have to know what he was about to do on the approach.
the women were going out to get money. they may not necessarily have any, Nichols was going out to make her bed money, Chapman had none leaving jail, and weren't a few pennies left at the feet of Eddowes? Or was that yes/no stories?
considering the small amount they could get, or part of the payment was infact a day of drinking then sharing a bed at night. A pimp would have starved on it. although there were gangs that went around robbing pros...
Monty: I meant Stride when I said Edowes. He seems to have been interupted with Stride.
Jack would have to know the area well, and he would have to pass through it unnoticed. These women would be part of his landscape. thus no shock or surprise. the first four women were similar in age. drunks. Kelly was much younger and a drinker heading towards life on the streets. |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 11, 2004 - 3:16 pm: | |
Wolf,
Thanks for your response. I RESPECT YOUR OPPINION and look forward to reading YOUR RESPONSE. Now I have to make my post at least ten words longer
All the best,CB |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 840
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 4:01 pm: | |
That's okay CB, I'm not immune to flattery of any nature.
I have written down my thoughts on this particular aspect several times, so here is one of them for you:
I have my sincere doubts whether
many of these so-called sexual serial killers actually are
motivated - or indeed intend to satisfy - a sexual urge of any
nature or form. Looking closely at many cases what I see are very
immature - almost unformed one could say - individuals who
are `playing' sex with their victims, as if playing with a victim
sexually is far more secure than actually doing anything sexual to a
victim. Of course I do not mean overt satyrs of the nature of Bundy,
I speak of killers like Pitchfork and the so-called Boston
Strangler, where the men masturbated after they had killed their
victims and then transferred their sperm using a secondary object
such as a twig or broomstick. I see in such behaviour a peculiar
form of childish magic. As when a child pours imaginary tea from a
tea pot into a cup and then adds imaginary sugar and milk. Nothing
has really happened in the plains of reality but something has
certainly happened somewhere. I believe Jack to be have been one of
these insincere killers, what I would term as a `no purpose' killer,
whilst Bundy was very sincere in his `true purpose`: to have sex
with his victims. |
Peter J. Tabord
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 10:00 am: | |
-- Warning - speculation! --
OK, let's see if this fits. I'm trying to glue together my ideas with AP and Monty's suggestions. Not trying to be definitive or write a book - just come up with a MO that makes sense (even if it isn't the right one!)
Our Jacky does not trawl the streets trying to pick up prostitutes or waiting to be approached. He can't attack right in the middle of the street, and he can't drag these ladies off kicking and screaming. This is the east end, not genteel territory - these are the kind of ladies who would not go quietly, knife or no. And since the Leather Apron/ JTR scare starts early, the later victims know the score regarding strangers and knives. One or two of them might react by being terrified into inactivity, but that's an enormous risk.
So, he in fact trawls the streets looking for _others_ picking up prostitutes. (or maybe he is interested in particular ladies because they've already triggered hin in some way, even perhaps when he's been attempting to cut bits from their clothing)
Whatever, he knows they can't do the deed right in the middle of the street, so he does a 'peeping tom' act, and follows the prostitute, knowing that they are going to go somewhere at least slightly secluded.
This fits in nicely with a couple of people seen hanging around like Pipe man and Hutch (if indeed it was he) waiting on the outcome of previous encounters.
Let's accept that, short though time was in some cases, he behaved without worrying too much about time pressure, confident he could scarper if threatened. And thus could recover any money from the previous customer. Liz Stride may not have had any money because she may not have been on the game that night, so even though he was interrupted there was none on her. She may have simply gone round the corner into the alley after the violent encounter on the street to get her breath back and suck a calming equivalent of an extra strong mint.
In such an encounter, I wonder if the john would normally leave first while the lady cleans up and adjusts her clothing, then Jacky leaps over the fence, or jumps out of the shadows, whatever. He then attacks immediately and overwhelmingly. (AP, I note a certain person was good at leaping about and unusually strong <g>)
Any good?
Regards
Pete |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 842
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 5:20 pm: | |
Pete
yes, I see that too, not quite everything you say, but a lot of it rings true. I find your scenario far more plausible than the previously accepted one of Jack cleverly luring these unfortunates to secluded places with intent and purpose.
As you must know I have never seen intent or purpose in Jack's crimes.
Just Pin Ball Jack, crashing and slamming around the alleyways and back yards of Whitechapel until someone kicks the wizard, bells ring and a whore goes down and four pence comes out of the slot at the bottom of the machine.
That certain person you mention was a Pin Ball, if nothing else, and that's what we should be looking for. |
Michael Raney
Detective Sergeant
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 85
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 6:02 pm: | |
CB,
"By cutting away the womb he takes away the part of the body that disgusted him and in a way takeing the part of the body that made her a woman?"
Why would a gay man be disgusted by a woman's womb? Why would it be a problem that it was what made her a woman?
Mikey} |
Sarah Long
Chief Inspector
Username: Sarah
Post Number: 642
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 5:22 am: | |
CB,
I'd have to agree with Michael here. Why would a gay man want to kill and mutilate a women and then remove her womb? If, as you say, he couldn't handle being gay then I still don't understand why you think he would attack women. Surely if this was the case he would attack men as they are the ones he would be annoyed at for him feeling the way he did.
Sarah |
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 268
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 6:21 am: | |
The problem for me with some of the reasoning about "Jack"----who killed, mutilated women who were amongst the most vulnerable class at that time,and seems to most to have been smart enough to evade detection is that somehow or other AP is encouraging us to "blame the victims" who I notice are referred to only as "whores" and sometimes even "drunken whores" on the poetry thread for example which gradually shifts the whole saga towards a scenario of "poor young Jack innocently cutting up some abstraction of a person
who didnt matter anyway.Come on AP who do you think you are kidding here? "jack" as you call him
was a twisted horrible git who didnt give a toss about humanity and chose to kill and mutilate those he could easily catch.[whereas it seems like Mary, Kate Catharine Elizabeth and Polly
were poor homeless people who seem not to have been able to survive at that time of horrendous inequalities.
Ap I dont want to start a quarrel for the sake of it and I admire your talent with verse and your otherinteresting thoughts about the case but can I at least ask you to consider other sensibilities
about this other than those of Thomas Cutbush? |
CB
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, February 12, 2004 - 9:27 pm: | |
Hi all,
Thanks Wolf and Pete for the response.
Hi Mikey
Disgusted was the wrong word. Uncomfortable may be a beter choice. I suggested that the ripper may have had a hard time dealing with his homosexuality and he took out his frustations on the women of WC. I asked Wolf if that was possible.
I post to learn and I consider myself lucky to share a common interest with people from all over the world. I hope to keep geting responses on my post.
Thank you all,CB |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 843
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 1:38 pm: | |
No worries Natalie, I can relate to what you are saying, and can understand your frustration and slight anger at my somewhat callous attitude to the victims, but to be honest with you when I am contributing to this site - whether that be on the poetry thread or elsewhere like here - I do try to do so with a historical perspective, which is perhaps more honest and faithful to the blunt truth than contributing using the moral standards and measures of our current age. I do not have a ‘down on whores’, in fact as I have said before I shared a home with a working prostitute for many years and I couldn’t have wished for better or more convivial company… she were a right diamond.
However, whether we like the situation or not, the common prostitutes of the LVP were considered to be nothing but worthless scum who represented a direct threat to the moral fabric of society, and again whether we like it or not, Jack was seen by many as a moral warrior sent to root out the basic moral corruption and greed in society that common whores represented. In fact Jack’s role at that time was interpreted by many Christians in much the same way as the onset of the AIDS was by more modern churches, as some sort of god-like reckoning for the inherent sexual corruption of mankind.
I don’t like this situation anymore than you do, but it would be entirely silly to ignore it.
It is wrong of you to attempt to narrow and box my vision of Jack in, by claiming that I am trying to gather sympathy for ‘poor Jack’, whilst degrading the whores for being whores. Not a bit of it.
All I really attempt to do is to give another view into the mirror here, so that when people peer inside, if they shift the angle slightly then they might see something else other than that which they are being told to see by the very people who do not allow for any diversion from their fiercely defended and entrenched views.
I have always held the believe that the crimes of Jack the Ripper were committed by someone who was dreadfully immature and childish, but this does not mean I believe that person to be an innocent abroad in the dark of a Whitechapel night, hemmed in by vicious harpies, and fighting for his very life against their sexual advances.
He just bumped into them and they just bumped into him, and away went the pin ball again, no more complicated than that.
I do know that my views do not always sit comfortably with many readers, but I sort of enjoy that situation, so don’t expect to see any changes in the near future, unless you got some information which I don’t.
|
Natalie Severn
Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 271
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 1:59 pm: | |
Hi AP,Thankyou for explaining so clearly your views and the ideas you have about these times.I do understand this and I understand why you choose to present them as you do.I could have guessed as much.Indeed your position over the involvement of the Cutbush family is instructive in so many ways and I do agree actually that the murderer could well have been one of the suspects
who was mentally quite ill and therefore a victim himself in another way.Thomas I find a very plausible suspect[since reading the various documents that you have brought to light as well as your book I may add].Anyway I"m glad this matter is resolved.Looking forward to more revelations.Take Care.
Best Natalie. |
Michael Raney
Detective Sergeant
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 96
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 1:59 pm: | |
AP,
Even if I don't always agree, I always enjoy your posts. Shifting the angle of the mirror never hurt anyone. Another perspective usually gives us insight.
Mikey |
AP Wolf
Chief Inspector
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 845
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, February 13, 2004 - 5:21 pm: | |
Thank you Mikey
it is often best to turn the mirror completely around and then see what is behind, very often it is someone we know.
Appreciate your kind words.
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
