|
 |
 |
|
|
|
** 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 July 26, 1999
Casebook Message Boards: Ripper Victims: General Discussion:
The Ripper Victims (General):
Archive through July 26, 1999
Author: Jill
Tuesday, 06 July 1999 - 11:09 am |        | Hello again,
I just had an afterthought. If Mary was someone who Jack loved or knew, it would not make any sense he would keep killing afterwards, does it?
I think if that was the case, there is a very high chance that he killed himself afterwards. Or do you think he could sit in his sofa and begin fantasising about a new cycle?
What are your ideas on this subject, Wolf?
Jill |
Author: Jill
Wednesday, 07 July 1999 - 01:11 am | | Sorry,
I did not mean anything offensive to the others, who are thinking as straight also. |
Author: Jules
Wednesday, 07 July 1999 - 03:14 pm | | G'day Jill,
Haven't seen you around before mate so here's a big Aussie welcome for ya. Have fun on the boards mate and don't be detered by the •••• heads out here. there's also a lot of very supportive people here too.
Jules |
Author: Jill
Thursday, 08 July 1999 - 12:21 am | | Hello Jules, everyone
Jules- Thank you gladly for your (far-away-) welcome (I'm from the chicken-dioxine-country Belgium).
All- I have been pondering on this discussion about Jack knowing at least one of his victims, and it brought another question to my mind.
Because maybe he knew all of them, by sight I mean. Correct me if I'm wrong but to me there seems to be only two options in the choice of his victims. Were they the coincidental victims he saw passing by on the spur of the moment? Or had he chosen them, say a week beforehand, and followed their moves and habits already fantasising about his deed?
I prefer the last, because that way he would find out where the victims would leed him. He would have time to know his escape routes, possible regular passers-by and thus the best time at night to go for them. What are your ideas?
Jill |
Author: Edana
Thursday, 08 July 1999 - 04:48 am | | Hello Jill and welcome. Are you really from Belgium...not by chance from near the French border? I agree with you that Jack had perhaps watched and observed his victims before he took action, but I think that maybe it was in a more general way...just watching and observing the 'flow' of life in Whitechapel. Then when he became a little more familiar, he took the opportunity to carry out his terrible work.
Edana |
Author: Jill De Schrijver
Thursday, 08 July 1999 - 08:55 am | | Hello Edana - Nope I'm from the other side, Antwerp. Which timezone do I post to?
Maybe a week was to much. Since you agree he could have been watching beforehand follow the next train of thoughts.
As I have read on other boards, it is always said he let the victims lead him to their secure spot. To do so, he must have known the area well (as all stated). Living in a part of the city seems to qualify for 'knowing the area' (as you will know your own neighbourhood best). But to know an actual spot to kill in a short but certain manner to know its flyroutes, in a very busy part with a lot of shortcuts, requires more than that. It demands (I think it does) study beforehand.
Either this meant that he had his favourite spots. He then only would take the opportunity on prostitutes that were solicitating beside the spot, so he would have more chance that they would lead him there. Meaning he would check out the sites the night he wanted to kill, and select one of the prostitutes standing there.
Or he choosed his victim, found out where she would take him most probably and study the site afterwards. Meaning that he at least new who and where he would kill 2 days before the murder. During these 2 days he already could have the 'enjoiment' of musing over his plan, getting all wired up.(pardon me, for the expressions used)
Which of the two are most likely to you? Have you another suggestion?
Jill |
Author: Edana
Thursday, 08 July 1999 - 10:13 am | | Hi Jill. Just this last weekend I met a lady who was born in the north of Belgium. Weird, having spent 45 years never meeting anyone from Belgium at all, now in the space of a week, I have met two.
I like the first scenario better, where Jack picked the place first and then the victim. He probably had a route of sorts that he took, observing as he went and then took the opportunity as it presented itself. However, I think he loved the element of danger and wasn't too careful of the place he picked. It's like those people who have sex in elevators...the danger of getting caught is all the fun. ANd besides he was very fast at his work, wasn't he? Less than fifteen minutes most of the time, I think. However,I just reminded myself how long fifteen minutes can be...especially if you're giving a speech or writing copy for a television commercial.
Edana |
Author: Jill De Schrijver
Thursday, 08 July 1999 - 11:35 am | | Hello Edana- We're with 10 million Belgiums and 7 million Flamish (north of Belgium). Only some in certain regions travel a lot (especially Antwerp in the north). The chance of meeting one is slim. If I would not have mentioned Belgium, you would not have known you met 2 in one week.
I see your point in danger. He taunted the investigators and the press.
But I'm not totally convinced, since it is known that serial killers like, besides killing, to fantasize beforehand and remember afterwards. The idea of killing, be it afterwards or before, must have occupied his live at that point.
Besides that the outside places, always would be dangerous, because enough people walked by and the police walked their beat.
With 'favourite spot' I don't mean 'safe spots', he actually could have picked a spot beforehand just because they meant more danger for being caught.
Maybe, and here's a third scenario, he had several victims in mind beforehand, and while walking his route of favourite spots, he took the opportunity just when he felt like it. That way he would have both the thrill of danger and planning.
(I don't remember anymore why I thought the choice of scenario would be so important. It will come to me again ... I hope)
Actually I always experienced 20 minutes of standing before a jury explaining my projects as too short. Still it wasn't my idea of fun neither. |
Author: D. Radka
Thursday, 08 July 1999 - 06:44 pm | | Ladies,
In terms of Jack possibly knowing one of his victims, the odds would be higher with Kelly.
Think of the layout of Miller's Court. MJ's apartment is ONE move off Dorsett Street. Thus he is far enough away to not risk being seen mutilating the body by passers by on the street, while at the same time he is close enough to the street to make his getaway without crossing the vision of anyone else living in Miller's Court. See what I mean? Plus, MJ had a single apartment, she wasn't sharing a double--so no one would break in on him. This makes me think that maybe he figured this killing would be his last before the killing happened. I.e., he went out looking for a place where he could really mutilate someone big time, since it would be his last time. So, if you are looking for a victim who possibly knew him, I would suggest MJ.
David |
Author: Diana Comer
Friday, 09 July 1999 - 10:44 am | | Jill, many years ago a very talented mystery writer by the name of Agatha Christie invented a very bright detective named Hercule Poirot. Monsieur Poirot was a Belgian like yourself. If he had only been real instead of fictional I would have begun to wonder if he was your uncle or something because I think your comments are very insightful. I can picture Jack doing just exactly what you suggested, picking sites and then victims. How would you suggest the double event went down? Was he scoping out both sites at the time and switched from one to the other?
Had he really planned to do one in Mitre Square at all or was this an impulse? Mitre Square was sort of out of his usual area. |
Author: Jill De Schrijver
Friday, 09 July 1999 - 05:39 pm | | Diana,
I know there is a lot of discussion going on about the double event and if the two killings can be subscribed to JtR. I'll lay this aside for a moment and will assume they are, for a moment.
Let's say he was performing scenario one (spots already chosen, victims were whoever came close to the profile):
He would start his route. This time the chosen spots are opposite the two previous ones because there police patrols would be more on their guard (Check on the map and Berner Street makes a nice even triangle with the others.) He comes across Elizabeth Stride who will likely take him to one of his preferred spots of her own accord. The two (the place and the victim) are perfect together and JtR goes for it. Actually he messes up greatly: he's seen and mentally disturbed by that, then he performs the kill in a totally wrong way, plus again he's disturbed by an intruder so he can't even finish it. The thing he fantasised about and hoped to relish on afterwards, is gone to shaters. Still maybe he can just finish his route and try it once again. So he rushes to the second site Mitre Square (Mitre Square looks out of the way, but notice how it makes an almost even square now)... the rest is history (the little we know of it anyway)
Now for the second scenario (victims chosen by sight first, then their sites examined):
Elizabeth Stride is on his 'shoping' list today (he has a reserve list if needed). She is where he wants her to be (was it her usual place actually?). Actually he ruins everything (see scenario 1)... He can either go home with a hangover or ... who's next on the list?...
He would have been very lucky there, because if Catherine Eddowes would not have been released or gone home straight away, he had to go further down his list, and down, ... (maybe that's why the murder of Annie Chapman would have occured so much near the morningdawn?).
Now that I think of it, it would have been more secure to find them near there homes (and even that was not so sure) if he already had chosen his victims beforehand. JtR only did that once, to our knowledge, with MJ. (More than once if you want to take in some try-outs before the canonical five.)
Now for the third scenario (route picked, victims on the list and then go for it): Starts checking the spots and if the wanted victims are there, he'll start his play. For the rest see scenario 1.
If the double event was really a JtR double event. Scenario 1 or 3 seems more likely, because scenario 2 would give to much uncertainties (paradoxically). In scenario 2 everything relies to much on his victims moves. I prefer 3 more, because he would have different fixed point to look for. If his chosen one wasn't there, he still had a reserve list of either victims or places.
I'm going to turn around my line of thinking now. What would it mean to the double event if JtR's MO was indeed scenario 2? It would bring the double event on shaky grounds. I'm not such a chance-believer: if you want something, you're after it, don't wait till it comes your way. How then could JtR have been so sure that Cathering Eddowes would be there: (as some suggested to motive Catherines moves) because he had an apointment with her? How likely would it be then, that he would jeopordise this meeting by first killing someone else?
You see, that the choice of scenario could have his implications in the believes of the double event, or the other way around (Now I do remember why I thought the subject was of importance). Take your pick, suggest more scenario's, ...
I'm not taking any stand at this moment, I was only brainstorming.
Sorry, if people thought this was too long or mixed up. I did two hours of thinking it over in the middle of the night. I'm beat.
Nighty Night, Jill |
Author: THOUGHTFUL
Sunday, 25 July 1999 - 11:09 am | | Just a thought!
Has anyone wondered whether the Ripper wore GLOVES??
It would explain the lack of noticeable blood (especially if he wore dark clothes)
As I said - just a thought! |
Author: Julian
Sunday, 25 July 1999 - 07:33 pm | | G'day Thoughtful, everyone,
As to Jack wearing gloves, I don't think so. Remember that after one of the murders (sorry, can't remember which one) blood was found in an outside wash basin, and Ms Eddowes's apron (the part that was found in Goulston st) was said to have been used to wipe his hands an his knife on.
Just these two things seem to indicate to me that he didn't wear gloves. I'd like to hear from others though.
Jules |
Author: Jill
Monday, 26 July 1999 - 01:51 am | | Hello, Thoughtful
At first glance it seems more logic that he would have used gloves. Actually it isn't.
During my studies I have followed 4 years of Ergonomics class(study of interaction between products and humans and enhancement for safety performance, to explain it quickly). One of the details mentioned about wearing gloves is tactility feedback, which is reduced a lot (depending on material).
Only some modern rubber gloves (used most of the time in the operation room) have satisfactory tactual feedback performance (this is still lower than without).
I doubt very much if rubber gloves were used during operation more than a century back, because high quality rubber wasn't available then (it's only recent dentists use gloves for the fine detail job they do).
As for other material: leather gloves have several ribs, they are stiffer as material ,certainly when being soaked in blood; they become crackeled, tough, ...
Most feedback Jack had, while gutting his victim in 10-15 mins time in the dark, was tactual. With gloves (certainly if leather) he even would have lost that. And I think he actually would have liked mucking around to feel the entestines with his bare hands.
Just try it out once: driving with gloves is not so much of a problem, but try something that requires more detail (like typing a post) and you'll get some idea what I'm talking of.
Jill |
Author: Ashling
Monday, 26 July 1999 - 02:01 am | | Excellent points regarding gloves Jill!
Take care,
Janice |
Author: Jill
Monday, 26 July 1999 - 02:08 am | | Ashling-I'd rather have my hands freeze off when smoking a cigarette than smoking it with gloves on.
All,
I will look up the figures in my ergonomics book and if rubber gloves were used during operations in the 1880s.
Cheers, Jill |
Author: Diana Comer
Monday, 26 July 1999 - 03:52 am | | Re: gloves
remember fingerprints were not an issue in 1888. The technology was there but unproven so nobody was using it.
Unless he just wanted to keep his hands clean. |
Author: Jill
Monday, 26 July 1999 - 04:43 am | | To keep the outside appearance of clean hands, he
could worn gloves AFTER the kill and so hiding his bloodied hands. |
Author: Bob Hinton
Monday, 26 July 1999 - 05:28 am | | Dear Everyone,
Some really fascinating stuff here, here's a few more points.
The locations of the murders tend to suggest that JTR did not go to any great lengths in planning his killings area wise.
Most of the killings took place in high risk areas where the chance of discovery was very high indeed. Even MJK was killed in a room only feet away from other people.
From this I think it is safe to assume that JTR roamed the streets looking for victims (with the possible exception of one that I believe was by appointment) When faced by the opportunity he seized it, the bloodlust completely overcoming his need for caution. At the moment of killing his entire mental being was focussed on destruction, nothing more.
It is interesting to compare these murders with the Son of Sam slayings. After Berkowitz was convicted he was questioned by the FBI in an attempt to discover why he killed in a particular pattern, both time wise and area wise. His answer was terrifying. He did not have any particular time or area for his murders, he went out practically every night to kill, its just that on some occassions he had the opportunity on others he didn't.
As for JTR wearing gloves, I think not for two reasons. One gloves were expensive items of clothing and the type of person JTR was would be unlikely to spend money on that type of thing.
Secondly and this has already been mentioned by another contributor, in this type of killing, feel and touch is everything to the killer. One murderer spoke of achieving orgasm only after plunging his hands into the "steamy softness of their bowels"
JTR was an unusual killer in that he defys classification into the normal organised or disorganised killer type. He belongs to the extremely rare organised/disorganised group.
I think his before killing planning was limited to selecting a type of victim. ie physically unable to put up much of a struggle rather than a particular individual.
all the best
Bob Hinton |
Author: Bob Hinton
Monday, 26 July 1999 - 06:01 am | | Dear Everyone,
I've just been re-reading some of the posts here and found the interesting items on the covering or otherwise of MJK's face. There have been several instances of a murder victim having their faces covered, the Courvoisier murder of 1840, the Leon Beron murder 1911, to name but two spring to mind.
According to some authorities this stems from a worldwide held belief that the eyes of a dead person retain the last image seen.
It is interesting to note that in these cases where faces have been covered the murders are all particularly bloody. In the first case mentioned Lord Russell had his throat cut.
De-huminising or de-personalising the victim is usually achieved by hacking off the features rather than by covering.
all the best
Bob Hinton |
|
|
|
|
