|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 **
Jack The Ripper 'was one of the highest in the land'.
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Suspects: Ripper Suspects:
Jack The Ripper 'was one of the highest in the land'.
Author: David Radka
Saturday, 15 June 2002 - 05:34 pm |        | Mr. Dewar,
I'm not an expert on idiot savantism, but I did look into it a little bit several years ago. As far as my limited knowledge goes, the I/S is a person who shows super-genius ability in one area only, and remains basically a retardate in all other areas. The I/S looks, acts, talks, and behaves consistently with a mentally retarded person, except for his one baliwick.
If I can remember correctly, one example I encountered was a 40-odd year old man considered seriously retarded from birth, who lived with his mother. He was unable to work, drive, act normally, or behave in any constructive way. One day, being a musical woman, just to calm him down, she played a recorded piano concert composed by Chopin for him on her stereo. The next day as she was washing dishes she heard the piano concert again being played in the living room. At first she thought her son had somehow figured out how to turn on the stereo, and had thus actuated the same record she had left on it the previous day. When she walked into the living room, there was her son seated at her piano, playing the Chopin perfectly, strictly from the memory of the previous day. The mother was astounded, went to the doctors, the news media were called, the man became quite a celebrity. He could play that particular composition only, but he'd play it perfectly whenever you asked him.
This is what an idiot savant is to me.
As I understand it, the idea that Jack the Ripper was an I/S has been used to try to explain how he was able to carry off the crimes undetected. Somehow he was able to memorize every detail of the sequence, and then act it out perfectly each time. He'd memorize the police routes, the buildings and alleyways, the movements of persons including prostitutes, eactly what to say to the prostitutes to get them to accompany him, each tick of the clock, everything. He'd probably seen all these things before, and then somehow just cobbled them together according to something he'd heard or seen, maybe from an open door to a slaughterhouse or the police station, etc.
I don't think this scenario describes Berkowitz, Sutcliffe, or JtR. What they did had some kind of a meaning for them, exactly what it meant we don't know in all cases, but they were each acting variably somehow in pursuit of something. The I/S, it seems to me, somehow merely tunes into a fixed sequence of sorts and is able to reproduce it over and over.
David |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Saturday, 15 June 2002 - 06:11 pm | | Dear David,
Purpose. Planning. Methodology. How does one explain that zippetyzappety. com on Eddowes face?
Almost impossible to accomplish with a knife, would'nt you say?
Rosey :-) |
Author: Joseph
Saturday, 15 June 2002 - 07:28 pm | | Hello Everyone,
David, the soft, continuous mumbling of a word or phrase is often the sign of an autistic savant; the symptoms aren't restricted to psychotic, or neurotic behavior.
Dr. Danold A. Traffort, of the Wisconsin Medical Society describes the condition as spectacular islands of brilliance in contrast to the overall handicap. The handicap Dr. Traffort refers to is the catalyst that initiates the phenomena, (e.g. it might be congenital, or acquired via disease or CNS [cerebral neural synopsis] injury). He asserts that males have a greater frequency of savantism than females by a ratio of 6:1. Since 1887, when Dr. Langdon Down of Down's Syndrome notoriety first began studying the disorder, there have been infrequent, but well documented cases of individuals with multiple, co-existing exceptional skills, such as: map memorization , visual measuring, ESP, and a highly developed sense of the passage of time, without the benefit of a watch. Dr. Traffort goes on to explain that almost every individual (96%) diagnosed with savant syndrome has an extraordinary memory.
These conditions, and all of their related possibilities, along with some historical information I uncovered a few years ago, are discussed in a book I've been writing about the Whitechapel murders. I'm may not have all the answers, but I have enough to keep me off the streets for a while.
Hi Caz,
This is all secondary source knowledge of course, but I don't think much has changed since the late 19th century as far as demand for payment is concerned. The client will not talk to the boss until her secretary has confirmed the appointment, so to speak. :-) So, if the victims had little or no money on them when they were found, then the killer must have reclaimed the cover charge, which indicates some presences of mind on his part. If the detectives find the cash, they narrow their search, taking some policemen from the outer edges of the investigation, and consentrating them on decoy stings, and patroling known areas of booty commerce.
One alternative to this scenario is that the victims knew the killer, and their intercourse was verbal, as opposed to....non-verbal, so no money was exchanged because no services were required.
The benefit of the first scenario is: it gives the killer a reason to move behind the victim and (1) garrote her (2) use the LAPD choke hold (3) cut her throat (4) etc.
The second vignette puts him in her face for a frontal assault to the throat, or some sort of preliminary disabling move. Unfortunately, the autopsy surgeons don't go into detail regarding the anatomy they examined or omitted. Personally, I'd like to know the condition of the inner ear of each of the victims.
I don't think I could characterize the killer's mental state as temporarily insane during the time of the murders, that line of reasoning creates more questions than it answers. Insanity, or mental disturbance isn't a prerequisite to homicide. I think Radka made a pertinent observation, i.e. that the killer was as cool as the frost on a polar bears ass when committing these murders; he most certainly displayed a presence of mind.
And now for something completely different, almost. A few years ago I speculated that the type of knife, or knives used, might still shed some light on this mystery, so I started a thread to explore that potential. A number of contributors uncovered quite a bit of information, but were somehow oblivious to their success.
The idea was to consider the variety of knives mentioned in the Casebook archives, and other legitimate sources, and then, by using the dialectic system of inductive thinking, we tried to determine what each of the blades can tell us about their possible use as the murder weapon.
To make this happen this time around we would have to be specific in detail, and label speculation as such (this eliminates time wasting confusion). Generally, some points of view will have more value to some than others, we're not trying to persuade in this venue; we're sharing our ideas. If any of you folks are interested, please participate; if not, then walk on by.
Best regards,
PS If you think this process should have its own topic, then we can create one. |
Author: Rosemary O'Ryan
Saturday, 15 June 2002 - 08:35 pm | | | The Jack of knaives? |
Author: Joseph
Saturday, 15 June 2002 - 10:28 pm | | Hello Everyone,
Let's re-cap
David Radka isn't advocating a hypothesis that claims all serial killers, unidentified or apprehended, are afflicted with savant syndrome. I'm not advocating a hypothesis that claims all serial killers, unidentified or apprehended, are afflicted with savant syndrome.
David is discussing the range of organization and planning skills that can be observed in the acts of murder, the extent of the mutilations, the crime scene descriptions, and the level of intelligence that is indicated by the possession of those skills.
In two separate scenarios posted to this board, I suggested the parameters for a scale of sanity and intellect to aid us in determining where, if at all, along that spectrum the Whitechapel Murderer's actions would place him. The scenarios were needed to frame the responses to my original question: Does anyone think that the victim's wounds were the work of a frenzied mind, too disorganized to pre-plan a scenario as complicated as Mitre Square for instance?
On one end of that scale is an addled and frenzied mind that causes the killer to knock over garbage cans, and howel at the moon while committing the murders and evading capture. At the other end of the measure is a cold blooded killer (i.e. able to take human life without any emotion or after thought) with enough intelligence to plan and execute these crimes for a dedicated purpose.
David and I have been discussing the plausibility of these conditions as the defining parameters in that gradation, and to what extent they manifest in the sequence of murders. The Son of Sam killings are a 20th century crime. Therefore, its a safe bet that David Burkowitz was not the Whitechapel Murderer.
Now, continuing from there, Mr. Smyth has adroitly summarized the most outstanding features of the murders: Not a religious maniac, not seized by any overbearing sexual desire, not a deluded lunatic, not possessed by hatred, not hell-bent on reformation.
Mr. Dewar believes that, The Whitechapel murderer might have been intelligent - but there is nothing in his crimes to indicate so. That raises two questions: (1) In your opinion Mr. Dewar, is Mr. Smyth's summation viable? (2) What evidence do you feel must be added to this crime sequence to indicate that the Whitechapel murderer was intelligent, and used that intellect to plan and execute these crimes?
Regarding Ms. Eddowes facial, what is so difficult to accomplish David M.? Haven't you ever carved a Jack-o-lantern? You have to use a knife; a spoon just isn't sharp enough. :-)
Best regards, |
Author: Philip C. Dowe
Sunday, 16 June 2002 - 02:13 am | | Hi David,
please skip the Mr Dowe - I am at least 10 years younger than you :-)
1) Sorry "ES" = "IT" -> the underbelly of our soul, the place where we store all our nasty thoughts etc.
2) I don't think that Jack was mentally ill. 99,95% he would appear to be perfectly normal. I am sure that no one would imagine that HE could be Jack. And then he meets these whores and ens up killing. The is no sign of mental instability in the crime scenes, because Jack was not a frenzy when he committed the crimes.
Philip |
Author: Dan Norder
Sunday, 16 June 2002 - 06:09 am | | Philip,
Presumably you mean the Freudian concept of id. I don't think Freudian analysis is the way to go (for this or pretty much anything), but if we were to do so I don't think we know for sure it was his id at work.
Here are the Freudian personality components and examples of how they may have (theoretically) played a part in the matter:
Id: animalistic emotions
Killer thinks: Slash, kill, I'm powerful, let me take these pieces with me I can eat or play with them later, heh heh heh
Superego: rules and morals
Killer thinks: Whore! deserves to die, her life is a blasphemy!, she must be punished!!, and her body displayed in a way to warn others not to make the same mistakes
Ego: rational thought
Killer thinks: Hmm, I want those parts, but how can I get them? Let me see, she's vulnerable, I could probably disable her quickly, hmmmm....
I really don't think we can say for sure that his id took over.
Dan |
Author: David Radka
Sunday, 16 June 2002 - 05:13 pm | | 1. I can't make out just what I'm being asked about concerning the mutilations to Eddowes' face. Please explain.
2. To me, the murderer is an extreme fanatic-like pervert. He is so perverse that the ordinary distinctions id, ego, and superego don't meaningfully apply to him. I think of this in the sense that these basic functions are rusted, gummed, or fused together. He is essentially inoperable; pure kitsch.
3. He has a cursory rationale for what his goal is in these murders, but it is much less important to him than his doing the murders. The goal is like the ego structure--once he starts, it becomes for the most part inoperable too.
4. Ditto his whole emotive assembly and superstructure. He may more or less rise a bit to the cutting, the female goodies, the squishing, the burst of stink and the guts, but these are basically just the coming attractions and not the main feature. He does not feel strongly or passionately about killing and mutilating, he feels little or no lust.
5. He has little interest in the possibility of being apprehended. If he had been apprehended, he would not consider it to have been of any significant detriment toward his reaching his goal in the murders, and, at the same time, his goal would remain of middling or even less importance to him.
6. He is skilled in concentration and purposefulness. When speaking with another person, he focuses on them acutely, making them feel he is genuinely interested in them.
7. While the murderer sees whatever his goal is in doing the murders as of secondary importance, he sees himself as doing the murders of gigantic primary importance. Thus if he can do it once, then, why not do it many times?
8. While he experiences little or no paroxysm, he expects that the city will experience a considerable one because of his deeds.
9. What he thought he was doing is in a sense along the same lines as what Mohammed Atta thought he was doing, but without the powerful religious goal. Atta's World Trade Center is his London and its population. The hijacked jet and the passengers inside are his prostitute victim. The suicidal plunging into the building, which kills everyone including the perpetrator, is essentially the same thing for both. The Whitechapel murderer was locked in a ghastly quasi-suicidal or suicidal embrace with his victims and his audience, as was Atta. It is point-of-attack perversity personified.
David |
Author: Philip C. Dowe
Monday, 17 June 2002 - 02:21 am | | Hi David,
I can go with you nearly all the way. Except on one small bit. I think he wasn't interested in being apprehended because he thought he could never be apprehended. Apart from that it reflects my picture of our killer. Two small points remain:
1) What was his goal?
2) Do you IYHO think he wrote any of the letters?
Philip |
Author: lucky pierre
Monday, 17 June 2002 - 07:55 pm | | Philip C.:
A good point. What was the goal of the GAME/RITUAL? Personally, I don't think ANY of the letters are from the real JtR! Has anybody consulted the Oxford/Webster Dictionaries for what a "ripper" is? IT IS SOMEONE WHO MAKES CASKETS. |
Author: Philip C. Dowe
Tuesday, 18 June 2002 - 02:37 am | | Hi Lucky,
me neither! There are too many things in most of the letters that I don't think our man would have written. For example he would not have talked of "playing games" and I don't think he would have sent part of a kidney. He would not have made fun of the police. etc etc.
Yeah, Jack the Casketmaker! I found that one too. Plus our man did not rip, he carved or sliced. The nom de guerre was given to him by somedody else and I am pretty sure that he did like being given a name.
Was it a game? Was it a ritual? Or was it a spur of the moment attack on whores who angered him? I don't believe in a "big picture" - to get back to the original topic of this thread. Back above - I don't know who - mentioned that hardly any money was found on the victims. Strange, because most sexuall transactions are pay first! Did he bother taking the money back? Or did he manage to find whores who served first? In that case he may just have been out for free sex!
Philip |
|
|
|
|
