Casebook: Jack the Ripper - Main
   

Introduction
Victims
Suspects
Witnesses
Ripper Letters
Police Officials
Official Documents
Press Reports
Victorian London
Message Boards
Ripper Media
Authors
Dissertations
Timelines
Games & Diversions
Photo Archive
Ripper Wiki
Casebook Examiner
Ripper Podcast
About the Casebook

Most Recent Posts:
Non-Fiction: Scholes of the Yard: The Casebook of a Scotland Yard Detective 1888 to 1924 - by Herlock Sholmes 58 minutes ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Trevor Marriott 1 hour and 16 minutes ago.
Non-Fiction: Scholes of the Yard: The Casebook of a Scotland Yard Detective 1888 to 1924 - by Pcdunn 2 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by jerryd 3 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Joshua Rogan 4 hours ago.
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - by Sam Flynn 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Motive, Method and Madness: Same motive = same killer - (28 posts)
Conferences and Meetings: American Jack the Ripper - True Crime Conference, Baltimore, April 7-8, 2018 - (6 posts)
Non-Fiction: Scholes of the Yard: The Casebook of a Scotland Yard Detective 1888 to 1924 - (3 posts)
Thompson, Francis: Jack the Poet - (2 posts)
Neil, P.C. John: Running towards me without a hat, which raised my suspicions!!! - (1 posts)

Wiki Updates:
Robert Sagar
Edit: Chris
May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
Online newspaper archives
Edit: Chris
Nov 26, 2014, 10:25 am
Joseph Lawende
Edit: Chris
Mar 9, 2014, 10:12 am
Miscellaneous research resources
Edit: Chris
Feb 13, 2014, 9:28 am
Charles Cross
Edit: John Bennett
Sep 4, 2013, 8:20 pm

Most Recent Blogs:
Mike Covell: A DECADE IN THE MAKING.
February 19, 2016, 11:12 am.
Chris George: RipperCon in Baltimore, April 8-10, 2016
February 10, 2016, 2:55 pm.
Mike Covell: Hull Prison Visit
October 10, 2015, 8:04 am.
Mike Covell: NEW ADVENTURES IN RESEARCH
August 9, 2015, 3:10 am.
Mike Covell: UPDDATES FOR THE PAST 11 MONTHS
November 14, 2014, 10:02 am.
Mike Covell: Mike’s Book Releases
March 17, 2014, 3:18 am.

Go Back   Casebook Forums > Ripper Discussions > Motive, Method and Madness

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #521  
Old 10-12-2017, 04:19 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Michael W Richards: Logic requires pattern and consistency, sequential occurrences. In these cases the behaviors can vary greatly, so its impractical to merely assume a routinely morphing murderer.

Merely assume? The assumption is not grabbed out of thin air, Michael. And there is not much morphing as far as I can tell. There is more of similarities.

I think the crux is what Sam struck on, disposal of remains. Something unseen in the Canonicals, save for some organs.

Why, Michael, would we expect the Ripper to cut up his victims and scuttle off for the Thames? The victims were killed in spots that were unconnected to the killer, in all probability, and so there was no need for dumping them elsewhere.

The display was part of the Ripper crimes, the shock value must have been something that was required or desired to complete the act.

No, it must not, actually. It may well be that what the Ripper did, he did for himself only. And then he left it behind, gruesome as it was. There is no need to accept that the killer MUST have wanted to shock society, although he may have wanted to do so. Equally, he may have discovered that effect after having killed Nichols and - foremost - Chapman.

If you look at the murder of Polly and Annie there seems to be little to suggest other than a random act of violence upon a stranger, with the ultimate objective being to mutilate the cooling remains.

No, when I look at them, I see a desire to fulfil a ritual, something that was interrupted in Bucks Row, but much more fulfilled in Hanbury Street. The violence had a very clear meaning, and it is no coincidence that the scenes turned out the way they did.
That´s what I see, so we need to differ on the point until further notice.

I think the taking of specific organs is a secondary goal.

I think it was just as important to him as was the rest of the cutting. I don´t regard it as secondary, nor as primary - but instead just as part of it all.

The Torsos were created out of sight and disposed of with some degree of stealth.

The stealth only involved not getting detected, though - it did not comprise making the parts disappear. On the contrary, they were aimed to be found, in my view.

Had no-one found any of the remains, excluding 1 torso perhaps, the killer likely would have been sated, and content to remain in the shadows.

I disagree. The killer would have carried on to kill, the way I see it.

Jack needed the audience.

Neither man needed the audience, but both men embraced and welcomed the attention they were getting. If there was not another man on earth, they would both have had the urge to kill anyway.

On the 1 torso perhaps placed, I feel its a political statement.

I assume we are talking about the Whitehall torso? I don´t rule out the possibility that there were political implications, but we will find that impossibe to convert to any evidenced truth. It may equally have been - and I favour that explanation - a comment directed to the police only, but with the hope of the overall society becoming informed of the delivery of the message.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #522  
Old 10-12-2017, 04:25 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 8,632
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
That is true, just as it is true that when we have two serialists in the same town, representing many common and peculiar traits in the way they do damage to their victims, they are to be expected to be the same man.
The first problem is that we don't know that there were two serial killers at work; the torso murders themselves could have been performed by one man, but they could have been committed by different individuals or even a syndicate.

The second problem is that, as Mike Richards has just pointed out, the behaviours vary widely, and there are major characteristics of the Ripper murders that are absent in the torso cases, and vice versa.

Third, even the perceived common traits are debatable.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #523  
Old 10-12-2017, 07:29 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Sam Flynn: The first problem is that we don't know that there were two serial killers at work; the torso murders themselves could have been performed by one man, but they could have been committed by different individuals or even a syndicate.

The same goes for the Ripper killings, I´m afraid - there can be no 100 per cent certainty. But you only mention the torso series as one where there could possibly be more than one perp?

The general consensus is that the 1887-1889 torso murders, at least, were the deeds of one man only. That is partially due to how these kinds of murders are extremely rare, wherefore we either have no such murders for the longest period, then we have a handful of killers with the same interest in killing, eviscerating and dumping, the same very clear skill when it comes to make a neat disarticulation, the same propensity to dump their victims in the Thames in parcels wrapped in cloth, the same odd habit to divide the torso in parts, the same idea that their prey should not be physically tortured, the same urge to divide the bodies up in parts in very close connection to the actual killing and the same drive to divide the dumping between river and dry land. And then, all of a sudden, they all stop killing and dumping. Simultaneously.

Alternatively, we have just the one killer.

Then there is the 1873 case, and that ties in perfectly with the others in many respects, although there was no wrapping in cloth, the body was divided into more parts and there was damage in this case that was lacking in the others. But it was a case where the cutting and disjointing was eerily foreboding of what was to come, and the victim had no torture marks plus she had been cut up in very close proximity to death, so there is ample reason to join her in.

So it is really not much of a problem at all, the way I see it.


The second problem is that, as Mike Richards has just pointed out, the behaviours vary widely, and there are major characteristics of the Ripper murders that are absent in the torso cases, and vice versa.

In every murder, no matter where it was commited, there are detils that are absolutely exclusive. No two murders are exactly the same. But if two women are killed by having their heads cut off with a samurai sword where the blade was strewn with salt, we should not take any differences in height of the cut on the neck as an indication of two killers.

Once there is rare and peculiar damage done, the suggestion of a single killer becomes by far the better one, no matter if there are other factors that differ.

There goes that problem - in my world, at least.

Third, even the perceived common traits are debatable.

To a degree, yes. We can go on for ever, for example, about how the shapes and sizes of the abdominal flaps can have differed, but we would be very stupid not to recognize the fact that the abdominal walls were taken away as an extremely crucial factor in determining who did it.

If a person is suffocated by pouring colour into his or her mouth while having his or her nose pinched closed, it does not matter a iot if the colour is red in one instance and blue in the other - it is the overall character of the deeds that give away the same killer as an inevitability.

So we do not have a problem with the flaps - we have what must be regarded as conclusive evidence that we are dealing with the same killer, not least since there are many more similarities to bolster the idea.

Can you see before your eyes one man in a Heneage Street flat who subdues and kills a woman, whereupon he cuts the abdomen open, ripping all the way from ribcage to uterus, removes the abdominal wall in two large, long panes and takes out the uterus. After this, he notices a ring on the finger of the victim and takes it for his own keeping. He then moves on to pull the lungs and heart out of the body, and then he leaves the body lying on the floor, while he fetches a saw and a knife. What will the victim look like as she lies on the floor? She will look very much like the work of the Ripper. She may even have had her neck slashed, we cannot know, but we DO know that the neck IS cut at some stage, in combination with decapitation.

Meanwhile, in nearby Flower and Dean Street, ANOTHER killer subdues ANOTHER woman, slashes her neck and cuts her abdomen open, ripping all the way from ribcage to uterus, removes the abdominal wall in three large panes and takes out the uterus. After this, he notices a ring on the finger of the victim and takes it for his own keeping. He then moves on to pull a kidney and part of a colon out of her body, and then he leaves the body lying in the street, and makes his escape.

Does this sound even remotely plausible to you? Is it the precursors of the Kray twins at work? Is the first man shouting through the open window, all the way to Flower and Dean Street "Now we cut the abdomen open, aaaaall the way down, don´t cheat now! And now we take the uterus out, one, two, three! And the ring, don´t forget to grab the ring!"?

To me, it sounds very much out of the question. And as I said before, you will not find one murder investigator by any other name than Marriott who would buy the idea. Promise!

Last edited by Fisherman : 10-12-2017 at 07:47 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #524  
Old 10-12-2017, 08:36 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Sam

To a degree, yes. We can go on for ever, for example, about how the shapes and sizes of the abdominal flaps can have differed, but we would be very stupid not to recognize the fact that the abdominal walls were taken away as an extremely crucial factor in determining who did it.

If a person is suffocated by pouring colour into his or her mouth while having his or her nose pinched closed, it does not matter a iot if the colour is red in one instance and blue in the other - it is the overall character of the deeds that give away the same killer as an inevitability.

So we do not have a problem with the flaps - we have what must be regarded as conclusive evidence that we are dealing with the same killer, not least since there are many more similarities to bolster the idea.

Christer we still do not agree on this issue of "Flaps". I doubt unless there is new evidence we ever will.

So please don't claim it is "conclusive evidence" because for others it is not.
I know some posters I deeply respect agree with you, no matter.
Say that "you beleive it's conclusive" but at least aknowledge that others strongly disagree and that some of those views are not a knee jerk reaction.

Anyway we have debated this many times and I see no need to replay that over Ah a.
I find the thread good reading and it must be one of the fastest growing threads ever?


Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #525  
Old 10-12-2017, 09:40 AM
Harry D Harry D is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,972
Default

Fisherman, Mr Richards doesn't even believe the Ripper series was the work of one killer, good luck convincing him that the same man did the Torsos!
__________________
Hail to the king, baby!
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #526  
Old 10-12-2017, 10:12 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Elamarna: Christer we still do not agree on this issue of "Flaps". I doubt unless there is new evidence we ever will.

So please don't claim it is "conclusive evidence" because for others it is not.

I´m afraid I cannot honour that request. It is the exact kind of evidence that would be used to put a case beyond reasonable doubt. It goes without saying that it COULD be two killers who got the same weird idea into their heads, but legally speaking, I believe such a suggestion would not appeal to a jury at all.

I know some posters I deeply respect agree with you, no matter.
Say that "you beleive it's conclusive" but at least aknowledge that others strongly disagree and that some of those views are not a knee jerk reaction.

I know others disagree. The thing is, they can´t actually disagree about the evidence as such, since they have never seen it. Nor have I. What they disagree about is my assertion that no matter the shape or size of the flaps, it nevertheless remains that the practice as such - to cut away the abdominal wall in a few large flaps - is enough to put the case beyond resonable doubt.
They - and you - are welcome to disagree, but I would like to see what a seasoned attorney had to say about it.

Anyway we have debated this many times and I see no need to replay that over Ah a.
I find the thread good reading and it must be one of the fastest growing threads ever?

That could well be.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #527  
Old 10-12-2017, 10:13 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry D View Post
Fisherman, Mr Richards doesn't even believe the Ripper series was the work of one killer, good luck convincing him that the same man did the Torsos!
When the going gets tough, the tough get going. I always loved a tough challenge. Plus I have a soft spot for Michael, who is a very nice guy. That should make for a useful debate, and I already have my next move planned...
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #528  
Old 10-12-2017, 10:19 AM
Sam Flynn Sam Flynn is offline
Casebook Supporter
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Wales
Posts: 8,632
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
What they disagree about is my assertion that no matter the shape or size of the flaps, it nevertheless remains that the practice as such - to cut away the abdominal wall in a few large flaps - is enough to put the case beyond resonable doubt.
Who said anything about LARGE flaps? The only one who fits into that category is Mary Kelly.

As a thought-experiment, substitute "corpse" for "orange", and "removal of abdominal flaps" with "peeling". How many different ways of peeling an orange are there? If you were to find two partly-peeled oranges, both of which had had some of the skin peeled off in segments with a knife, would you think that it was beyond doubt that the same person peeled them?

NB: you found the fruit in a densely populated city, with one orange found in one district, and the other in a different borough 12 miles away.
__________________
Kind regards, Sam Flynn

"Suche Nullen" (Nietzsche, Götzendämmerung, 1888)
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #529  
Old 10-12-2017, 10:33 AM
Elamarna Elamarna is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South london
Posts: 3,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Elamarna: Christer we still do not agree on this issue of "Flaps". I doubt unless there is new evidence we ever will.

So please don't claim it is "conclusive evidence" because for others it is not.

I´m afraid I cannot honour that request. It is the exact kind of evidence that would be used to put a case beyond reasonable doubt. It goes without saying that it COULD be two killers who got the same weird idea into their heads, but legally speaking, I believe such a suggestion would not appeal to a jury at all.

I know some posters I deeply respect agree with you, no matter.
Say that "you beleive it's conclusive" but at least aknowledge that others strongly disagree and that some of those views are not a knee jerk reaction.

I know others disagree. The thing is, they can´t actually disagree about the evidence as such, since they have never seen it. Nor have I. What they disagree about is my assertion that no matter the shape or size of the flaps, it nevertheless remains that the practice as such - to cut away the abdominal wall in a few large flaps - is enough to put the case beyond resonable doubt.
They - and you - are welcome to disagree, but I would like to see what a seasoned attorney had to say about it.

Anyway we have debated this many times and I see no need to replay that over Ah a.
I find the thread good reading and it must be one of the fastest growing threads ever?

That could well be.
May I be truly cinical and suggest that the legal profession and truth are often entirely different matters.



Steve
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #530  
Old 10-12-2017, 11:11 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 15,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elamarna View Post
May I be truly cinical and suggest that the legal profession and truth are often entirely different matters.
Steve
You may! That is, if I am allowed to be truly rational and say that verdicts worded "beyond reasonable doubt" will have many, many years of knowledge, experience and practice behind them, handed down over centuries of studies of human behavior.

We are not talking about law-wringing here, Steve.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.