Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How to sort the Ripper

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
    Hi,

    Serial killer typologies have been strongly criticized by researchers for a long time. These killers rarely match the theoretical models and there are often overlaps between operational definitions of types of serial killers and problems with understanding their MO:s with these typologies as tools. Even the concept of MO has been called into questions by researchers.

    But I have a suggestion, since you seem to work rather inductively with comparing Jack the Ripper to others. Try and hypothesize that Jack the Ripper was also the dismemberment murderer in 1888 and 1889. Perhaps you will get some interesting results!

    I wish you the best of luck.

    Kind regards, Pierre


    "The second victim of the Thames series was discovered in September of 1888, in the middle of the hunt for the Whitechapel Murder. On September 11, an arm belonging to a female was discovered in the Thames off Pimlico. On September 28, another arm was found along the Lambeth-road and on October 2, the torso of a female, minus the head, was discovered. The torso was discovered on the grounds of the construction site for the New Scotland Yard building and was dubbed by the press the "Whitehall Mystery." Scotland Yard had a murder mystery to solve even before their new building was complete.

    The medical men involved, along with Dr. Bond, agreed that a degree of medical knowledge had been used, but they could give no evidence pointing to the method of death. Dr. Charles Hibbert, who examined one of the arms, stated that, "I thought the arm was cut off by a person who, while he was not necessarily an anatomist, certainly knew what he was doing-who knew where the joints were and cut them pretty regularly." At the inquest, the jury, despite the fact that an obvious murder had taken place, returned a verdict of "Found Dead."

    Eighteen eighty-eight is considered the "Year of the Ripper" in the chronological accounts of the history of London. Within his ten-week reign, the Ripper had managed to shake Victorian London to its core. Yet, by the end of the year, interest in Jack the Ripper began to dwindle rapidly. By June of 1889, almost seven months had passed without a Ripper type murder, and hopes were being entertained that his bloody wrath was over. The same could not be said for the Thames series, which was about to begin again.

    On June 4, part of a female torso was fished out of the Thames at Horselydown, while at about the same time; a left leg to the body was plucked from under the Albert-bridge, Chelsea. Within the next week, numerous other parts of the same body were recovered in or near the Thames.

    The London Times on June 11, reported that the remains found so far "are as follows: Tuesday, left leg and thigh off Battersea, lower part of the abdomen at Horselydown; Thursday, the liver near Nine Elms, upper part of the body in Battersea-Park, neck and shoulders off Battersea; Friday, right foot and part of leg at Wandsworth, left leg and foot at Limehouse; Saturday, left arm and hand at Bankside, buttocks and pelvis off Battersea, right thigh at Chelsea Embankment, yesterday, right arm and hand at Bankside."

    It is an interesting fact that one of the body parts had been purposely thrown over the private railing to the Shelley Estate. It is ironic that Mary Shelley had earlier written a novel entitled Frankenstein, about a monster pieced together by various body parts.

    The medical men who examined the pieces agree that some degree of medical skill was involved. At the inquest on June 17, it was stated that, "the division of the parts showed skill and design: not, however, the anatomical skill of a surgeon, but the practical knowledge of a butcher or a knacker. There was a great similarity between the condition, as regarded cutting up, of the remains and that of those found at Rainham, and at the new police building on the Thames Embankment." The London Times of June 5, reported that "in the opinion of the doctors the women had been dead only 48 hours, and the body had been dissected somewhat roughly by a person who must have had some knowledge of the joints of the human body."

    Once again, the doctors were unable to provide a means of death. However, this time, the jury was confident in reaching a decision of "Wilful murder against some person or persons unknown." As in the other similar cases, the head of the victim was never found, however, the identity of the victim was clearly established. The body was identified as that of Elizabeth Jackson, a suspected prostitute, from Chelsea. This lead was of little use, as the murder was to remain, as the others, unsolved.

    In July, Whitechapel was awakened to the possibility of another Jack the Ripper crime. A known prostitute, Alice McKenzie, was found murdered in the heart of the district. While police and citizens were entertaining the theory that Jack was back in business, the torso killer would strike again, and this time in the Ripper's backyard.

    On September 10, Police Constable William Pennett was walking his beat along Pinchin Street, Whitechapel, when he discovered the torso of a female under a railway arch. As in the McKenzie case, this murder created a flurry of police activity in the district. Within minutes of finding the body, the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of Police, as well as numerous detectives who had been engaged on the Ripper investigation, were on their way to the crime scene. Officially, the police were to place this murder in the same category as the rest, unsolved and of the Thames type."

    http://www.casebook.org/dissertation...o-murders.html
    It is not inconceivable that JTR was also the torso killer. Given the nature of the killings, the fact that no one saw the killer or the dumping of the bodies, and the gruesomeness as well as boldness of the perpetrator makes them very similar. It would also be an amazing coincidence and probably statistically highly unlikely that you would have had 2 serial killers operating (excuse the pun) in the same area at the same time.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Pierre View Post
      Hi,

      Serial killer typologies have been strongly criticized by researchers for a long time. These killers rarely match the theoretical models and there are often overlaps between operational definitions of types of serial killers and problems with understanding their MO:s with these typologies as tools. Even the concept of MO has been called into questions by researchers.

      But I have a suggestion, since you seem to work rather inductively with comparing Jack the Ripper to others. Try and hypothesize that Jack the Ripper was also the dismemberment murderer in 1888 and 1889. Perhaps you will get some interesting results!

      I wish you the best of luck.

      Kind regards, Pierre


      "The second victim of the Thames series was discovered in September of 1888, in the middle of the hunt for the Whitechapel Murder. On September 11, an arm belonging to a female was discovered in the Thames off Pimlico. On September 28, another arm was found along the Lambeth-road and on October 2, the torso of a female, minus the head, was discovered. The torso was discovered on the grounds of the construction site for the New Scotland Yard building and was dubbed by the press the "Whitehall Mystery." Scotland Yard had a murder mystery to solve even before their new building was complete.

      The medical men involved, along with Dr. Bond, agreed that a degree of medical knowledge had been used, but they could give no evidence pointing to the method of death. Dr. Charles Hibbert, who examined one of the arms, stated that, "I thought the arm was cut off by a person who, while he was not necessarily an anatomist, certainly knew what he was doing-who knew where the joints were and cut them pretty regularly." At the inquest, the jury, despite the fact that an obvious murder had taken place, returned a verdict of "Found Dead."

      Eighteen eighty-eight is considered the "Year of the Ripper" in the chronological accounts of the history of London. Within his ten-week reign, the Ripper had managed to shake Victorian London to its core. Yet, by the end of the year, interest in Jack the Ripper began to dwindle rapidly. By June of 1889, almost seven months had passed without a Ripper type murder, and hopes were being entertained that his bloody wrath was over. The same could not be said for the Thames series, which was about to begin again.

      On June 4, part of a female torso was fished out of the Thames at Horselydown, while at about the same time; a left leg to the body was plucked from under the Albert-bridge, Chelsea. Within the next week, numerous other parts of the same body were recovered in or near the Thames.

      The London Times on June 11, reported that the remains found so far "are as follows: Tuesday, left leg and thigh off Battersea, lower part of the abdomen at Horselydown; Thursday, the liver near Nine Elms, upper part of the body in Battersea-Park, neck and shoulders off Battersea; Friday, right foot and part of leg at Wandsworth, left leg and foot at Limehouse; Saturday, left arm and hand at Bankside, buttocks and pelvis off Battersea, right thigh at Chelsea Embankment, yesterday, right arm and hand at Bankside."

      It is an interesting fact that one of the body parts had been purposely thrown over the private railing to the Shelley Estate. It is ironic that Mary Shelley had earlier written a novel entitled Frankenstein, about a monster pieced together by various body parts.

      The medical men who examined the pieces agree that some degree of medical skill was involved. At the inquest on June 17, it was stated that, "the division of the parts showed skill and design: not, however, the anatomical skill of a surgeon, but the practical knowledge of a butcher or a knacker. There was a great similarity between the condition, as regarded cutting up, of the remains and that of those found at Rainham, and at the new police building on the Thames Embankment." The London Times of June 5, reported that "in the opinion of the doctors the women had been dead only 48 hours, and the body had been dissected somewhat roughly by a person who must have had some knowledge of the joints of the human body."

      Once again, the doctors were unable to provide a means of death. However, this time, the jury was confident in reaching a decision of "Wilful murder against some person or persons unknown." As in the other similar cases, the head of the victim was never found, however, the identity of the victim was clearly established. The body was identified as that of Elizabeth Jackson, a suspected prostitute, from Chelsea. This lead was of little use, as the murder was to remain, as the others, unsolved.

      In July, Whitechapel was awakened to the possibility of another Jack the Ripper crime. A known prostitute, Alice McKenzie, was found murdered in the heart of the district. While police and citizens were entertaining the theory that Jack was back in business, the torso killer would strike again, and this time in the Ripper's backyard.

      On September 10, Police Constable William Pennett was walking his beat along Pinchin Street, Whitechapel, when he discovered the torso of a female under a railway arch. As in the McKenzie case, this murder created a flurry of police activity in the district. Within minutes of finding the body, the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of Police, as well as numerous detectives who had been engaged on the Ripper investigation, were on their way to the crime scene. Officially, the police were to place this murder in the same category as the rest, unsolved and of the Thames type."

      http://www.casebook.org/dissertation...o-murders.html
      I think this hypothesis is highly unlikely, considering the radically different signatures (and the fact that the killer would have to keep switching between the signatures- an eviscerator who makes no attempt to conceal his victims, and a dismemberer who abducts his victims and then dumps the bodies, retaining the head to prevent identification- which makes no sense at all.) In fact, several of the Torso victims-not proved to be murders-were dismembered in different ways, suggesting that there was even more than one Torso perpetrator.

      It seems your "theory", however, is predicated on the assumption that they were one and the same perpetrator so, therefore, I think it is a theory that can be safely discarded.
      Last edited by John G; 02-13-2016, 02:39 PM.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by SuspectZero View Post
        It is not inconceivable that JTR was also the torso killer. Given the nature of the killings, the fact that no one saw the killer or the dumping of the bodies, and the gruesomeness as well as boldness of the perpetrator makes them very similar. It would also be an amazing coincidence and probably statistically highly unlikely that you would have had 2 serial killers operating (excuse the pun) in the same area at the same time.
        They weren't operating in the same area, however. Only one of the Torso victims was discovered in Whitechapel, and we have no idea where she was abducted. Moreover, the Torso crimes took place over a much longer period, 1873-1889, and almost certainly involved more than one perpetrator.
        Last edited by John G; 02-13-2016, 02:47 PM.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by John G View Post
          They weren't operating in the same area, however. Only one of the Torso victims was discovered in Whitechapel, and we have no idea where she was abducted. Moreover, the Torso crimes took place over a much longer period, 1873-1889, and almost certainly involved more than one perpetrator.
          Hi,

          But since an hypothesis of the same killer or killers for the whole period is difficult to construct, it is much easier to use the cases in 88-89 as a sample. Due to its shorter time span it will probably also be more reliable.

          Regards, Pierre
          Last edited by Pierre; 02-13-2016, 02:54 PM.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by John G View Post
            They weren't operating in the same area, however. Only one of the Torso victims was discovered in Whitechapel, and we have no idea where she was abducted. Moreover, the Torso crimes took place over a much longer period, 1873-1889, and almost certainly involved more than one perpetrator.
            I probably should have said that better - the same city. And I don't think it should be so quickly discarded as a theory.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Errata View Post
              Wow. The guy in the newspaper article is so not the guy described in he murderpedia article. Which leads me to believe that murderpedia conflated one homophobic serial killer's name with another's crimes, but it's the crimes described by murderpedia I am interested in. Either that or he had two very different murder methods. Or there was a Kieran Kelly and Keiron Kelly with very similar problems, which seems improbable. And if you wonder why I can't reconcile the two accounts, I have a hard time believing that Kelly managed to shove a broken bottle into a man's rectum, slashing his throat and genitals before pushing him in front of a train. I can't see how the guy gets on the platform, much less the tracks.

              Well that's irritating. Appalling, morally, irritating personally.

              Finished the UK. No one else quite like the Ripper, though the Yorkshire Ripper probably comes closest. You guys don't have nearly as many spree killers as we do. Probably equal on parricide, but statistically far few incidents of going postal. Good job. I don't know if anyone has congratulated you guys for that.

              Oh, and I take back what I said about Florida. Texas is definitely the place to go for serial killers.
              Hi Errata,

              Yes, this confused me initially! There are in fact two completely different serial killers, but with similar names: Kieron Kelly and Kieran Kelly. Kieron Kelly was a mutilator, whereas Kieran Kelly's MO was pushing his victims in front of underground trains.

              Have you also considered Anthony Hardy, The Camden Ripper? He was certainly a very odd serial killer, who admired Jack the Ripper. His signature included satanic ritual, dismemberment and necrophilia.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by SuspectZero View Post
                I probably should have said that better - the same city. And I don't think it should be so quickly discarded as a theory.
                London had a population in 1888 of around of 5.6 million people, so I don't think it would be that unlikely that two serial killers would be operating in the same city over a period of several years.

                There is no proof that any of the Torso victims were murdered, and several of them were dismembered in different ways, indicating different perpetrators. The signatures of JtR and the Torso perpetrator were also radically different.
                Last edited by John G; 02-13-2016, 03:09 PM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Pierre View Post
                  Hi,

                  But since an hypothesis of the same killer or killers for the whole period is difficult to construct, it is much easier to use the cases in 88-89 as a sample. Due to its shorter time span it will probably also be more reliable.

                  Regards, Pierre
                  It would also be almost certainly wrong, which is why I think you can safely discard your theory. Sorry, but there you have it.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Pierre View Post
                    Hi,

                    Serial killer typologies have been strongly criticized by researchers for a long time. These killers rarely match the theoretical models and there are often overlaps between operational definitions of types of serial killers and problems with understanding their MO:s with these typologies as tools. Even the concept of MO has been called into questions by researchers.

                    But I have a suggestion, since you seem to work rather inductively with comparing Jack the Ripper to others. Try and hypothesize that Jack the Ripper was also the dismemberment murderer in 1888 and 1889. Perhaps you will get some interesting results!

                    I wish you the best of luck.

                    Kind regards, Pierre

                    My model absolutely does not preclude the idea that he could have been the Torso Killer as well. All I ask for in a serial killer to compare to the Ripper is that
                    1: they are a mutilator. I don't even discriminate between post mortem or peri mortem. Different battle for a different day.
                    2: They not be a rapist.
                    3: They abandoned the corpses of the people they killed.

                    That's all the search criteria. Now because I don't have a foolproof way of sorting a killer who breaks into the home of their victim and kills there, in terms of body disposition, I don't count those. But not from any philosophy, just I need more information than I am likely going to get.

                    To compare to the Ripper, I need a serial killer to tick those three boxes. And only those three boxes. And I've found one guy. Apparently because (and I'm guessing here) if you care enough to mutilate someone, you probably care about the corpse produced as well.

                    We know that no matter what the motivation of the Ripper, he did not rape his victims, and there was no sign he tried. So even if it was done for a sexual thrill, he didn't try to consummate it. Which makes sense, because almost every rapist dumps the body. But purposeful mutilators (as opposed to frenzied stabbers who are fulfilling a different need) tend to be body hoarders, and when they aren't they are dumpers. Leaving me with one guy, as I said. Now if a state is going to produce another candidate, I believe it will be Texas, mostly because I have a generally dim view of the state.

                    So either my characterization of Jack being a body abandoner is wrong, and it might be, or this sub type of serial killer is rare. Or both. Although there is one other guy that fits the criteria, so I've proved it's possible to be this rare combination. But mind you that even changing the classification to a body hoarder isn't going to open up the field a lot, because Jack still wouldn't be a rapist, which a majority of body hoarders are as well. Except Gein notably. Maybe. I mean, a box of vulvas so it's hard to imagine that was an entirely coitus free house.

                    Ever stand back and read what you just typed and wonder how your life arrived to the point where you would be typing "box of vulvas"?
                    The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by John G View Post
                      Hi Errata,

                      Yes, this confused me initially! There are in fact two completely different serial killers, but with similar names: Kieron Kelly and Kieran Kelly. Kieron Kelly was a mutilator, whereas Kieran Kelly's MO was pushing his victims in front of underground trains.

                      Have you also considered Anthony Hardy, The Camden Ripper? He was certainly a very odd serial killer, who admired Jack the Ripper. His signature included satanic ritual, dismemberment and necrophilia.
                      Seriously? Two guys with almost the same name? That's creepy. What's creepier is that I know a set of twins named Kienan and Kelly. I'll never be in a room alone with them again.

                      Hardy the "no comment" guy? I have no idea why that's what brain seizes on. But yeah, I actually looked pretty hard at all the Rippers, figuring that a similar name might mean more similarities that gruesome murders. I disqualified him because sex was definitely involved and he was a body dumper. But he may have kept a piece? I think? Anyway. Still didn't tick off the boxes. It sounds easy, but apparently it's not. I'm even casually keeping track of mutilating non raping body hoarders, just in case I need to research that side of it, and it's still not a lot of names.

                      I wonder what would happen if I looked at women?
                      The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        I think there was only the one Kelly. There doesn't seem to be much in the papers about him at all, but here is a piece from the Times Sept 24 1983.

                        I have seen two opposing statements about the Weighly murder - one says that Kelly was convicted, the other that he wasn't. I cannot even find Weighly in the death registers for 1977.
                        Attached Files

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          So murder/mutilator Kelly is the same as subway pusher Kelly? That's a hell of a thing. He probably wasn't confined to just those two styles either if he had that level of rage.
                          The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Not having read the book, I can't assess it. The reviews here are by no means all positive :

                            Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for London Underground Serial Killer at Amazon.com. Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              The Times, June 8th 1984 - spelt 'Kiernan.'
                              Attached Files

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
                                If Tabram was a ripper victim, and I think she was, I think she may have been his trigger kill. As in she did something that pissed him off. Thus the anger and frenzied stabbing.


                                However, I think the beginnings of the sig is there, as possibly with Millwood earlier, with stabbing of private parts/abdomen and interest in what's under that skirt.
                                i agree with you.
                                Is it progress when a cannibal uses a fork?
                                - Stanislaw Jerzy Lee

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X