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:
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - by caz 16 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: A Very Inky Question - by Sam Flynn 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: A Very Inky Question - by caz 2 hours ago.
A6 Murders: Bob Woffinden has died - by OneRound 2 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Mike Barrett Interview - September 1995 - by Pcdunn 5 hours ago.
Scene of the Crimes: Was Whitechapel really any worse than other areas of London? - by DrummondStreet 10 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Maybrick, James: One Incontrovertible, Unequivocal, Undeniable Fact Which Refutes the Diary - (16 posts)
Maybrick, James: Too Sensible & Competent - (11 posts)
Maybrick, James: Mike Barrett Interview - September 1995 - (5 posts)
Maybrick, James: A Very Inky Question - (4 posts)
Maybrick, James: Anne Graham Interview - October 1995 - (3 posts)
A6 Murders: A6 Rebooted - (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 > Suspects > Barnett, Joseph

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 01-15-2014, 09:04 AM
richardnunweek richardnunweek is offline
Superintendent
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,221
Default

Hi,
The circumstances do.
If we accept Hutchinson's account,then we have the rather easy pick up by Mr A.The laughter, the walking back pass Hutch, with arm around the shoulder, the kiss in Dorset street, and all that with a man dressed like he was out of the ''Penny dreadful'' and Mary showing no apparent alarm..
All rather strange, that she should trust a complete stranger , when the day before she said to Mrs McCarthy'' He is a concern isn't he'' when referring to the killer..
If she did know this man, it does not have to be that this man killed her, if he had known her, and had left before dawn, why would he come forward ?
Regards Richard,
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-15-2014, 09:44 AM
robhouse robhouse is offline
Inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickens View Post
The Kelly murder appears to have many elementally psychopathic hallmarks Ė the murderer seems to have enjoyed his time both literally and figuratively; yet the process does not appear punitive in that the victim's death, (and therefore her suffering), was rapid and effective - a preliminary step and not, apparently, one to be necessarily savoured. Whoever spent that night at 13 Millers Court was careful, considered and deliberate to the extent of being almost playful. A generous fire was tended to secure suitable light; organs were not strewn around in abandon, they were placed; Kelly was less ripped than degloved, and then in an almost inquisitive manner.
This is very much in line with my own thinking on the Ripper, which is in part based on the type of killer called a lust murderer, or post-mortem mutilator... a very rare type of serial killer in fact. It is important to note that this type is not normally sadistic, ie. he does not get pleasure from inflicting pain and suffering on his victims. Instead, he is primarily interested in exploring the body after death... seeing what is under the skin. This is a primitive type of killer, and quite probably psychotic.

For reference, see "The Lust Murderer" published by the FBI BSU at Quantico, April 1980.

"The lust murderer, usually after killing his victims, tortures, cuts, maims or slashes the victim in the regions on or about the genitalia, rectum, breasts in the female, and about the throat and buttocks, as usually these parts contain strong sexual significance to him and serve as sexual stimulus."

"The asocial [lust murderer] approaches his victim in much the way as an inquisitive child with a new toy. He involves himself in an exploratory examination of the sexually significant parts of the body in an attempt to determine how they function and appear beneath the surface."


RH
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-15-2014, 02:47 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,294
Default

G'Day RH

If we accept the FBI BSU analysis and I'm certainly inclined to as they have "the runs on the board" that really begs the question, why did he stop? Because Quantico are clear that Lust Killers escalate not stop, t is, they opine, other serial killer types that have the capacity to stop.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-15-2014, 05:12 PM
Lechmere Lechmere is offline
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,450
Default

Checking Dickensí post, the following points occur to me.
He says that the culprit didnít spend time savouring the act of murder and did not prolong it. This surely was an essential feature of the act. He was compelled to kill quickly to ensure the alarm was not raised. That was what he knew. Theoretically he may have been able to disable the victim in such a manner that she was not killed quickly but could not cry for help. But that was not within his previous experience.

I disagree with Robís suggestion that the Ripper was a lust killer, primarily interested in exploring the body after death and seeing what was under the skin. In all the cases but Kelly he must have been acting with whirlwind speed and in very poor lighting conditions. He can barely have seen what was going on.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-15-2014, 05:34 PM
J6123 J6123 is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 90
Default

having read Bruce Paley's book, I must say I really enjoyed it. surely one of the best suspect books, if not the best? that said, I got the impression the author was willing to jump to some conclusions in order to beef up the case against his suspect, particularly regarding the boning of fish at work, his motives (disapproving of prostitutes and being intimately involved with the final canonical victim), and the key fiasco. still, Joe Barnett is one of the more tangible suspects, along with Hutchinson and David Cohen, but only because the rest have no more right to be there than any other man who was alive in 1888.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-15-2014, 05:44 PM
GUT GUT is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: I come from a land Down Under
Posts: 7,294
Default

G'Day J6123

Quote:
I got the impression the author was willing to jump to some conclusions in order to beef up the case against his suspect
I think you'll find that most Ripperologists do just that.
__________________
G U T

There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-16-2014, 09:59 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 6,125
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J6123 View Post
...I got the impression the author was willing to jump to some conclusions in order to beef up the case against his suspect, particularly regarding the boning of fish at work...
I forget, what was the evidence that Joe graduated from fish porter to fish gutter?

Not that it makes much difference if MJK's killer also murdered Eddowes and Chapman. We had a surgeon posting here a few months back, who advised that these murders featured techniques used on human corpses that were probably picked up from the dissecting room by an amateur observer or medical student.

While Joe was in work I suppose it's possible that he paid to be one such amateur observer, but fish had nothing to do with it. And again, why would he have planned to kill MJK in the room they had shared until very recently, and put himself straight in the frame, when he could have done an outdoor job on her to make it appear like the work of a stranger? Not a spur of the moment decision, surely, since a very sharp knife was called for.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov



Last edited by caz : 01-16-2014 at 10:04 AM.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-18-2014, 03:36 PM
pinkmoon pinkmoon is offline
Chief Inspector
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: north west of england
Posts: 1,813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by caz View Post
I forget, what was the evidence that Joe graduated from fish porter to fish gutter?

Not that it makes much difference if MJK's killer also murdered Eddowes and Chapman. We had a surgeon posting here a few months back, who advised that these murders featured techniques used on human corpses that were probably picked up from the dissecting room by an amateur observer or medical student.

While Joe was in work I suppose it's possible that he paid to be one such amateur observer, but fish had nothing to do with it. And again, why would he have planned to kill MJK in the room they had shared until very recently, and put himself straight in the frame, when he could have done an outdoor job on her to make it appear like the work of a stranger? Not a spur of the moment decision, surely, since a very sharp knife was called for.

Love,

Caz
X
Hi caz my dear,what people seem to forget is that Barnet was interviewed by the police quite thoroughly so if he was the killer of mjk he must have had a very good story and a cracking false alibi.
__________________
Three things in life that don't stay hidden for to long ones the sun ones the moon and the other is the truth
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-20-2014, 05:23 PM
J6123 J6123 is offline
Constable
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 90
Default

Hello Caz,

Boning of fish - I don't think there is any evidence that his work involved gutting fish. at least none that I have come across. the author seems to have simply assumed that his work involved boning fish, because that then gives Barnett the rough anatomical knowledge and knife skills that the killer is believed to have had. the same goes for his apparent dismissal from his job for 'theft'. there's no evidence I'm aware of that he was dismissed for theft. again, the author suggests theft as the reason for his dismissal to make him seem more like a potential serial killer.

Medical Knowledge - that is interesting. notice how close the Polly Nichol's murder was to the London Royal Hospital. most likely just a coincidence, but still worth noting.

Barnett's candidacy - I agree with you. it doesn't add up does it. nothing tells me that Barnett was angry, hostile or demented enough to carry out these mutilations. obviously some serial killers appear fairly normal on the surface, but look at what this offender did to Mary Kelly. it seems unlikely the perpetrator walked out of Miller's Court after this crime and simply slipped back into an ordinary life, never to kill again. Barnett, on the other hand, appeared to be genuinely distraught and affected by events, and appears to have settled back into a quite normal life afterwards. in fact, didn't he marry again?
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-23-2014, 07:37 AM
Premium Member
caz caz is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 6,125
Default

Hi J6123,

I suppose I was thinking that Mary Kelly was gutted rather than boned.

Presumably whoever boned fish at Billingsgate would have done the gutting (aka cleaning) too, although I can't think experience in either process would have been particularly useful when it came to extracting a human uterus, kidney or heart.

Maybe Kelly was a mermaid - vital statistics 38-22-one and thruppence a pound.

And yes, I thought there was evidence that our Joe settled down with another woman - Louise or Louisa? - for the long haul, whether they married or just lived together.

Love,

Caz
X
__________________
"Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


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 03:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.