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:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: It was Lechmere. - by Rainbow 16 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: It was Lechmere. - by Rainbow 38 minutes ago.
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: It was Lechmere. - by Rainbow 1 hour and 28 minutes ago.
Hutchinson, George: Hutchinsons statement.... - by andy1867 3 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Local killer for local people................ - by Merry_Olde_Mary 3 hours ago.
General Suspect Discussion: Local killer for local people................ - by SirJohnFalstaff 4 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: Lechmere The Psychopath - (196 posts)
Swanson, Chief Inspector Donald: Seaside Home - (9 posts)
Motive, Method and Madness: Apron placement as intimidation? - (6 posts)
Lechmere/Cross, Charles: It was Lechmere. - (6 posts)
Hutchinson, George: Hutchinsons statement.... - (4 posts)
General Suspect Discussion: Local killer for local people................ - (3 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 > Scene of the Crimes

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-05-2016, 08:25 PM
Ginger Ginger is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 446
Default

I'd never really given the question much thought before. My unexamined assumption was that Jack would let his victims pick the spot, since they almost certainly knew better than he where they'd be uninterrupted.
__________________
- Ginger
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-05-2016, 11:41 PM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,506
Default

Buck´s Row was a deserted street at the murder time, more or less, as witnessed about by many of the people involved in the drama.
Mitre Square was off the beaten track in many respects, a dark, quiet little square nobody had any reason to visit in the middle of the night.
The backyard of 29 Hanbury Street was basically empty during the night.
Berner Street was not exactly Champs Elysées.
These were not places where somebody would go, looking for prostitutes.

There were areas in the East End where the prositutes flocked and where a punter would be able to pick and choose. In these areas, there was no possibility to do the business, so the prostitutes would have to be knowledgeable about where to find spots where the transactions could be finished. Generally speaking, the closer to the where the deal was agreed upon these spots were, the better - no prostitute would want to spend significant amounts of time walking the streets with their punters.
Returning to Bucks Row, it is reasonable to suggest that the deal was struck in Whitechapel Road, where there was a lot of prostitution traffic. We also know that Nichols was walking Whitechapel Road in an easternly direction as Emily Holland met her.
From Whitechapel Road up to the murder spot in Bucks Row, there were the fewest of minutes to walk, but these few minutes would take the couple from a fairly crowded street into full seclusion.
So if the killer was the one who suggested the spot, we can see how it follows the pattern a prostitute would work to herself.
And it applies that f the prostitute was not familiar with the spot suggested, I think she would be less likely to accept it, no questions asked, since she ran the risk of getting caught if she was not cautious.
On balance, the likelier suggestion must be that the prostitute chose the spot. But as Gut wisely points out, the ultimate decision whether it was to be turned into a murder spot or not, was taken by the killer.

Last edited by Fisherman : 08-06-2016 at 12:07 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-06-2016, 02:46 AM
Joshua Rogan Joshua Rogan is online now
Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 1,063
Default

To my mind - not that I've much experience of either - locations suitable for alfresco sex and for murder would seem to have the same requirements. The only difference, perhaps, being whether one would require more or less time than the other.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-06-2016, 03:10 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua Rogan View Post
To my mind - not that I've much experience of either - locations suitable for alfresco sex and for murder would seem to have the same requirements. The only difference, perhaps, being whether one would require more or less time than the other.
Exactly - and since the prostitutes were on offer on a spot where alfresco sex was not an opportunity, it stands to reason that the punters were engaged in business and whisked away into the back streets and alleys where the prostitutes had intimate knowledge of places suited for completing the deals.

Last edited by Fisherman : 08-06-2016 at 03:22 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-06-2016, 07:44 AM
Pierre Pierre is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 3,895
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherman View Post
Buck´s Row was a deserted street at the murder time, more or less, as witnessed about by many of the people involved in the drama.
Mitre Square was off the beaten track in many respects, a dark, quiet little square nobody had any reason to visit in the middle of the night.
The backyard of 29 Hanbury Street was basically empty during the night.
Berner Street was not exactly Champs Elysées.
These were not places where somebody would go, looking for prostitutes.

There were areas in the East End where the prositutes flocked and where a punter would be able to pick and choose. In these areas, there was no possibility to do the business, so the prostitutes would have to be knowledgeable about where to find spots where the transactions could be finished. Generally speaking, the closer to the where the deal was agreed upon these spots were, the better - no prostitute would want to spend significant amounts of time walking the streets with their punters.
Returning to Bucks Row, it is reasonable to suggest that the deal was struck in Whitechapel Road, where there was a lot of prostitution traffic. We also know that Nichols was walking Whitechapel Road in an easternly direction as Emily Holland met her.
From Whitechapel Road up to the murder spot in Bucks Row, there were the fewest of minutes to walk, but these few minutes would take the couple from a fairly crowded street into full seclusion.
So if the killer was the one who suggested the spot, we can see how it follows the pattern a prostitute would work to herself.
And it applies that f the prostitute was not familiar with the spot suggested, I think she would be less likely to accept it, no questions asked, since she ran the risk of getting caught if she was not cautious.
On balance, the likelier suggestion must be that the prostitute chose the spot. But as Gut wisely points out, the ultimate decision whether it was to be turned into a murder spot or not, was taken by the killer.
Hi Fisherman,

Transactions made in X street and prostitutes leading clients to Y place are not established historical facts for the serial killer.

They are rather well established facts for a couple of the victims. So what does this imply?

It implies that the killer might have been anywhere, doesn´t it?

Regards, Pierre
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-06-2016, 07:53 AM
DJA DJA is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Some Australian Mountain Range.
Posts: 1,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi Fisherman,

Transactions made in X street and prostitutes leading clients to Y place are not established historical facts for the serial killer.

They are rather well established facts for a couple of the victims. So what does this imply?

It implies that the killer might have been anywhere, doesn´t it?

Regards, Pierre
What established facts for which victims?

You simply make this BS up as you go.
__________________
My name is Dave not Deb
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-06-2016, 08:13 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre View Post
Hi Fisherman,

Transactions made in X street and prostitutes leading clients to Y place are not established historical facts for the serial killer.

They are rather well established facts for a couple of the victims. So what does this imply?

It implies that the killer might have been anywhere, doesn´t it?

Regards, Pierre
What are you saying here, Pierre? That there is no research establishing that serial killers will follow prostitutes the their chosen venues?

If so, you may have noted that I did not say that there was any such research - I said that the murder venues were generally not spots where prostitutes would hang out to sell themselves, but instead spots where the clients would be taken after the affair had been struck.

I have no idea what is it you regard as "rather well established facts for a couple of the victims", and how that would imply that the killer may "have been anywhere", so maybe you would care to explain that to me.

There is of course the possibility that the killer may have sought out empty streets and that he may have lain in wait there for any prostitute to show up. The problem is that if and when that happened, the prostitute would in all probability arrive with a punter.

It therefore remains that the more useful suggestion is that the killer followed the victim to a spot chosen by the latter.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-06-2016, 08:14 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DJA View Post
What established facts for which victims?

You simply make this BS up as you go.
Should have noted this post before I answered Pierre - it seems I am not the only one to be a bit baffled by how his post was worded...
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-06-2016, 08:14 AM
c.d. c.d. is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,292
Default

If prostitutes regularly worked a certain area it would be reasonable to assume that they used certain locations in that area to conduct their business. It would probably not have been to difficult for Jack to ascertain where those locations were and to determine whether they were suitable for his purposes. Thus he could be reasonably assured that if the woman picked the location it would be to his liking. On the other hand, he might have found it exciting to be randomly led somewhere where he would have to take his chances.

c.d.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-06-2016, 09:09 AM
Fisherman Fisherman is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,506
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by c.d. View Post
If prostitutes regularly worked a certain area it would be reasonable to assume that they used certain locations in that area to conduct their business. It would probably not have been to difficult for Jack to ascertain where those locations were and to determine whether they were suitable for his purposes. Thus he could be reasonably assured that if the woman picked the location it would be to his liking. On the other hand, he might have found it exciting to be randomly led somewhere where he would have to take his chances.

c.d.
That works very well with my own thinking. In my universe (parallel to that of a number of others), Charles Lechmere was the killer. And he would have traversed the streets of Whitechapel en route to work, during work and on his way home. Arguably, he will have stumbled on a good many sex encounters for money, and he will have been able to establish where these transactions took place.
The same, I imagine, will have been true for a number of people traversing Whitechapel from one side to the other for causes of walking to work.
As you know, I also favour a picture of the killer as a psychopath, and psychopaths very much enjoy playing games involving risks, so I find myself agreeing with you about the suggestion of him taking his chances on a more haphazard ground too.
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 01:42 AM.


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