|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** This is an archived, static copy of the Casebook messages boards dating from 1998 to 2003. These threads cannot be replied to here. If you want to participate in our current forums please go to https://forum.casebook.org **
Archive through 23 October 2001
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: General Discussion :
Profile of Jack:
Archive through 23 October 2001
Author: Philip C. Dowe
Sunday, 07 October 2001 - 01:58 pm |        | Hi Monty,
yes I will, but I have just heard the news and at tzhe moment all I can think about is bomby over Kabul.
Philip |
Author: Monty
Tuesday, 09 October 2001 - 08:25 am | | Phil,
Whenever you're ready.
I was just reading the bunff on the RE-EVALUATION board about the Diary. I posted a message asking if a keeping of a diary is common amongst Serial Murderers? (I cannot think of a single one)
I was ignored so I'm wondering if that sort of thing would come out in a profile?
Take care,
Monty
 |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 08:22 am | | Hi Monty,
To help shed some light on the keeping of diary's by serial killers it is important to note that in most cases some momento of the murders will be taken even if the momento is a body part to be consumed later.
Some killers have kept scrap books others have kept the momentos that were taken in a special place where they can relive the incident over and over again. As far as diarys are concerned, it would depend heavily on the mental stability of the killer. If a person is to far over the deep end the diary would be incomprehensible.
Killers in the past have kept diarys. Sirhan Sirhan and Lee Harvey Oswald are the first to come to mind, although they were not serial killers. The key feature to the diary would be the detailed account of the event and this would always include information that is not known to the police. These accounts of the crime would be exceptionally detailed so the perp could relive the crime over again at will. |
Author: Monty
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 08:52 am | | Howdy Scott,
Thanks for you input,
I can understand the taking of momentos because they in some way are a connection to the victim. But a diary consists solely of the murderers memories,nothing solid to hold nor touch to trigger vivid accounts.
It seems obvious to me that Jack took momentos anyway so why the need for a diary?
Now a scapbook with newspaper clipping would be very interesting. Then I may be swayed.
There is nothing in the Maybrick journal that gives information unknown to the police
I could go on longer but unfortunately work calls. Perhaps I will put my arguments against sometime in the future.
Regards,
Monty
|
Author: Scott E. Medine
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 10:07 am | | The mission of the F.B.I’s BSU now known as ISU (Investigative Support Unit) is not to capture serial predators but to assist local law enforcement agencies in their capture of the killer. So yes, the F.B.I. has never caught a serial killer. As a retired homicide detective with the city of New Orleans, I have attended the F.B.I.’s sexual predator profiling course in Quantico. I can assure you that despite their critics, mostly defense attorneys , they are on top of their game.
First we have to remember that profiling is not an exact science. On the other hand, its not voodoo either.
Secondly, as with all homicide cases there is always unanswered questions.
Thirdly, the profile is only as good as the information that goes into determining it. Witness statements need to be taken with a grain salt. I have seen cases lost due to witness statements. What a witness recalls is only a small fraction of what really happened. A good example is an automobile accident. The driver of each auto is of course a witness. Are they reliable? Not much. What each is remembering is the fraction of a second just before and after the accident. The gaps left in the memory are filled with how they would like to remember the incident. Are they lying? Maybe ...maybe not. They are filling in the missing gaps with what they think happened or, as I have said, with what they would like to think happened. I remember one particular homicide scene and its witnesses. A gang member walked up to a street junkie, that owed him money, and shot him in back of the head and took off running. We spoke with three witnesses, there were others but these were the only three that did not suffer from selective amnesia. It should be noted these interviews were taped on micro cassette.
Two questions were asked;
1) Which way did the shooter run?
2) What did he look like to include dress?
Believe me these two questions were enough to aggravate any investigator.
Witness A- 63 year old Black Male retired truck driver) He ran down Elysian Fields and then left onto Galvez. He was a black male about 25 ,wearing a blue sweat shirt and blue ball cap and khaki pants. I’m 6 feet tall so he was my height.
Witness B -36 year old White Male manager of a loan company) He ran down Elysian Fields and then right onto Galvez. He was a Black Male about 15 wearing a black hooded sweat shirt, dark brown baggy pants and since I’m 5 feet 8 inches he was smaller than me so I’d say he was about 5 feet 5 inches.
Witness C -20 year old black female College Student Tulane University) He ran down Elysian Fields and turned right onto N Miro St. (this is the opposite direction of Galvez St. Galvez St. is south o f the shooting and N Miro was North of the shooting) He was about 18 years old about my boyfriends height, and he plays basket ball for Xavier University, so he was about 6 feet 4 inches and he was wearing a black sweat shirt with a blue hooded jacket over it and the hood pulled up. He had dirty blue jeans on.
Long story short...we eventually caught the killer he was convicted and is now on Louisiana’s death row. Witness statements were of no help. He was caught thirty minutes after the shooting on St. Bernard which, which does run off Galvez. Two narcotics officers using profiling methods saw him in a drug area wearing gang related clothing and sweating. They pulled up, he ran they caught him. He had a .38 caliber revolver that later matched the bullet pulled out of the vics skull. His dress? Blue t- shirt, blue and white bandana around his head, khaki pants. Usual gang dress for Black Gangster Disciples. Oh yeah, he was 5 feet 8 inches and 22 years old. It was the testimony of the two narcotics officers and the ballistics report form the crime lab that convicted him, not the witness statements.
Fourth, and most importantly....THERE IS ALWAYS EVIDENCE AT THE CRIME SCENE. The most common statement heard is ; “the killer has left no clues.” In law enforcement circles.... no clue is a very big clue.
The killers profile, in my opinion?
White male, that’s a give me. I think anyone of anyone of any other race would have stuck out like a sore thumb.
Late 20's early 30's. The level of violence of the killer was escalating and reached its climax with Mary Kelly. This tells me he suffered from intense full blown paranoid schizophrenia. He was extremely delusional. This psychosis develops in the early teens and if unchecked becomes full blown and often uncontrollable in the late 20's. The arranging of the items found at the side of Annie Chapman also points to PS. PS’s will try to arrange items, or in some cases, certain items in an order that makes sense to only them. It is almost ritual. It has been theorized that is their way of placing order in their disorganized messed up lives.
He is of slim build probably an emaciated look. This going out on a limb and I am sure will spark a lot of turmoil on the boards. There are studies that have shown that people with full blown PS tend to have a slim build due to eating being their last priority. Most delusions suffered by PS’s also involve eating or food intake i.e. the food is poisoned. Anyway, I have used this information to help in capturing Dominick Hassleman.
He definitely would have lived in the White Chapel area. By triangulating the scenes three possibilities come up as possible areas of residence. I will post the map triangulations later after I scan them in.
Medical and anatomical knowledge? This will not be popular.........NIL, ZIP, NADA, NONE, ZERO. It has been my experience that it doesn’t take much medical knowledge to mutilate a body. It doesn’t take much anatomical knowledge to rip the body open and remove a kidney, liver or any other body part. Anatomical curiosity? Sure he has that, but to think he was a medical student? A butcher? Well, ok he was a butcher in a way...but not in the sense of preparing meat for sale and consumption by the general populace. A person suffering from this bad a case of PS will not have had the discipline to be a student or hold down a detailed job as a meat preparer. He would have no military background. He would be an intense loner, probably living in some sort of homeless shelter if not on the streets. As far as his ability to charm or carry on a conversation with the victims? in an earlier post I stated it doesn’t take much conversational skill to get a price out of a prostitute for her services. After all I am sure the local clientele was not looking for stimulating conversation. his ability to communicate with the local press, police or vigilante groups? Not much. The Dear Boss and Saucy Jack letters were fakes. The From Hell letter I have my doubts but those doubts are gut feelings and I do not go on gut feelings so I have to agree this was an actual correspondence. The letter was disjointed and manical as I would think the killer’s state of mind would be. The fact that he does not use his nom de guerre is interesting. It is almost as if he is trying to set the record straight that he is the real killer. The kidney? In my play book that is a few notches up on the psychotic scale from just sending the ears. My doubts come into play with the killer’s ability to wrap and mail a package. I have to admit, I know nothing of the 19th century British Postal system. The Goulston Graffiti? I would not waste much time on that. Even if it was him the more important issue is location of the piece of bloody apron. The killer may have discarded on his way to what may have served as his home. Which may mean Goulstan was frequently traveled by him and was on his route home. The killer was more lucky than smart.
The big one. Because of the arrangement of the items at the Chapman scene, the body parts at the Eddowes scene the killer would have been recently released from an asylum. |
Author: graziano
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 05:07 pm | | Hello Scott,
so, that's your conclusion for the killer:
-acting lonely,
-psychotic or at least lunatic,
-not very smart,
-very lucky,
-audacious.
You really feel that you are not going to be popular ?
Why ?
They said that for the first time 113 years ago and, as incredible as it can be, it's the most popular thesys for the killer among the people posting here and the major authors today.
With different words (and different names) it's always the same bis,tris and so on repetita.
Arrangements of objects beside the body of Annie Chapman ?
Well, they were on the ground.
If I depositate quietly crouching myself a piece of comb on the soil or if I throw it there while standing up, are you going to see the difference ?
Arrangements of the body parts of Eddowes ?
It seems to me that when you cut a piece of colon from a body and this could have been quite fortuitous first cutting the belly and then looking for the kidney you have three choices:
- take it away,
- put it back in the body,
- throwing it away near the body.
It seems that they chose the last solution.
The level of violence escalating ?
For Chapman and Eddowes I would classify the violence at the same level, only maybe the location for Eddowes was a bit more secure for the murderer(s).
For Nicholls not very much under and there are enough elements in this case to say that they stopped short just because they were disturbed.
For Tabram, what is more violent, a good ripping or the delighting of 39 sadic stabs (sadic because you know at the 38th that the victim is already dead) ?
Medical knowledge, ZERO ?
They seemed in any case how to avoid to be plain spluttered with blood.
It doesn't take much conversational skill to get a price out of a prostitute for a services.
In one day of work you would be astonished to know to how many clients a prostitute refuses her services.
The reason ? Afraid to be ripped open.
What is the evidence that these women were going with the killer for sex at the moment of their murder ?
Were they naked ?
Were they raped ?
Was the place where they were found a common sex site ?
How do we know that ?
Witnesses not knowing the height of the man/men they saw ?
Well, your example are interesting but you forget to precise the distance of each witness from the scene of the crime.
The further from the scene a person is, the less precise his/her testimony will be.
In our case, the witnesses saw the guys quite from a very small distance.
Aside from Mr Pipeman seen by Schwartz, the other were all between 5.5 and 5.7/8. Quite precise.
For the dressing we have many similitudes, so I do not understand what is your point here.
For the clues.
Absolutely.
I always thought that the locations (I mean the place where the bodies have been found) of the body and their position on the ground were the most important.
For the Goulston street graffito I would like to know what a simple passer-by not at all connected with our case, having written it as you hint, could have meant.
Am I wrong or in plain english it does not mean anything ?
Bye. Graziano. |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 06:18 pm | | Dear Graziano,
As always, you get quickly to the POINT! Scott is new... so be gentle.
Rosey:-) |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 06:48 pm | | Thanks but that's ok Rosemary. I was police officer and a homicide detective, I'm used to the doubting Thomases in the world. Graziano may make a good defense attorney.
But Graziano, speaking from 20 years of experience, 147 homicide cases yeah that profile is exactly what I think.
Peace,
Scott |
Author: Simon Owen
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 07:37 pm | | The difference between Tabram and the other victims doesn't seem a lot but I think it really is a wide gap in reality.
The reason is that Tabram was stabbed and not slashed , now I may be wrong but upwards of around 20 stab wounds indicates that the killer knew his victim personally I think it has been said. Is this still accepted belief at Quantico ?
From my own experience , the aunt of a schoolfriend was murdered with 119 stabwounds on her own staircase : the perpetrator turned out to be one of her cousins.
NB : For followers of British criminology , what does this say about the 1992 Rachel Nickell murder case ? |
Author: Robeer
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 08:14 pm | | Scott,
Fascinating experience and research you shared above. Thanks for joining the message board. By the way I love the Big Easy. Did you enjoy the movie?
I have some questions. Mine may seem dull in comparison to the graziano who has such a colorful style and a poetic way of asking questions. Please bear with me.
If you would reread my posts of 6 Oct and 7 Oct it would save me space on this post to keep from repeating. I would appreciate your comments on some of the questions.
I don't remember all the names but Gacy in Chicago, the Hillside duo, Dahmer, the Gainsville killer, the photographer killer, Williams in Atlanta, Coryl in Houston, Kurtin in Germany, the Yorkshire Ripper, and Bundy. Were not all these SKs deceivingly normal in appearence and behavior? Most of them were neat to fastidious in dress. The photographer and Bundy moved across the US as did a recent SK in Texas who used the railroad to move around. Eight out of ten did kill in their own backyard but others used mobility to avoid detection. Bundy was the only slender one. Most lived in their own house or apt and almost had the appearance of being affluent.
In other words it would not be easy to distinguish these SKs from the rest of the population. They could hold down regular jobs. TYR was a bus driver. My guess is JTR would fit right in with this group or type of SK.
Can you tell us the history of profiling, who pioneered it, and how effective it is? What is your opinion of handwriting analysis and psychological profiling based on handwriting?
Thanks |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Wednesday, 10 October 2001 - 10:01 pm | | Hi Robeer,
There are two types of predators. Sociopaths, aka psychopaths and psychotics. To make it simple, sociopaths would make good used car salesmen. They are personable and at times well likeable. Able to charm the skin off a snake. They get along well in social functions and society. however they may have that dark side, be it con me, or in the cases you have stated above, serial predators. California's Zodiac was a psychopath also.
Pschotics on the other hand, are mentally unstable and are unable to function in society. They literally have trouble with some of the simple functions of every day life. They are delusional and suffer from paranoid schizaphrenia. Richard Trenton Chase California's Vampire Killer, Dominick Hassleman the Ghoul of New Orleans, Ed Gein, Richard Herins, Harvey Glatman etc.... all had trouble functioning in society. They were loners, they were all delusional and very much over the deep end, farther than the SKs you have named. Their crimes were the types of crimes that would rival the White Chapel killings in sheer frenzy and manical mutilations. Of the ones I named above, Glatman was the more the sane of the bunch but still a person approaching the end of his emotional rope.
As far as your other posts I will read them and respond.
Peace,
Scott |
Author: graziano
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 03:33 am | | Hello Scott,
of course it was not my intention to scare you or not to be gentle.
I doubt you could be with your profile.
I'm very interested in your professional experience.
I will be in Italy next month and I will try to bring precise references of what I am going to say now.
For the moment, please take it as it comes because it is only from recollection.
In 1998 or 1999 four prostitues were killed between Genova and La Spezia in the North West of Italy.
I do not remember the exact details but their bodies were found on the open street badly mutilated.
They were all very young (between 20 and 25) and they were all from Albania.
The first thought was of course that it was the work of a serial/sexual killer.
The reality appeared to be different.
It was a war between two different gangs of pimps.
One of the gang killed in such a way the girls of the other with a double goal:
-to eliminate competition phisically,
-to scare the other gang girls and to prevent them working for it.
So, shortly said it was what we could call a campaign of terror.
Now, I do not say that the aim was the same in our case, but I would be interested in knowing what makes you so sure in attributing the Whitechapel murders to a psychopath and not to a terroristic action ? (Let's forget the purposes for the moment).
Bye. Graziano.
P.S.: I am not asking you: "Why aren't you answering my previous questions ?", so, you see, I would not be a good defense attorney. |
Author: Harry Mann
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 04:38 am | | Hello Scot,
A question on the Big one.Why does the arrangement of items near the body signify the recent release from a Mental Institution.
How many of those you mentioned showed this trait,and were also recently released inmates?.
Regards,H.Mann. |
Author: R.J.P.
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 09:14 am | | Simon--Hello. To expand on your interesting 'upwards of twenty stab wounds' theory...
39 wounds (Tabram) divided by 2(soldiers)=19.5, which falls just directly beneath the needed 20 wound standard. How's that for math? [sorry]
But really, using this same idea, wouldn't it make Mary Kelly's 'victimology' every bit as suspect as Tabram's? Sounds like you're arguing for Barnett... Cheers, RP |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 09:52 am | | Hi Graziano,
No problem. I like a challenge. When One looks at a crime scene one has to take into consideration the totality of the circumstances. To just say X many prostitutes, and I say this because there is and always be debate on Martha Tabram and Emma Smith as ripper vics, were killed all with their throats slit and their bodies mutilated is not enough to go on.
Then as there are now exist knife cultures as well as gun cultures. Mediterranean (sp?) cultures, Latino cultures, Asian cultures all are knife cultures. Mid Eastern and U.S. are gun based cultures. Although the Mid East also falls under knife cultures and Latinos fall under gun cultures as well. ANYWAY........
For years street gangs in the US have made box cutters their concealed weapon of everyday choice, because many local laws for concealed weapons do not consider box cutters as weapons. (No wonder the terrorist used them on the planes) and the police are more than not likely to not arrest them on concealed weapon charges. Who carries box cutters? Stock clerks in warehouses and stores, carpet and flooring people, carpenters, I like tinkering around with electronics and I think they make a great wire stripper. Truth be told a common pencil or pen can be used as an edged weapon.
In the US street gangs, Hispanic gangs, more notably, The Latin Kings, La Raza and Sur 13 will use the throat slashing to make a point to rival gang members. Their method is more commonly referred to the Colombian Necktie. The throat is slashed to the point of near decapitation and the tongue is pulled out the cut and draped over the chest.
In the O.J. Simpson case, I have to admit, I did not follow it as I more important things going on, like investigating my own murder cases. But I have been told by sources, whose credibility has not been established one way or the other that the throats being cut appeared to be in such a way as to send a message. Like I said I have no real knowledge of the case other than what has been played out in the media. Today’s media, like 19th Century media still has been known to misquote and take out of context.
In short, what I am saying is the totality of the circumstances has to be considered. Today gang warfare , terrorist activities, the narcotics trade, religion and other factors go into the mix, just as factors from Victorian London would go into the White Chapel mix.
Peace,
Scott
P.S. I would like to know the details of the Italian case.
P.P.S I will answer your questions let me clear my desk at work first. And uhhh ... yeah ya would just remember to throw in an objection whenever you like. |
Author: Simon Owen
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 03:06 pm | | Barnett is a good suspect RJP , but there would have been others who knew Kelly.
For instance Joseph Fleming , Walter Sickert and maybe even the Prince of Wales if Andy and Sue Parlour are to be believed.
I'm not saying any of these three did it BTW !
Graz , I think the aim of leaving the Ripper victims in the street WAS to create an atmosphere of terror in the community. More because the Ripper enjoyed the feeling of having everyone afraid of him IMHO though , he liked that feeling of power and notoriety. He was one sick mutha.
Grail , I cannot agree more that the Ripper victims were killed elsewhere and then dumped where they were found.
To support this theory , remember what Kate Eddowes wore on her feet - heavy boots. If she had entered Mitre Square alive , the sound of her boots on the cobbles would have been audible to the watchman George Morris , and remember Morris didn't hear a thing. He was easily able to hear the policeman's boots in Mitre Street however , proving IMO that had Kate walked into Mitre Square , Morris would have heard her footsteps.
And of course the Liz Stride murder itself is compelling evidence for the mutilations being committed elsewhere.
I will collate all this somewhere soon , and put all my ideas together about this ! |
Author: graziano
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 04:10 pm | | Hello Simon,
I think that RJP is hinting to the fact that the knife has not been used in the same way with Mary Kelly as with the others four canonical.
(And then, could only a knife explain such enormous mutilations?)
Thus what you say about Tabram, practically that she could be discharged as a ripper(s) victim for that reason, could also be said for Mary Kelly.
Now, I really do think that there are striking similarities between the Tabram's murder and the others.
I will call for you on this on the appropriate board on the next few days.
By the way, do you know something about Jane Savage (I do not find anything on the boards about her) ?
Bye. Graziano.
P.S.: the point you make about Eddowes and her boots could be in my opinion a potentially huge one.
I myself have enormous doubts about the sightseeing of Eddowes by Lawende and the entrance by the same Eddowes of Mitre square in a state of consciousness (but I must be sincer, yes, alive).
Are you sure that Morris could hear PC Watkins in Mitre street ?
Bye. Graziano. |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 04:32 pm | | Dear Scott,
How right you are with the "racial profiling" of offenders...the Malay or other Easterner may well be responsible...especially when they are on bhang
or other stimulants on their nervous system. I am beginning to see that Quantico has versed you well... in the art of 'deviancy'.
Rosey :-) |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 05:58 pm | | Dear Rosemary,
Thanks
|
Author: Scott E. Medine
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 05:58 pm | | Arrangements of objects beside the body of Annie Chapman ?
Well, they were on the ground.
If I depositate quietly crouching myself a piece of comb on the soil or if I throw it there while standing up, are you going to see the difference ?
Nope, no difference. But if that comb and several other objects were neatly arranged in an orderly fashion then there would be a clue as to the mental stability of the perp. Some people suffering from full blown PS ( paranoid schizophrenia) will have the habit of placing things in an order that makes sense to them. It is their way of putting their portion of the world in some sort of order. In past cases I have run into this behavioral clue. It becomes an obsession with them that they cannot control. I’m reasonably sure the items just fell out of Annie’s pocket(s) and the perp did not go looking for them.
Arrangements of the body parts of Eddowes ?
It seems to me that when you cut a piece of colon from a body and this could have been quite fortuitous first cutting the belly and then looking for the kidney you have three choices:
- take it away,
- put it back in the body,
- throwing it away near the body.
It seems that they chose the last solution.
Unless the perp had a hankering for chitlins and tripe I’m sure the thing to do is discard it. But to lay it down between her arm and her body is somewhat ritualistic and implies the behavior as stated above.
If he would have just flipped it over his shoulder and it land in a heap then I would think he was just generally discarding it. The placement of the flesh on the night stand in Mary Jane’s room has the same orderly fashion. True it was in a heap, but given the violence of the attack, the blood that was reported to have been on the bed and on the walls shows that the killer wasn’t to worried about house keeping, so why not just fling the flesh and body parts to side on the floor? A kidney here, a spleen there, a pound of flesh here and a pound of flesh over there. No, he placed them in an orderly fashion that made since only to him. Which brings us to another scenario....could the killer have secretly been a fan of Shakespeare. ( I’m kidding of course)
The level of violence escalating ?
For Chapman and Eddowes I would classify the violence at the same level, only maybe the location for Eddowes was a bit more secure for the murderer(s).
For Nicholls not very much under and there are enough elements in this case to say that they stopped short just because they were disturbed.
For Tabram, what is more violent, a good ripping or the delighting of 39 sadic stabs (sadic because you know at the 38th that the victim is already dead) ?
Eddowes and Kelly had their faces mutilated as well. Technically this would mean it is a way of taking away their personality. Many profilers would say that is a sure sign that he may have personally known these two women. And this is the fodder where a lot of Ripperologist get their take that the killer knew these two victims. Actually these crime scenes show that the killer was growing more frenzied and maniacal. One could assume that if the killer had not been disturbed on Berner St. then Kate Eddowes may have lived to see another day and the body of Liz Stride would have been mutilated.
The killer is not considered a sadist. Since all mutilation of the victims was Post Mortem. If the mutilations had taken place Ante Mortem then the profile would have to adjusted to reflect the killer being a sadist. Key point is that official documents show Polly Nicholls being found dead with her eyes open. In modern forensic studies this is a definite indication of instant death. Death so instantaneously that the eyes literally did not have time to shut.
Medical knowledge, ZERO ?
They seemed in any case how to avoid to be plain spluttered with blood.
Only blood spatter analysis would be able to actually determine accurately the actual positioning of the body of the vic and the perp. This data, if taken, is long gone as blood spatter analysis was not known of then. But based on my experience, the amount of medical knowledge it takes to rip open a human body is none. If the body was dissected slowly and carefully with some precision then I would think differently. One need not be a veteranarian to gut a fish. Anatomical knowledge would not be a big deal. Most serial predators of this sort have usually experimented on animals as children, the White Chapel would have done the same. Once again to be able to rip open a human and start pulling out entrails does not take a medical degree not would it be to start removing organs. I’m sure he has eaten kidney pie before........well maybe not human kidney pie.
Getting back to the bloodless perp...........
The majority of the blood would have come from the arteries in the neck. If the neck is pointing away from the perp, as in him taking the vic from behind then the blood spatter would be away from him. Once the heart stops beating the blood ceases to spout like a fountain.
It doesn't take much conversational skill to get a price out of a prostitute for a services.
In one day of work you would be astonished to know to how many clients a prostitute refuses her services.
The reason ? Afraid to be ripped open.
What is the evidence that these women were going with the killer for sex at the moment of their murder ?
Were they naked ?
Were they raped ?
Was the place where they were found a common sex site ?
How do we know that ?
In my experience, prostitutes have sex for money. They have sex with anybody with money. Then as now, most prostitutes have an addiction. Now a days it is crack, crank, heroin, then it was alcohol. Addictions are very strong. The addiction controls the person, the person does not control the addiction. Talk to any recovering drug addict or alcoholic. I have seen prostitutes slaughtered and butchered before in serial fashion and for the hard core prostitutes who need the money to get a fix believe me they will stop at nothing. They live to make just enough to secure money for their vice.
Witnesses not knowing the height of the man/men they saw ?
Well, your example are interesting but you forget to precise the distance of each witness from the scene of the crime.
The further from the scene a person is, the less precise his/her testimony will be.
In our case, the witnesses saw the guys quite from a very small distance.
Aside from Mr Pipeman seen by Schwartz, the other were all between 5.5 and 5.7/8. Quite precise.
For the dressing we have many similitudes, so I do not understand what is your point here.
Any law enforcement official will tell you that witnesses are not always accurate. In many cases they hinder the investigation rather than help it. This is especially true if the case is a high profile one that has been played out in the media. Signed statements of guilt from the perps are good enough to gain a conviction. Cold hard evidence is what is needed. Witnesses can give you a direction to go in but taking their word as gospel is very dangerous to any investigation. Witness statements and signed confessions need to be supported by facts.
For the clues.
Absolutely.
I always thought that the locations (I mean the place where the bodies have been found) of the body and their position on the ground were the most important.
For the Goulston street graffito I would like to know what a simple passer-by not at all connected with our case, having written it as you hint, could have meant.
Am I wrong or in plain english it does not mean anything ?
You are definitely right. Body positions are important. It plays into the ritualism of the killer. I may be off on this, and I have to check my notes but two major body positions are found in the killings. On their backs or sides with their knees bent and their heads turned to the right, or in the position as stated above with their left arm on their abdomen.
The killings all took place in the early morning hours. Most PS’s will sleep all day and prowl at night. The killings took place in concealed areas and the bodies were left there to be found. No effort to cover them or hide them. The bodies were found with relative ease.
The police are always portrayed as robots. They are stellar officers who never sway from their duty. Every 15 minutes or so they made their rounds with out fail. Today as then, I am sure police officers get free coffee, tea, drinks and discounted food. I am sure they stopped to talk with friends and people they see everyday on their beat. FIND SOME OUT OF THE WAY AND CATCH A FEW MINUTES OF SLEEP. With this in mind the killer wasn’t watching and making notes of their schedule. He was just lucky that one didn’t walk up on him in the act.
Was the killer married? No someone this full blown could barely care for himself let alone someone else. Every body’s fav suspect Kosminiski ate out of the gutters. Was he a loner? Yup.
This all I have time for Graziano. Work beckons me.....damn.
Peace,
Scott |
Author: Tom Wescott
Thursday, 11 October 2001 - 11:10 pm | | Scott, Simon, Graz, and all...
First of all, Scott, welcome to the boards. Your presence and knowledge is very refreshing. Now, onto matters. Yes, Annie Chapman's items were indeed arranged, but not below her feet...If you forget the books and study the inquest papers you will see that the muslin and comb were most likely placed UNDER her feet, which were turned up so they were flat on the ground, and the piece of envelope seems to have been UNDER her head. While this is purposeful organization, it would not be what you would call orderly.
Simon, for the last time, the body was not dropped off in the square. You are forgetting one VERY Important thing in your argument about Morris. You state that since he didn't hear Eddowes' boots she couldn't have walked into the square, but if she were to be carried into the square, wouldn't Morris have been MORE likely to have heard the men carrying her, considering they'd be bearing such weight, and would have certainly heard the parked carriage and the winnying of the horses? Come on, man. She walked into the square. Also, with the PC's the witness' finding the victims almost immediately after death, wouldn't a carriage have been noticed? They were all certainly asked. Are you a Wiccan? Forget the royal stuff, my friend.
As for the graffito, on the night it was left the Ripper had killed Stride (yes, I believe she was a Ripper victim) outside a Jewish workman's club where he must have heard 60 voices talking and singing in a jewish accent, possibly yiddish, and was almost caught. He had not performed his mutilations, his calling card so to speak, and the graffito most likely meant "I am the one who killed the girl at the jews club, they are not to be given credit (i.e. blame)'. Of course, the meaning of the graffito is open to debate, but it's in only that context that it makes full sense. If you think about it it makes NO sense if the Ripper DIDN'T write it.
As for Tabram, she was strangled prior to being mutilated (just like Jack's victims), but survived all 39 wounds, dying from hemmorage caused by loss of blood. There WAS a rip found near her vagina - ignored by most writers - a sexually motivated attack. If murder were the sole purpose, the killer would have finished her off with the strangulation. No bayonet was used. It was a dagger, along with a second knife, not uncommon for serial killers. If you believed Jack killed both Stride and Eddowes, which seems most likely, then you must accept the possibility that he had two different knives on him that night as well. Tabram also fits in perfectly with Jack's known 'schedule'. There's everything to suggest she was a Ripper victim and very little to suggest she wasn't. As for the throat slashing, Jack probably noticed that Tabram wasn't killed right off, and as a precautionary measure against a victim screaming before he had finished, decided to slice the throats of the next victims. That's all for now.
Rosie,
Racial profiling? I say 'whatever helps the good guys catch the bad guys'. Certain statistics should not be ignored even if it might seem 'politically incorrect' to the more sensitive souls out there. Whatever saves more lives works for me, and if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Robeer
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 01:47 am | | Tom,
I have seen in two books a post-mortem knife that belonged to some lady in London. She used it to tend her roses until the blade broke in two. Her story about the source of the knife is a police officer gave her two knives in a box he claimed belonged to JTR. She later burned the box because it had bloodstains. Not sure what happened to the other knife. This is an interesting story that came to mind after reading your post. If the story is true then the police must have known the identity of JTR. It sounds like the police wanted to dispose of the murder weapons. Why?
If footsteps can be heard in the streets of Whitechapel in the early hours of the morning how much more so the hoof beats of a horse wearing horse shoes? Would a carriage at that time of night in this neighborhood not attract attention like a neon sign? Surely the PC on the beat would notice or hear the clatter of a carriage at a time when there is the least amount of activity and the early morn is still and quiet.
Robeer |
Author: Robeer
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 02:24 am | | Scott,
Would a psychotic not be more obvious walking down the street than a sociopath? By that I mean wouldn't a psychotic be more noticeable in social contact than a sociopath who seems normal?
JTR was invisable. People looked at him and never saw him. Nothing about him appeared out of the ordinary. If he was in a group of suspects he would be the least suspicious. He probably looked harmless because he was nice looking, neat in appearance, polite, humorous, relaxed, or cultured. He probably was likeable and others felt at ease around him or even safe with him on a lonely street late at night. It would seem the whole of London was on the lookout for a psychotic when in fact a sociopath was committing the crimes and blending back into crowd with nothing at all to distinguish him from any other bloke walking down the street.
It is unlikely JTR was creepy as a psychotic might behave or have a slovenly appearance. A prostitute wants to get paid for her services. She is more likely to get her asking price from a better dressed client than one who looks broke to begin with. If that client is witty, charming or polite then he can't possibly be JTR can he?
Robeer |
Author: Monty
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 03:18 am | | Robeer, re the knife.
According to JtR A-Z the knives once belonged to a certain Hugh Pollard, the sporting editor of Country Life magazine. He was a partner of gunsmith Robert Churchill who was, apparently, Scotland Yards ballistics expert.
Pollard passed them on to Dorothy Stroud (the lady you mentioned) who used the knives for gardening. Unfortunately one of the knives broke and was disposed of, the other passed on to Donald Rumbelow. I believe that it is still in his possession.
The knife that Mr Rumbelow has is a "surgeon's amputating knife of continental manufacture in the 1870's".
The other knife was believed to be a post-mortem knife with a thumb grip designed for 'ripping' upwards.
My personal belief is that they were straight forward victorian surgical knives that have been (for the sake of a good story) passed off as Jack's.
Monty
|
Author: Monty
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 03:48 am | | Hi Tom,
You mentioned that you believe that Jack did write the graffito. I'm not disagreeing but why was he cryptic ??.
Why not just write "I am the one that killed the woman in Berner St" ? That way all this debate over Stride and the graffito would have never existed.
Quick, simple and straight to the point. Bit like me really.
My girlfriend agrees !?!?!
Monty
|
Author: graziano
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 06:06 am | | Scott, Tom,
thanks for the answers, they seem a lot interesting.
I'll spend the weekend on them.
Bye. Graziano. |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 12:23 pm | | Dear Robeer and Tom,
n general, yes a psychotic would be more noticeable. But given the fact that most of the residents of White Chapel were blue collar tradesman or laborers, the slaughter house(s) in the area and the socio-economic and living conditions of the period a dirty person walking the streets would not be out of the ordinary. The crime scene descriptions and the photo of Mary Kelly leave no doubt in my mind that the work was that of a Paranoid Schizophrenic. In my general profile I would think the killer to be either an immigrant or an Englishman with a stuttering problem or some other speech impediment. This is due to the lack of social contact the killer would probably have had. If he was an immigrant, then depending on his country of origin,
his general knowledge of the English language he would have felt more isolated and further limiting his social contact. So in a way he would have been invisible to the general public.
If indeed the general feeling among the populace the killer was a person with medical knowledge due to sensationalized reporting and the witness descriptions given of the somewhat well dressed man or the “shabby gentile look” , then with whom would the prostitutes feel more at ease with? A man dressed in coat and tie or some other manner befitting some respectability or a local person who may not be clean shaven, in street clothes and with a disorderly appearance. As I said before, all the vics were alcoholics. Depending on the strength of the need to feed their vice, I am sure that the “I’m careful and it can’t happen to me attitude....” come into play. Addicts and alcoholics today have the same attitude..... “ I know what I’m doing.....I know who I am doing business with......I know who I can trust.....” etc..... and still their bodies are always recovered from garbage dumpsters, back alleys, abandoned buildings etc.....the victim of some homicide.
One more thing to remember....SOME NOT ALL sociopaths aka psychopaths will keep up with the police investigations and actually intermingle with the police. But these crimes were not committed by a psychopath they were committed by a psychotic.
Tom you are right in your statement regarding the placement of the Chapman items. It is a purposeful organization. It is also orderly. There is certain order to it, and the purpose of the order is known only to the killer.
I also agree whole heartedly with your translation of the Goulston St. graffiti . But I still feel the most important part of the scene is its location.
As far as racial profiling goes....? I agree with it. There is more evidence that it works than not. The political correct individuals just have a louder voice. If they were really smart they would have clean cut all American looking white fraternity members transporting the drugs.
Peace,
Scott |
Author: Simon Owen
Friday, 12 October 2001 - 03:05 pm | | What does it mean : are you a Wiccan ? Why ?
I'm not by the way ! |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Saturday, 13 October 2001 - 08:57 am | | Dear Folks,
Today's lesson is..."SMART". Was Jack Ripper the first "SMART" terrorist/killer?
"SMART"...
Stealth...100%
Precision...100%
Psychology...100%
Objective..."unknown"
United States military...eat Kelly's heart out!
Rosey ("SMIRK") :-)) |
Author: Philip C. Dowe
Sunday, 21 October 2001 - 11:30 am | | Hi there,
I'm back and somehow Monty asked about two weeks ago, if I could write a profile on Jack. The last two weeks I have spent "looking" at child-killings and had not much time for Jack. If you are still interested in a profilers profile then say. I am willing to share my thoughts.
Peace
Philip |
Author: Tom Wescott
Monday, 22 October 2001 - 01:01 am | | Scott,
Sorry it's taken me so long to find this thread again in order to respond. From what I understand, the main thing that seperates a psychotic from a psychopath is how they relate to their environment. For instance, if you put a psychopathic serial killer of women in prison, and remove him from the environment in which he commits his evil deeds, he tends to become the model prisoner. But if you have a psychotic spouting rubbish and dribbling, and you put him in a cell, he will still spout rubbish and dribble. His behavior is not altered by his environment. In that sense, I do not see how it's possible that Jack could have been a psychotic and taken the steps necessary to avoid capture. It's no coincidence that when 'Ripper hunters' were at their peak in Whitechapel he claimed a victim indoors. That's premeditation and evidence of some measure of self-control.
Robeer,
Regarding the knives claimed to have belonged to the Ripper...Frederick Deeming's death mask was displayed to the public at the Black Museum as 'Jack the Ripper's death mask'. But that assertion doesn't make Deeming the Ripper. Know what I mean?
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Author: Monty
Monday, 22 October 2001 - 08:12 am | | Phil C,
Welcome back.
Yes, Im still very, very, very interested in your profile of Jack. Whenever you have the time though.
Monty
|
Author: Christopher T George
Monday, 22 October 2001 - 09:24 am | | Hi, Tom, Robeer, Philip, Simon, Scott, et al.:
Tom Wescott wrote:
It's no coincidence that when 'Ripper hunters' were at their peak in Whitechapel he claimed a victim indoors. That's premeditation and evidence of some measure of self-control.
I wonder though if the massive mutilations carried out on Mary Jane Kelly were done not just because he had more time, as generally thought, but because he was frustrated that he did not have the extra thrill of killing in the open and displaying his victim for all to see? Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Best regards
Chris George |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Monday, 22 October 2001 - 09:25 am | | Hi Tom,
The ability of a killer to vanish without a trace has always been the stuff of legend. Killers today still seem to just ...vanish...without a trace. Profiling a killer has many parts. The psychological profile is only one part. The crime scene profile and the physical profile are two other parts of the complete profile that are, often, either over looked or very misunderstood. In fact, sometimes they are mistaken for the psychological profile.
When we look at the crime scenes plotted on a map of the Whitechapel area, we or I should say I and several other people I know see a trend. Discounting for the moment any possibility of Annie Millwood and Martha Tabram, and using just the canonical victims, two patterns emerge. These two patterns can be seen when we connect the dots.
Draw a line from Polly Nichols to Annie Chapman
Draw a line from Nichols to Liz Stride.
Draw a line from Stride to Kate Eddowes.
Draw a line from Kate Eddowes to Mary Kelly.
Draw a line from Mary Kelly to Annie Chapman.
Finally draw a line from Nichols to Stride.
When done you should have what roughly appears to be two triangles joined together. When investigating a series of murders this connecting of the crime scenes is used to determine the killers comfort zone(s). The areas of the city, county, state etc...in which the killer feels most comfortable and secure in the committing of his crimes. Establishing these comfort zones can become very intricate depending on the number of killings and whether or not the bodies were moved after the killing. The case of the Hill Side Stranglers, in California, revealed a very mind boggling and confusing array of lines as the scenes involved a site of the killing, and a dumping ground. It was this technique that helped to prove that two killers were operating. Jack’s comfort zones are very easy to see.
Just for the sake of argument lets now plot Millwood and Tabram. You see that they fall into the comfort zone on the left. Let’s call this comfort zone Y. Comfort zone Z will be the triangle on the right. The zone with the most attacks is zone Y. This is the killer’s “primary” zone of comfort. Zone Z is the killer’s “secondary” zone of comfort. These are the two areas of Whitechapel in which the killer feels most at ease. Somewhere in these two zones is where the killer lives.
Considering the socio-economic conditions of the times, the number of flop houses in the area it is of my opinion that the Whitechapel killer lived not in one permanent place but like many people in the area moved from place to place. With each new residence being in the areas of the city he knew like the back of his hand, I strongly believe, he lived near each crime scene and the victims were victims of opportunity.
Certainly a well dressed and proper gentleman would stick out like a sore thumb in the Whitechapel area and would not be able to move about as unnoticed and freely as someone who appeared to be on the outside just like everyone else. I cannot help believe that the quickest way to disappear is to just .......... go home, after you have satisfied your sexual urge to kill. I do say sexual because my experience shows that this type carnage at the crime scenes were sexually motivated and were committed by a sexually immature person with an intense hatred for women. From personal experience anyone who nearly decapitates and disembowels a person in public is just a few french fries short of a happy meal. The crime scene is to disorganized. The only proof of a somewhat organized crime scene is that the killer brought his own weapon to each o f the killings. If the killer were known as Jack The Shooter, then I think he would be a lot easier to find as a firearm makes a very distinguishable sound and I am sure they might be a bit harder to come by in Whitechapel. Jack the Mad Axeman would be an easy catch given an axe is harder to conceal. Jack the Ripper....knives were the personal protection weapon of choice I would gather. How many people do we know of that the police questioned, or were tipped off to as to having been seen carrying a knife. |
Author: Thomas Neagle
Monday, 22 October 2001 - 11:01 pm | | Scott
Elizabeth Long:
"a shabby genteel appearence"
Matthew Packer:
"I put the man down as a young clerk"
William Marshall:
"Had more the appearance of a clerk than anything else"
PC Smith:
"He was of respectable appearance"
Israel Schwartz:
The man was described as respectably dressed.
Joseph Lawende:
The man was described as shabby genteel.
George Hutchinson:
"Respectable appearance"
Every witness, except Mrs. Cox, described a respectable looking man. Most of the suspects were described as clerkly, or respectable looking. I'd say it's a good bet that one of these respectable looking men, seen by the witnesses, was Jack the Ripper. These suspects are not the kind of lower-class men, that you seem to be suggesting, were Jack the Ripper. In fact, the man seen by George Hutchinson, could be described as an upper-class or aristocratic man.
Also, I wanted to mention, that the police did house to house searches in the area, as well as having a lot of on the street intelligence in the area, and Jack the Ripper was not to be found in Whitechapel and it's surrounding environs. |
Author: Paul Carpenter
Tuesday, 23 October 2001 - 04:47 am | | Thomas,
You say: "These suspects are not the kind of lower-class men, that you seem to be suggesting, were Jack the Ripper. In fact, the man seen by George Hutchinson, could be described as an upper-class or aristocratic man."
"Respectable" was actually a descriptive epithet applied to almost anyone who wasn't on society's bottom rung - generally people with enough income to afford to be wearing half-decent clothing.
The Times went so far as to describe the streets around one of the murder scenes (I can't remember which) as "respectable" and yet even you would struggle to argue that Whitechapel was a district packed with Aristocrats and city retreats for well-heeled toffs.
I don't see how you can use the vague description of someone "respectable" or "shabby genteel" to argue that the witness were seeing a member of the aristocracy.
Your other point, about the very thorough house-to-house searches conducted in the area and their failure to achieve anything is a good, valid one. That, coupled with the occurrance of the murders on weekends and public holidays has led many people to suspect that the Ripper came from outside the district.
It is not however, possible to infer from this the social class of the Ripper. Anyone not working on a weekend or a public holiday and living outside of Whitechapel could fit that bill - and there were teeming millions of people living in equally desperate poverty all over the city.
Regards,
Carps |
Author: Scott E. Medine
Tuesday, 23 October 2001 - 09:07 am | | As stated before, the look of respectability is one that will stick out among the poverty stricken in the area. Does that mean they were the killer? No. I have stated in another post that witness statements can often be misleading especially in senationalized cases played out in the media. The only statement I accept as a possible description is the “shabby genteel” description. I think the key word in that description is shabby.
Yes, the police did conduct house to house searches. But the police did not speak to everyone as there were some cases where they received no answer when knocking. Even in the Polly Nichols investigation police records and the coroner report both show that not all houses on Buck’s Row were searched. Never the less, if the killer, as I believe moved from flop house to flop house frequently, then it is highly possible the police missed him.
If this case were today rather than 19th century London, there would most assuredly be more forensic data to look at. And based on my experiences, I would have to tell the police to look for a person as I described. I like to keep an open mind and not cue in on any particular suspect. But i would have to say that the killer would be someone like David Cohen.
Peace,
Scott |
Author: Thomas Neagle
Tuesday, 23 October 2001 - 01:32 pm | | Putting aside the man George Hutchinson saw for a minute, every suspect seen by a witness, besides Mrs. Cox, described a middle or upper-middle class man, not a poor, destitute man, and certainly not a poor, raving lunatic, like David Cohen was supposed to be. Packer and Marshall describe 'young clerks'. If you read the descriptions of the men seen by PC Smith and Schwartz, they were describing respectably dressed, middle-class men. Long and Lawende described 'shabby genteel' men, which suggests, by the cut of their clothes, genteel, middle-class or upper-middle class men, who have seen their good fortunes lessened somewhat lately.
Hutchinson described an upper-class or aristocratic man, with his collar and cuffs, astracan trimmed coat, button boots and gaiters(spats)with white buttons, large gold chain with a big, red stone seal, and a pair of brown, kid gloves.
In terms of the other suspects I mentioned, the point I was making was that the descripions of them were of middle-class or upper-middle class men, not poor, destitute men, and certainly not poor, ravening lunatics like David Cohen. It's a good bet that one of these men, especially the men seen by Lawende and Schwartz, who were seen very close to the time that the murders were committed, was Jack the Ripper(unless Jack the Ripper was Dr. William Gull, which in that case he would have been in a carriage and the men on the streets would have been his accomplices).
It is my opinion that two or three of these men, both George Hutchinson's aristocratic man and the other middle-class or upper middle-class dressed men, were upper-class or aristocratic men. If there was some kind of Joseph Sickert/John Wilding "royal conspiracy", then the men on the streets would have been J.K. Stephen, Walter Sickert, John Netley, and in the instance of George Hutchinson's aristocratic man, Randolph Churchill. But in my opinion, it is just as likely, if not more likely, that Jack the Ripper was not some kind of Joseph Sickert/John Wilding "royal conspiracy", but was J.K. Stephen and Prince Eddy working together.
Though there was a house to house search in the area, not all the houses would have been searched. The important thing is that with all the intelligence, on and off the street, the police would have gathered, they did not find Jack the Ripper in Whitechapel or its surrounding environs. Thus Jack the Ripper was, in all likelihood, from outside of the Whitechapel area. And as I've shown, besides the man seen by Mrs. Cox, all of the suspects seen were middle-class or upper middle-class(with the exception of the the man George Hutchinson saw who looked aristocratic looking), respectable looking men, not poor, lower-class men, or poor, lower-class ravening lunatics, like David Cohen. |
Author: graziano
Tuesday, 23 October 2001 - 02:16 pm | | Elisabeth Long stated that the man she saw appeared to be a foreigner (T, 20.09.888).
George Hutchinson said that the man he saw was of Jewish appearance (signed statement before Insp. Abberline).
If we believe Schwartz or Lawende to be what Anderson called "...the only person who had ever had a good view of the murderer..." and that "...unhesitatingly identified the suspect..." referring so very likely to the man seen in Berner Street or the one in Duke Street,
Swanson tells us that he was also a Jew.
And in fact the incredible absence of Schwartz at the inquest could have been the consequence of the fear of the police to publicize the fact that the man seen by him was Jewish-looking (remember the anti-jewish athmosphere following the episode of the Annie Chapman murder and the suspicion over Leather Apron).
The man seen by PC Smith and Marshall seems to be the same seen by Schwartz and the one by Lawende.
It looks to me it is very likely that Jack was Jacob and not an aristocratic english-looking man.
Nevertheless the descriptions do absolutely not corroborate the possibility of having a lower-class ravening lunatics like David Cohen or Kosminsky.
Graziano. |
Author: Philip C. Dowe
Tuesday, 23 October 2001 - 02:30 pm | | Hi Monty
ok here are the basics of my profile of Jack:
- white
- male
- around 35 years old
- around 1.80m
- physically strong but not muscular
- from Whitechaple
- skilled and intelligent but not studied
- had no idea whatsoever where organs were
- was mentally unstable (could have been suffering from a borderline syndrome)
- was deformed or disfigured
- was a loner
- had NO connection to the royal family or the freemasons
- was not religious
- became aggressive due to situation
- was not sexually aroused by the acts of murder
- did not keep a diary
- ended up in an asylum
So much for now, if you are interested in explanations then tell me
See you
Philip |
|
|
|
|
