The Ripper & Ed Gein

[Michael W Richards]

I think any real dispute I have with anything that is being said on this thread is really because I probably shouldn't have posted on it in the first place, so my apologies for derailing your conversations about this premise.

I believe that some of these issues could be solved satisfactorily with the information that is already available, and I suppose I don't get it when people want to discuss topics that are off that already pre-paved track.

But that's just my feeling on the matter, so Ill try to stay out of discussions where people want to freestyle ideas. As I said, no offense intended.

Cheers

[Errata]

I think any real dispute I have with anything that is being said on this thread is really because I probably shouldn't have posted on it in the first place, so my apologies for derailing your conversations about this premise.

I believe that some of these issues could be solved satisfactorily with the information that is already available, and I suppose I don't get it when people want to discuss topics that are off that already pre-paved track.

But that's just my feeling on the matter, so Ill try to stay out of discussions where people want to freestyle ideas. As I said, no offense intended.

Cheers

No worries at all. I am actually an extremely literal person. When someone says they'll be back in a minute, I think they mean a real minute. Not like 15. Like I get worried. So I get the unswerving mind thing. It's just a different way to solve a problem.

Say for example you want to find a lion den. We know what lions want and need, what they like, what they don't like. But the Serengeti is a big place. You look at the map and look for things that lions need. Water source, food source, safety, etc. So you are adding chunks to a map. I'm looking for what they can't live with. Lack of water, nearby cities, lots of other predators. I'm taking chunks away from the map. You start with nothing and build up, I start with everything and pare down. Both give us answers. Putting the two together likely gets us the best answer the quickest.

If Jack exists and is like Gein, that gives us answers. I can assume yes, and pare down with facts. When it becomes unsupportable, the theory has failed. You can assume no, and build up with facts, but when it stalls, the theory has failed. In this case, both methods are likely to fail. But whether you are adding to your tower of cards, or I am subtracting from my Jenga game, either way it's kind of fun.

[Natasha]

.. so as not to derail a thread, and much thanks to Errata for sparking this thought with her posts - always interesting conversations, with E..

Was JtR closer in nature to Ed Gein than say, Bundy, Dahmer and Kemper?

I said (rightly or wrongly, heh) in a post reply to Errata just now, that out of all of the well-known serial killers, Ed Gein was the ONLY true postmortem mutilator. Technically, he was not a 'serial killer' but if he wasn't caught there's little doubt he would've kept killing if fresh female corpses weren't otherwise available.

I'm thinking it's not very accurate to compare JtR to the rest, as he does not appear to be sadistic (he killed quickly, mutilated after, he wasn't bent on causing prolonged suffering). He doesn't appear to have raped his victims, while being obsessed with their vaginas and wombs and breasts.

I have pondered, in the past, if JtR was a necrophile (or similar..) for that reason. But Gein wasn't, I think, really a necrophile as such. Sex wasn't his motive. I think Gein just enjoyed the illusion (or delusion) of having 100% control of his dominating mum.

Anyhow that's my major JtR thought of the day. I think it's probably the closest parallel in behaviour, though JtR was likely a good bit smarter than Gein (who was caught, and relatively quickly, as he was killing respectable townsfolk, not women in at-risk lifestyles -and- leaving eyesmacking trails of evidence behind him).

Hi Ausgirl

Good thread.

I think it relevant to assess what the motives were in different cases to ascertain what the drive was in the ripper, after all it is probably one of the closest ways to look at the motivations of the ripper.

[Ausgirl]

Hi Ausgirl

Good thread.

I think it relevant to assess what the motives were in different cases to ascertain what the drive was in the ripper, after all it is probably one of the closest ways to look at the motivations of the ripper.

I also think it's useful to examine what his motives probably were -not-. I'm fairly confident at this stage that JtR was not a sadist or a rapist, for example, making him a member of a very small minority of serial killers.

[Natasha]

I also think it's useful to examine what his motives probably were -not-. I'm fairly confident at this stage that JtR was not a sadist or a rapist, for example, making him a member of a very small minority of serial killers.

I agree. In the case of Emma Smith she was raped and a blunt object was jabbed into her intimate area, there was no mention of damage in the form of jabbing in the C5's intimate area, which suggests to me that the murders were not sexually motivated.

[Vincenzo]

Hi ausgirl
The closest to the ripper that I've found is William Suff the Riverside Prostitute Killer. Nasty stuff.

I read a book about Bill Suff years ago. Very scary guy.

[WingsUnchained]

Great Points

It's just cardinal proof that nurture can corrupt nature to the point where nature is destroyed.

This is probably the most in-depth assessment of Gein that I've seen outside of actual criminal research/investigation and I fully agree with the specific part I've quoted. Gein was such a complex individual— so much so that he was the main inspiration for three horror movies with totally different plots. Those are Psycho (the obsession with his mother), The Silence of the Lambs (Buffalo Bill collected skin for a woman suit) and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Leatherface's fascination with making various things from human skin). Personally, I like to include Carrie as well, albeit subtracting the supernatural power of pyrotelepathy, since Carrie's mother was extremely comparable to Gein's.

I'm new here, btw.

[Abby Normal]

I read a book about Bill Suff years ago. Very scary guy.

yeah. he was. mustache and all.

[Abby Normal]

This is probably the most in-depth assessment of Gein that I've seen outside of actual criminal research/investigation and I fully agree with the specific part I've quoted. Gein was such a complex individual— so much so that he was the main inspiration for three horror movies with totally different plots. Those are Psycho (the obsession with his mother), The Silence of the Lambs (Buffalo Bill collected skin for a woman suit) and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Leatherface's fascination with making various things from human skin). Personally, I like to include Carrie as well, albeit subtracting the supernatural power of pyrotelepathy, since Carrie's mother was extremely comparable to Gein's.

I'm new here, btw.

welcome wings!

[Abby Normal]

This is probably the most in-depth assessment of Gein that I've seen outside of actual criminal research/investigation and I fully agree with the specific part I've quoted. Gein was such a complex individual— so much so that he was the main inspiration for three horror movies with totally different plots. Those are Psycho (the obsession with his mother), The Silence of the Lambs (Buffalo Bill collected skin for a woman suit) and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (Leatherface's fascination with making various things from human skin). Personally, I like to include Carrie as well, albeit subtracting the supernatural power of pyrotelepathy, since Carrie's mother was extremely comparable to Gein's.

I'm new here, btw.

BTW. just my personal opinion. Gein is NOT like the ripper.
he couldn't get a slug in heat with a limo and a 100 dollar bill to go with him. Which is why he dug them up and then after that had to kill them in public with no stealth and got caught.

just my opinion.

[SirJohnFalstaff]

.. so as not to derail a thread, and much thanks to Errata for sparking this thought with her posts - always interesting conversations, with E..

Was JtR closer in nature to Ed Gein than say, Bundy, Dahmer and Kemper?

I said (rightly or wrongly, heh) in a post reply to Errata just now, that out of all of the well-known serial killers, Ed Gein was the ONLY true postmortem mutilator. Technically, he was not a 'serial killer' but if he wasn't caught there's little doubt he would've kept killing if fresh female corpses weren't otherwise available.

I'm thinking it's not very accurate to compare JtR to the rest, as he does not appear to be sadistic (he killed quickly, mutilated after, he wasn't bent on causing prolonged suffering). He doesn't appear to have raped his victims, while being obsessed with their vaginas and wombs and breasts.

I have pondered, in the past, if JtR was a necrophile (or similar..) for that reason. But Gein wasn't, I think, really a necrophile as such. Sex wasn't his motive. I think Gein just enjoyed the illusion (or delusion) of having 100% control of his dominating mum.

Anyhow that's my major JtR thought of the day. I think it's probably the closest parallel in behaviour, though JtR was likely a good bit smarter than Gein (who was caught, and relatively quickly, as he was killing respectable townsfolk, not women in at-risk lifestyles -and- leaving eyesmacking trails of evidence behind him).

I don't want to derail the thread, but what are your thoughts on Albert Fish?

[Vincenzo]

yeah. he was. mustache and all.

Wasn't it suspected that he used the breast meat from his victims in the chili he made and submitted to competitions?

One thing that always stuck to me about the book on him that I read. The writer investigated the case and spent a lot of time interviewing Suff. Suff always proclaimed his innocence. The writer said, however, he thinks Suff is guilty. But that there was only any real physical evidence tying him to one murder. He said that if Suff had been tried individually for each crimw he likely would have been aquitted of all except the one. But they charged him with the 12 or 13 murders (i forget how many exactly) and the jury convicted him because of all the bodies.

Also when he was younger in Texas he was convicted of killing his infant child, paroled and then he moved to California.

I cant remember the name of that book but i reccomed it for those interested in true crime.

[Abby Normal]

Wasn't it suspected that he used the breast meat from his victims in the chili he made and submitted to competitions?

One thing that always stuck to me about the book on him that I read. The writer investigated the case and spent a lot of time interviewing Suff. Suff always proclaimed his innocence. The writer said, however, he thinks Suff is guilty. But that there was only any real physical evidence tying him to one murder. He said that if Suff had been tried individually for each crimw he likely would have been aquitted of all except the one. But they charged him with the 12 or 13 murders (i forget how many exactly) and the jury convicted him because of all the bodies.

Also when he was younger in Texas he was convicted of killing his infant child, paroled and then he moved to California.

I cant remember the name of that book but i reccomed it for those interested in true crime.

Hi Vincenzo
Yes his first murder was his baby. **shivers***
Another point in the argument that serial killers don't change Victimology and MO(see Aussie hutch thread!) BTW.

And yes there is evidence that he was a cannibal, and made chilli out of the victims remains to feed others.

similar to ripper:

Victimology
Victims lured/ruse
MO
post mortem mutilation
cannibalism
strangulation
knife used
bodies displayed
Bodies left (not kept near/at home)
sexual areas/parts targeted
organs taken away
breasts removed


This guy looked like an average Joe, even an affable nobody. Kind of Like Dahmer.

I think that the Suff and Dahmer are the most closest to the ripper ive found.
Kemper, bundy, and ridgeway next.

Gein-negative. totally different animal.

[Shaggyrand]

Wasn't it suspected that he used the breast meat from his victims in the chili he made and submitted to competitions?

One thing that always stuck to me about the book on him that I read. The writer investigated the case and spent a lot of time interviewing Suff. Suff always proclaimed his innocence. The writer said, however, he thinks Suff is guilty. But that there was only any real physical evidence tying him to one murder. He said that if Suff had been tried individually for each crimw he likely would have been aquitted of all except the one. But they charged him with the 12 or 13 murders (i forget how many exactly) and the jury convicted him because of all the bodies.

Also when he was younger in Texas he was convicted of killing his infant child, paroled and then he moved to California.

I cant remember the name of that book but i reccomed it for those interested in true crime.

Cat and Mouse by Brian Alan Lane? If so, I have to disagree with it being worth reading. There is a lot of interesting stuff but found a lot of the approach, like novelizing the murders, a fair amount of outright fiction in many details for i assume was the sake of "atmosphere", endless author interjecting self and the inclusion of Suff's writing for cheap shock, to have really worked against it. The bones for a great true crime book are there but I mostly ended up wondering how much was actually true. Just my opinion.

[Abby Normal]

Cat and Mouse by Brian Alan Lane? If so, I have to disagree with it being worth reading. There is a lot of interesting stuff but found a lot of the approach, like novelizing the murders, a fair amount of outright fiction in many details for i assume was the sake of "atmosphere", endless author interjecting self and the inclusion of Suff's writing for cheap shock, to have really worked against it. The bones for a great true crime book are there but I mostly ended up wondering how much was actually true. Just my opinion.

Hi Shag and Vincenzo
I just ordered The Riverside killer by C.Keers an investigator on the case. It got much better reviews than Cat and Mouse.