|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
Thread |
Last Poster |
Posts |
Pages |
Last Post |
  | Archive through May 17, 2005 | Frank van Oploo | 50 | 1 | 5-17-05 5:46 pm |
| |
 Closed: New threads not accepted on this page |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 4403
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 5:48 pm: | 
|
Hi Frank
I agree. The only thing I'm just a little dubious about is the idea that he may have followed Kelly around for several days, spying out the lie of the land. But yes, I agree he could have got more sneaky as time went on.
On the other hand, he also could have changed in the opposite direction. By the time he killed Kelly he could have been completely ga-ga, simply walking into the room in a kind of trance.
In which case his logic would have been coincidental. 
Robert |
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 603
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 5:59 pm: |
|
That's a good one, Robert - it actually 'sounds' like Johan Cruijff saying that!
"Coincidence is logical"
Johan Cruijff
|
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 604
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - 6:19 pm: |
|
Hi again Robert,
Just to put things into balance before I'm off to bed, I'm just a little dubious about the notion that he could simply have walked into the room by sheer chance, completely ga-ga and in a kind of trance (if he didn't pose as a punter, that is).
Nighty night,
Frank
"Coincidence is logical"
Johan Cruijff
|
Richard Brian Nunweek
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 1407
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 3:58 am: |
|
Hi,
Kellys killer was extremely lucky?.
He happened to pick the one night that week that kelly had no sleep over, logic says he proberly had some kind of knowledge regarding that.
I would hardly believe that Mary broadcasted it in the pubs she frequented, ' I am staying alone tonight'
Of course that does not have to be the case, the very fact that Kelly invited a man back to her room would suggest to the killer that the room was empty of others.
Regards Richard. |
Helge Samuelsen
Sergeant
Username: Helge
Post Number: 26
Registered: 4-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 7:39 am: |
|
Logically it is not possible to take any facts after an event and calculate if certain of those facts or happenstances were due to anything but coincidence. In any event there might be a multitude of possibilities.
What if, in a car accident involving two cars, the driver of one of the cars happened to stop and buy gas just that morning, thus setting up the accident timewise?
What if the other guys morning newspaper was late and he spent an extra five minutes reading it?
What if either one overslept?
None of these happenstances contribute to show that the accident happened BECAUSE (predetermined) of any of them. And no matter what "coincidences" took place to "set up" the accident, it does not become less "possible".
Neither chance nor logic works both ways, and simply cannot be "reverse engineered". (Hope my choice of example did indeed clarify my point, although it bears on the surface of it little semblance with the case at hand. If not, blame it all on my university trained "not necessarily common" sense..LOL)
Unless we can show that any "facts" concerning MJK actually WAS known by JtR, there is no way we can say that they had any bearing on his actions whatsoever (its fun to speculate, though)
He could, like in the previous murders, (IMO) simply have been terribly lucky. Admittedly this luck probably was laced with considerable street-smarts. Lets face it, most probably the MJK murder was the safest he ever committed. Jacky probably could not believe his luck when he realized he would have poor Kelly alone in her room for "extended pleasure".
If Kellys room was not "private" that night, then she would not have invited him in the first place. (And if another punter had beaten Jack to it, she would never have been a victim..as an example)These things bear no consequence on Jacks behaviour other than he is acting out his desires in an "inactive" or "passive" way in relation to the situation.
Which is my elaborate way of saying that MJK was damned unlucky that night.
Sure Jack could be trapped in a room. But what are the odds? Surely the possibility of being seen, possibly identified, and possibly even being caught and lynched out in the open streets was considerably more likely.
Besides, anyone visiting MJK at night would, IF they entered, find themselves caught in a room with an armed killer. Jack would be the only one left standing. Most probably..
If jack stalked MJK prior to the murder, this would probably have decreased his chances of getting away with it! No crime is harder to solve than where the perpetrator has no previous knowledge of the victim.
Unless, of course, he allready knew Mary, and\or simply did not care..
Sincerely Helge
Fascinating! (Mr Spock raises an eyebrow)
|
Caroline Anne Morris
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Caz
Post Number: 1760
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 10:49 am: |
|
Hi Richard, Helge,
...the very fact that Kelly invited a man back to her room would suggest to the killer that the room was empty of others.
If Kellys room was not "private" that night, then she would not have invited him in the first place.
No crime is harder to solve than where the perpetrator has no previous knowledge of the victim.
I agree with all these points.
The only difference between Jack and any normal punter was what he did while he had the promise of being alone with a prostitute.
How many faceless, nameless punters came and went from that little room, with no one any the wiser?
The same number who went with a prostitute out on the street, I imagine.
Except that the girls with rooms could charge a bit more, and a bit more again if a punter wanted to stay longer - or all night.
My guess is that Hutch gave up after 45 minutes, assuming this one would be there until dawn, leaving her something to keep the rent man happy in the morning.
Love,
Caz
X
|
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 605
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 12:14 pm: |
|
Hi Richard,
“He happened to pick the one night that week that Kelly had no sleep-over.”
Perhaps on a minor note, but it wasn’t the only night Kelly had been sleeping alone. If I’m not mistaken Maria Harvey had spent only Monday and Tuesday nights with Kelly.
“Logic says he probably had some kind of knowledge regarding that.”
That is exactly what I’m saying – if he didn’t get into MJK’s room posing as a client that is.
“I would hardly believe that Mary broadcasted it in the pubs she frequented, ' I am staying alone tonight' ”
I would hardly believe that either and it’s not what I said or even implied. People talk, everywhere they are. Small talk, serious talk, talk about everyday life. As life in the East End back then took place mainly in the streets and pubs I think it’s quite possible that MJK’s killer picked up information that was interesting to him, certainly if he was looking for it. Things may have developed from there.
It surprises me a bit to see the man who might be regarded as the inventor of imagination (no offence intended – rather the opposite) has trouble seeing the possibility I’ve put forward.
“Of course that does not have to be the case, the very fact that Kelly invited a man back to her room would suggest to the killer that the room was empty of others.”
Like Caz, I completely agree with you there.
All the best,
Frank
"Coincidence is logical"
Johan Cruijff
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 2093
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 - 4:52 pm: |
|
Regarding hearts, eyes and other bits and bobs connected to the body, I think it well worth looking at the confessions of Frederick Baker, the infamous killer of Fanny Adams in 1867.
Although he carefully cut out the eyes of the young girl, and then carried them about in his hands for most of the afternoon, it does appear from his confession that the heart and other internal organs just sort of slipped out while he was dismembering and cutting up the girl with his pocket penknife.
Worth a study. |
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1755
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, May 19, 2005 - 5:22 am: |
|
G'day,
If Jack the Ripper had've limited his prey to prostitutes that took their clients to their place-of-residence, I think he would have really made his target small. I don't think many prostitutes would have done that.
I think he stalked his victim long enough to find out where she serviced her customers so he could quickly plan his escape. I believe he lived locally, so that wouldn't have taken him long.
He seemed to know exactly how long it took P.C. Neil to complete his rounds, passing Buck's-Row. He seemed to know exactly how long P.C. Watkins took to patrol his beat near Mitre-Square.
If murder behind closed doors was a more attractive option, why did Martha Tabram's killer, (whether he was JtR or not), strike her on the first floor landing of G.Y. Building?
LEANNE |
Carolyn
Detective Sergeant
Username: Carolyn
Post Number: 107
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, May 19, 2005 - 8:19 am: |
|
Leanne
I'm not sure that it did have to do with attractive options. I think the murders where not as well planned as that. I'm not sure about Tabram being a victim of JtR, her killing could be a completely different matter.
You very well could be right about him knowing the movements of the police...But couldn't he have just waited in the area for a victim to come along? Due to the time, the chances were if she were out that late she probably was a prostitute.
If his target was a prostitute only, any one would work as his victim. The areas seem odd to me for him to have picked out, but I'm not sure that he didn't 'case' them out first.
Random ramblings, 
Carolyn |
Kyle
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Saturday, May 14, 2005 - 6:15 pm: |
|
Gday Leanne,
I agree Kelly probably was a ripper victim. Given the sordid nature of the East End in 1888, while the ripper crimes were in full swing, I always believed some other sordid character may have jumped onto the bandwagon - right up front.Most humans by nature are followers.Making the police think it was a ripper'job' would naturally keep their attention on the real JtR.
Compared to the other murders, Kelly's was a picnic for him.I guess there was no garantee that a visitor might pop round at 3.00am , but I would think once she was dead, inside the room, he could feel safe enough."How did he know he had time and privacy".He probably didnt know it , but he knew the pressure of being caught was less than the others.From the looks of her photo, it is hard to gauge anatomical knowledge, as someone with or without it could have done that.
Allthough being new to these boards, I have had a part time interest in the ripper for a while.I guess it seems that no 2 people will have identical oppinions on the suspect.I believe he has certainly preplanned, or cased ,the areas around Whitechapel.I think he has had better than average anatomical knowledge.The double event has always been the greatest indicator. How has he done those mutilations and not get seen.This was a superhuman achievement.I sometimes dream of that night.Hundreds of frantic police, hundreds of whistles going off all over Whitechapel after Stride's body was discovered.Any human seen anywhere would have been stopped.Add to that, he had blood on him, and was carrying a human kidney.How in God's name did he do all that and get to his hideout unseen by human eyes.Did he have SAS training?
I have always had a suspect in my mind resembling the fictitious character 'Dr Hannibal Lectre'from the film 'The silence of the Lambs'. He was INSANE - yes. But not all insane people are unintelligent.I think JtR was alot like Dr Lectre.Smart, shrewd , calculating - but yes - INSANE.
Thanks |
Kyle
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, May 13, 2005 - 2:17 pm: |
|
Caroline and Frank
You are right - murderers dont have to be experts in marksmanship,poisoning or strangling.These days, kids are walking to school with guns and shooting people.Hardly experts.However, I believe the murdering of the prostitutes is not the issue here.The issue is that grotesque mutilations and organ removal has occured.A very rare occurance to 'normal' murders.The question we are all asking is - could he have done this, in public areas, with time restraints, without knowing anything about anatomy.I believe he must have had some knowledge. I cant help picturing the ripper's face, pouring with sweat, as he was carving, and thinking -" I could be busted at any moment here", which was the case.Surely, with anatomical knowledge, his chances of success and escape were multiplied.
D. Norder and A. Spellak
All good points you make.Having worked as a grocery manager at Woolworths, I new the meathall lads very well.I think their actual knowledge of human anatomy is not very high.Carving up pigs and cows is different. I had to study human anatomy for a year and a half as part of a course I did at uni.Alot of hard work.Dan , you said that , from what we know, most murders show no anatomical knowledge.Was their context similar though. Were they done in public areas with an alerted police force looking out for them? With these murders, it is all about context.
The fact is there was time pressure.To my mind - immense pressure.Surely, with insufficient anatomical knowledge, or even being just a butcher, it wouldnt have been enough.Which leads me to conclude if that was the case, he was very lucky not to be nicked.
Finally , I would like to add this. If it was prooven he did not have anatomical knowledge, than my theory is that this is what the murders were all about. A quest for anatomical knowledge. He chose whores because they were easy and the public wouldnt care about a few whores - to his mind.Once finished with Mary Kelly, his insatiable quest for anatomical knowledge was forfilled.Which made me think of a suspect who wanted to be a doctor or health care professional - but was rejected from studying it for some reason.
thanks
|
Leanne Perry
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Leanne
Post Number: 1756
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2005 - 6:49 am: |
|
G'day Kile, Carolyn, Frank, Caz, AP, Anyone else,
Let's look closely at each canonical JtR murder case slowly, (leaving Martha Tabram alone for a minute), and see if we can guess what the Ripper may have learned after each one, and whether or not he was likely to have stalked each victim beforehand:
NICHOLS: Her body was found by P.C. Neil at 3:45a.m. It wasn't there when he passed the spot at 3:15a.m. (half-an-hour earlier), but the couple could have been hiding in the dark, waiting for him to pass.
Nichols was last seen alive at 2:30a.m. by Ellen Holland at the corner of Osborn Street and Whitechapel Road, and left going in the direction of Buck's Row. She told Holland that she didn't have enough money for her bed. She was then drunk, so I'd say she spent her money on drink as she earned it, and probably served clients in Buck's Row for most of the night. If JtR was stalking her, he could have learned to trust the victim to take him to a place where they wouldn't be disturbed. At the time there wasn't a huge Ripper-scare, so prostitutes and police wouldn't have been cautious. They would have been worried about gangs of youths and soldiers.
At 2:30 P.C. Neil hadn't yet passed Buck's Row on his first visit, and when he did there was no one there so I think it's unlikely that JtR waited at the scene for any prostitute to enter the stage.
What does everyone say about this case, before we move onto the next? Do you think this is worth doing?
LEANNE
|
Frank van Oploo
Chief Inspector
Username: Franko
Post Number: 606
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, May 21, 2005 - 5:27 am: |
|
Hi Kyle,
“I believe he must have had some knowledge.”
I agree. The fact that he opened his victims up tends to indicate that he knew there was something inside the body. The fact that he, certainly initially, targeted the lower part of the bodies tends to indicate he knew where to find the female parts. But as far as I’m concerned his anatomical knowledge needn’t have gone any further than that. It could have, mind you, but not necessarily IMHO.
“I cant help picturing the ripper's face, pouring with sweat, as he was carving, and thinking -" I could be busted at any moment here", which was the case. Surely, with anatomical knowledge, his chances of success and escape were multiplied.”
If we forget about what I’ve written above for a moment, wouldn’t quite the opposite have been true? Wouldn’t things have been easier for him if he had no anatomical knowledge at all and just wanted to destroy his victims, take them apart and perhaps take some parts of them with him? Then he wouldn’t have had any (additional) restraints put upon him, enabling him to just do what felt good to him at the time.
All the best,
Frank
"Coincidence is logical"
Johan Cruijff
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
