Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would the Ripper have killed himself?

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

  • Would the Ripper have killed himself?

    Part of Macnaughten's rationale for suspecting Druitt is that the Miller's Court 'glut' pushed his mind over the edge and compelled him to commit suicide. However, Macnaughten didn't have the advantage of knowing what we know today, specifically that serial killers are remorseless and rarely take their own lives until after or just before they're apprehended. Is it more likely that if Monty was the Ripper he would've tried to replicate that kind of murder again rather than kill himself to silence his inner-demons? And if so, what does this do for his potential as a suspect?

  • #2
    I think we can all agree that who ever was committing these crimes was light years away from normal so it's not to far fetched to ponder if our killer killed himself or was locked up in some instituition I can't see him stopping and for want of a better term "getting better".I think the only reason our killer would have killed himself is if he thought that he had been rumbled by the police or someone close to him the part where sir Melville states"i have no doubt his family suspected him"is very interesting to say the least add the fact that his brother had no problem letting it be known he had been sacked from the school and that the mother was in an asylum we have to ask why would he do this even today having someone in a mental institution has a stigma let alone in those days especially for such a well to do family and the last point Druitts brother lied when he said he was his only relative why.
    Last edited by pinkmoon; 07-07-2015, 02:11 AM.
    Three things in life that don't stay hidden for to long ones the sun ones the moon and the other is the truth

    Comment


    • #3
      There are rules, or patterns about serial killers, and there are modern exceptions to these patterns, some minor and some major.

      If Montague Druitt was Jack the Ripper, then to some extent he was an exception.

      On the other hand, there are glimpses in various primary sources that Druitt had confessed to an Anglican priest and therefore the clock was ticking for him to either accept he was going into a madhouse for the rest of his life, or to do do away with himself (which would protect his clan from social ruin).

      Harry D raises a very important point, one repeated by many modern authors (such as the late and brilliant Philip Sudgen) who think that because Macnaghten wrote in his report(s) that M. J. Druitt fits the chief's dubious "awful glut" litmus test (over Kelly) he therefore fastened onto this suspect above all others because the drowned man matched this pre-conceived and largely erroneous notion.

      Unfortunately researchers and readers are being misled by Macnagthten. Yes he is certainly putting the cart before the horse, but he is doing so deliberately,

      This is because in those same reports Macnaghten deploys data he knows to be untrue (e.g. that Cutbush and Cutbush were related) and one of those deceitful bits is that Mr Druitt was a suspect in 1888, e.g. whilst he was alive.

      Both Griffiths and Sims pepertuated this police-friendly propaganda, but it was untrue, as Mac's memoirs admitted.

      From other sources, including 1888 to 1891 newspaper accounts, some internal police accounts and, most importantly, Macnaghten's memoirs, we know that Kelly was not considered the final victim. That was Frances Coles in 1891 (until Griffiths in 1898 established the 'autumn of terror').

      "Laying the Ghost of Jack the Ripper" (1914) by Mac, though adapted from the so-called 'Aberconway' version, totally re-conceived the thrust of his report, which was about three living suspects in 1888 who matched the "awful glut" litmus test (hence Kosminski's incarceration had to be backdated, or else it would not fit).

      The retired chief admitted that the un-named Druitt--who is the only suspect worth mentioning--was unknown for years because the police thought the killer was still out there; actually he was nothing more than a phantom as he had destroyed himself at the end of 1888. This finale was nothing to do with law enforcement, let alone a fast closing police net--rather Jack had suffered some kind of private breakdown.

      You see, in 1914 Mac puts the horse in front of the cart.

      It wasn't Mary Jane Kelly's slaughter that established Druitt as the best suspect, for this chief, instead it was the timing of Druitt's suicide that established that Kelly was the final victim. But did so only "some years after" when "certain facts" led, he writes, to this "conclusion".

      In my opinion Mac's trotting out the awful glut one last time is mostly a poetical front for the confession of the killer, who now supposedly killed himself within a night and a day, or another night, or a bit later, but sure had plenty of time to make a confession (Sims had spent fifteen years aggressively asserting that this was logistically impossible).

      I would also defend Macnaghten's understanding of serial killers.

      Though working in the Victorian era with all its limitations, and with zero medical training, he grasped, like no other of his contemporaries in law enforcement, that the Ripper could be a man who stared back at him in his own mirror (an English, Anglican, gentleman, an Oxonian, a cricketer, a tutor of boys), a man above suspicion who could have pulled up a chair in one of his clubs:

      'Sexual murders are the most difficult of all for police to bring home to the perpetrators, for “motives” there are none; only a lust for blood and in many cases a hatred of woman as woman …”

      In Chapter X of his memoirs, ‘MOTIVELESS MURDERS’, Macnaghten returned to sexual mania, and provided a more detailed definition:

      'As I have said before, when writing of the Whitechapel murders, such madness takes Protean forms. Very few people, except barristers, doctors, and police officers, realize that such a thing as sexual mania exists, and, in a murder case similar to the two mentioned above, it is a most difficult task for prosecuting counsel to make a jury fully understand that it supplies and accounts for the complete absence of any other motive for the crime.'

      Macnaghten offers a chilling warning to his readers; that among the dull plebs you pass in the street every day are a few leading a double life as a drooling maniac:

      'Students of history, however, are aware that an excessive indulgence in vice leads, in certain cases, to a craving for blood. Nero was probably a sexual maniac. Many Eastern potentates in all ages, who loved to see slaves slaughtered or wild beasts tearing each other to pieces, have been similarly affected. The disease is not as rare as many people imagine. As you walk in the London streets you may, and do, not infrequently jostle against a potential murderer of the so-called Jack the Ripper type. The subject is not a pleasant one, but to those who study the depths of human nature it is intensely interesting.'

      The extraordinary and sickening notion of the respectable citizen above suspicion, behind which lurks a vicious criminal and/or murderer of strangers, was not a foreign one to Sir Melville Macnaghten, I think partly because of what he learned about Montie Druitt -- albeit posthumously.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Harry D View Post
        Part of Macnaughten's rationale for suspecting Druitt is that the Miller's Court 'glut' pushed his mind over the edge and compelled him to commit suicide. However, Macnaughten didn't have the advantage of knowing what we know today, specifically that serial killers are remorseless and rarely take their own lives until after or just before they're apprehended. Is it more likely that if Monty was the Ripper he would've tried to replicate that kind of murder again rather than kill himself to silence his inner-demons? And if so, what does this do for his potential as a suspect?
        We actually have no idea how common it is. Remember that we don't even know what percent of operating serial killers we even catch, much less study. Never mind those who don't quite make it to three murders for whatever reason.

        Serial killers tend not to kill themselves. Sadists, narcissists, antisocial personality disorder will never kill themselves. And those problems show up a lot in serial killers. But Borderline does too, and suicide is very common there. So there is nothing inherent in a serial killer that lends itself to self preservation more than anyone else.

        He could have killed himself over money woes. A serial killer is not defined only by being a serial killer. He can be a dad, a businessman, an artist, etc. whatever else he does in his free time. Raider spent a lot more time as a father and husband than he did as a serial killer. And those roles meant something to him. Dahmer's role as a grandson meant a great deal to him. Serial killers usually have other lives and other responsibilities, and those make him vulnerable to the same stressors as the rest of us. They very well might kill themselves given the right stressor.
        The early bird might get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese.

        Comment


        • #5
          To put it in a nutshell, Macnaghten had no preconceived notion of the Ripper having imploded after Kelly which the drowned barrister supposedly fit.

          There is also a long-standing theory (that I do not subscribe to) that Mac favored, before Druitt, an Irish terrorist leader as the fiend.

          In 1891, or thereabouts, Macnaghten was posthumously handed the Druitt solution by the deceased man's family, lock, stock and barrel.

          For reasons of politics, internal and external, Macnaghten pretended in two versions of a memo that Druitt best fit an "awful glut" litmus test, therefore he was probably the Ripper. This pretense was dispensed with in his 1914 memoir, which matches hand-in-glove the surviving sources between 1888 and 1891.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Jonathan H View Post
            Though working in the Victorian era with all its limitations, and with zero medical training, he grasped, like no other of his contemporaries in law enforcement, that the Ripper could be a man who stared back at him in his own mirror (an English, Anglican, gentleman, an Oxonian, a cricketer, a tutor of boys), a man above suspicion who could have pulled up a chair in one of his clubs:

            'Sexual murders are the most difficult of all for police to bring home to the perpetrators, for “motives” there are none; only a lust for blood and in many cases a hatred of woman as woman …”

            In Chapter X of his memoirs, ‘MOTIVELESS MURDERS’, Macnaghten returned to sexual mania, and provided a more detailed definition:

            'As I have said before, when writing of the Whitechapel murders, such madness takes Protean forms. Very few people, except barristers, doctors, and police officers, realize that such a thing as sexual mania exists, and, in a murder case similar to the two mentioned above, it is a most difficult task for prosecuting counsel to make a jury fully understand that it supplies and accounts for the complete absence of any other motive for the crime.'

            Macnaghten offers a chilling warning to his readers; that among the dull plebs you pass in the street every day are a few leading a double life as a drooling maniac:

            'Students of history, however, are aware that an excessive indulgence in vice leads, in certain cases, to a craving for blood. Nero was probably a sexual maniac. Many Eastern potentates in all ages, who loved to see slaves slaughtered or wild beasts tearing each other to pieces, have been similarly affected. The disease is not as rare as many people imagine. As you walk in the London streets you may, and do, not infrequently jostle against a potential murderer of the so-called Jack the Ripper type. The subject is not a pleasant one, but to those who study the depths of human nature it is intensely interesting.'

            The extraordinary and sickening notion of the respectable citizen above suspicion, behind which lurks a vicious criminal and/or murderer of strangers, was not a foreign one to Sir Melville Macnaghten, I think partly because of what he learned about Montie Druitt -- albeit posthumously.
            Hi Johnathan,

            I don't know if this totally supports Mac's statements about jostling into potential murderers, but it seems to fit the bill. In his book "Victorian Studies in Scarlet" (New York: W.W.Norton & Co., 1970) Richard Altick mentions (p. 283 - 284) some interesting similar statements that he came across in his researches.

            "That perceptive and readable informal historian of late Victorian society, E. E. Kellett, recorded: "A doctor once told me that he did not believer there was a single practitioner in London, of twenty years' standing, who had not serious reason to believe that wives in his practice had poisoned their husbands and husbands their wives, but in the vast majority of cases the doctors could not utter their suspicions." For every Adelaide Bartlett, Edward Pritchard, and Madeleine Smith who got caught, there may well have been hundreds of wives, husbands, and lovers who discreetly found their illegal way out of an inconvenient situation and, for all we know to the contrary, lived happily ever after."

            Also: "The matter, as H. B. Irving observed, could, "only be referred to clandestinely; they are gazed at with awe and curiosity, mute witnesses to their own achievement. Some years ago James Payn, the novelist, hazarded the reckoning that one person in every five hundred was an undiscovered murderer. This gives us all hope, almost a certainty, that we may reckon one such person at least among our acquaintances." In a footnote Irving added, "The author was one of three men discussing this subject in a London club. They were able to name six persons of their various acquaintances who were, or had been suspected of being successful murderers."

            Mac was a club member, and while certainly reticent on the whole, in a general conversation with trusted he might have made quiet comments about unsolved cases or curious deaths.

            I might add that in my own lifetime, though not in a social position like that of MacNaghten or Irving or Payn or Kellett I have crossed paths twice (that I know of for certain) with killers at my job at the Crime Victims Board (a claimant who sought an E.A. for the funeral of her sister subsequently murdered another sister and went to prison for it, and a guard in the office building the agency was in killed a girlfriend and went to prison as a result). I do suspect (given population sizes and society pressures) it happens much more frequently than we like to think.

            Jeff

            Comment


            • #7
              To Mayerling

              Yes, very pertinent to the memoir's theme on this point about murderers all around us.

              Of course Macnaghten meant those who murdered for pleasure, not because of wanting to rid omnself of an inconvenient spouse.

              Mac may have upped the horror of the Ripper's pedigree if this source is reliable:

              F. W. Memory in ‘The ‘Daily Mail’ of May 3rd 1930:

              “The first person to speak with authority with which I discussed the matter was Sir Melville Macnaghten … He was very confident that the Ripper was the scion of a noble family.”

              We know that Druitt was no more a member of the aristocracy then he was a surgeon.

              Comment


              • #8
                Serial killers rarely commit suicide. Most serial killers have anti-social personality disorders (psychopathy). As a consequence, "they are without conscience, have a limited capacity for emotion and empathy, and are often tremendously narcissistic." See: Pemment, 2012 https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...commit-suicide.

                However, there may be circumstances when a narcissistic psychopathic serial killer may be prone to suicide, I.e if they are incarcerated and therefore unable to "seek the kind of pleasure they crave." (Ibid). That probably explains why the few serial killers who have committed suicide have tended to do so whilst in custody, I.e Harold Shipman, Fred West.

                Moreover, depression is often a major reason for suicide. However, serial killers don't normally experience depression in any conventional sense because they are "emotionally stunted." (Ibid).

                I would note that the current suicide rate for serial killers is just 4.4%, with 52% of the suicides occurring after arrest. (Lester, 2010).
                Last edited by John G; 07-08-2015, 04:21 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think we are judging this by today's standards let's take Mr Sutcliffe for example hes been looked after and treated decently over the years his only cause for complaint is having to suffer the company of Jimmy saville.Now our killer in 1888 if he thought or knew the game was up and his family knew about his murderous activities he surely had the prospect of the gallows or life in an asylum the very mention of asylum used to strike fear into the heart of people so would suicide be a much easier option.
                  Three things in life that don't stay hidden for to long ones the sun ones the moon and the other is the truth

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by pinkmoon View Post
                    I think we are judging this by today's standards let's take Mr Sutcliffe for example hes been looked after and treated decently over the years his only cause for complaint is having to suffer the company of Jimmy saville.Now our killer in 1888 if he thought or knew the game was up and his family knew about his murderous activities he surely had the prospect of the gallows or life in an asylum the very mention of asylum used to strike fear into the heart of people so would suicide be a much easier option.
                    Hello Pink,

                    Yes I accept this is a possibility, particularly if he believed the police were closing in on him. However, if he was narcissistic might he have a low opinion of the police and their ability to catch him? Interestingly, the Lester study found that the suicide rate amongst British serial killers is 7.5%(post 1900), so significantly higher than the American rate. However, pre 1900 the suicide rate among American serial killers was just 2.94%. (Lester, 2010)

                    Nonetheless, Lester refers to the case of Herb Baumeister, an organized lust killer suspected of killing 16 gay men in Indiana and Ohio. After falling under suspicion, and following the break down of his marriage, he drove to Ontario and shot himself in the head, leaving a 2 page suicide note. However, there's a possibility that he was suffering from schizophrenia.
                    Last edited by John G; 07-08-2015, 04:41 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thanks Pinkmoon

                      I agree, as I have argued this theory for half a dozen years: from the scraps we have it seems a net was closing around Druitt due to his confessing and/or cognition of family members, though this ticking clock did not involve police.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Errata View Post
                        We actually have no idea how common it is. Remember that we don't even know what percent of operating serial killers we even catch, much less study. Never mind those who don't quite make it to three murders for whatever reason.

                        Serial killers tend not to kill themselves. Sadists, narcissists, antisocial personality disorder will never kill themselves. And those problems show up a lot in serial killers. But Borderline does too, and suicide is very common there. So there is nothing inherent in a serial killer that lends itself to self preservation more than anyone else.

                        He could have killed himself over money woes. A serial killer is not defined only by being a serial killer. He can be a dad, a businessman, an artist, etc. whatever else he does in his free time. Raider spent a lot more time as a father and husband than he did as a serial killer. And those roles meant something to him. Dahmer's role as a grandson meant a great deal to him. Serial killers usually have other lives and other responsibilities, and those make him vulnerable to the same stressors as the rest of us. They very well might kill themselves given the right stressor.
                        I agree that it is possible that the killer committed suicide for some other reason than guilt/horror/shame over the murders.

                        Suicide is rarely an impulsive act, and an individual may have spent weeks or months contemplating the possibility of ending it all.

                        An interesting point is made on a website by a doctor which deals with suicide:

                        "People who’ve survived suicide attempts have reported wanting not so much to die as to stop living, a strange dichotomy but a valid one nevertheless.

                        "http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2010/06/6-reasons-people-commit-suicide.html


                        When discussing suicide, I have heard many people say that they did not want to die, but if they had the option of going to sleep that night and not waking up, they would grab it gladly.

                        Is it possible that the killer (possibly Druitt) simply "wanted not so much to die as to stop living"?

                        Is it also possible that the murders were not the main reason for the suicide?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by barnflatwyngarde View Post
                          I agree that it is possible that the killer committed suicide for some other reason than guilt/horror/shame over the murders.

                          Suicide is rarely an impulsive act, and an individual may have spent weeks or months contemplating the possibility of ending it all.

                          An interesting point is made on a website by a doctor which deals with suicide:

                          "People who’ve survived suicide attempts have reported wanting not so much to die as to stop living, a strange dichotomy but a valid one nevertheless.

                          "http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2010/06/6-reasons-people-commit-suicide.html


                          When discussing suicide, I have heard many people say that they did not want to die, but if they had the option of going to sleep that night and not waking up, they would grab it gladly.

                          Is it possible that the killer (possibly Druitt) simply "wanted not so much to die as to stop living"?

                          Is it also possible that the murders were not the main reason for the suicide?
                          It is possible that an alternative motivation could have led to suicide. If the killer finds his physical being has been weakened and is collapsing (and can't be stopped from further collapse) he might end up realizing that death is preferable to being helpless.

                          Jeff

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            [QUOTE=Jonathan H;345889]Thanks Pinkmoon

                            I agree, as I have argued this theory for half a dozen years: from the scraps we have it seems a net was closing around Druitt due to his confessing and/or cognition of family members, though this ticking clock did not involve police.[/QUO
                            Poor druitts been forgotten about over the years a lot of people discarded the little love because he was from a higher class of society. I think when the f.b.I. offender profiling was applied to this case people started to flock to kosminski due mainly to him been from the lower class .Two things that always stick in my mind is why his brother had no problem letting the world know that mother was in the Looney bin which would have carried a massive stigma in those days and the fact he lied when he said he was the only living relative it's just a shame no one has found anything to link druitt to these crimes.
                            Three things in life that don't stay hidden for to long ones the sun ones the moon and the other is the truth

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes, fair enough.

                              The FBI profiler (whose name escapes me, but he wrote a book called something like, "The Cases that Haunt Us") finally landed upon David Cohen as the better bet to the fiend.

                              I think this was because Cohen, unlike Aaron Kosminski, was demonstrably violent and also demonstrably dead before Swanson and Anderson allegedly said the Ripper was six foot under (1895, and some indeterminate time according to Anderson's son, respectively, but presumably soon after incarceration as with the Marginalia).

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X