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: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by rjpalmer 33 minutes ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by Kaz 4 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by c.d. 6 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by Paddy 8 hours ago.
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - by John Wheat 9 hours ago.
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - by John Wheat 9 hours ago.

Most Popular Threads:
Hutchinson, George: Possible reason for Hutch coming forward - (10 posts)
Maybrick, James: Acquiring A Victorian Diary - (3 posts)
Shades of Whitechapel: Centenaries - whole and half - (2 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 > Klosowski, Severin (George Chapman)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-28-2013, 03:02 AM
Nick Spring Nick Spring is offline
Detective
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Salisbury
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Not enough to make him a suspect simply another person of interest based on what is currently known.

Its time people woke up and realized exactly what is needed for someone to be classed as a suspect.
Hi Trevor,

Yes I agree, there is a great difference in someone who is of interest and someone who could be classified as a suspect.

The line gets blurred here and i'm not sure what the criteria is for a suspect based on what we know, not wishing to go off thread here either.

Best

Nick
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-28-2013, 04:18 AM
HelenaWojtczak HelenaWojtczak is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hastings
Posts: 875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
But in 1888 he had not killed

His later murders were as a passive poisoner.

Can someone change from being a serial mutilator to being a passive poisoner I think not.
What on earth is a "passive poisoner"?

The man tortured three innocent women by slipping a deadly substance repeatedly into their food and drink, deliberately and without the slightest conscience or guilt or shame, inflicted horrendous, painful and agonising illness upon them, over a period of weeks. He was a nasty sadist who not only enjoyed seeing them suffer, but gained pleasure and satisfaction from driving their relations and their doctors to their wits' end trying to work out why they were ill.

"Passive"? I think not!


Helena
__________________
Helena Wojtczak BSc (Hons) FRHistS.

Author of 'Jack the Ripper at Last? George Chapman, the Southwark Poisoner'. Click this link : - http://www.hastingspress.co.uk/chapman.html
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-28-2013, 05:45 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,779
Default

Lesson to be learnt !!!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenaWojtczak View Post
What on earth is a "passive poisoner"?

The man tortured three innocent women by slipping a deadly substance repeatedly into their food and drink, deliberately and without the slightest conscience or guilt or shame, inflicted horrendous, painful and agonising illness upon them, over a period of weeks. He was a nasty sadist who not only enjoyed seeing them suffer, but gained pleasure and satisfaction from driving their relations and their doctors to their wits' end trying to work out why they were ill.

"Passive"? I think not!

A person who kills by poisoning his victims in what can be described as domestics murders is not necessarily a sadist. He wants to kill for a specific purpose i.e to get rid of them, not to inflict pain and suffering on them although that may be the end result. He may not even know when administering the poison what the effects will be.

All to do with a state of mind.



Helena
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-28-2013, 05:45 AM
Chris Chris is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
an uncorroborated opinion of an ageing police officer in later years
There's a lot of it about.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-28-2013, 05:58 AM
HelenaWojtczak HelenaWojtczak is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hastings
Posts: 875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Lesson to be learnt !!!!!!!!
Trevor has quoted me as writing the following, which are in fact his own words, not mine.

A person who kills by poisoning his victims in what can be described as domestics murders is not necessarily a sadist. He wants to kill for a specific purpose i.e to get rid of them, not to inflict pain and suffering on them although that may be the end result. He may not even know when administering the poison what the effects will be. All to do with a state of mind.

I'd like to take issue with two issues Trevor raises here:

1. "He may not even know when administering the poison what the effects will be."

This man repeatedly dosed a woman time and time again, and saw the effects first hand, up close and over a period of time. Having seen that he made that woman seriously, desperately ill for many weeks, and watching her die from his actions, he then did the same with two more women.

How, then, can you say "He may not even know when administering the poison what the effects will be."?

2. There is no evidence that Chapman poisoned his victims in order to "get rid of them", as Trevor suggests. He wasn't married to any of them, so he could have simply left them, or chucked them out.

Helena
__________________
Helena Wojtczak BSc (Hons) FRHistS.

Author of 'Jack the Ripper at Last? George Chapman, the Southwark Poisoner'. Click this link : - http://www.hastingspress.co.uk/chapman.html
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-28-2013, 06:23 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenaWojtczak View Post
Trevor has quoted me as writing the following, which are in fact his own words, not mine.

A person who kills by poisoning his victims in what can be described as domestics murders is not necessarily a sadist. He wants to kill for a specific purpose i.e to get rid of them, not to inflict pain and suffering on them although that may be the end result. He may not even know when administering the poison what the effects will be. All to do with a state of mind.

I'd like to take issue with two issues Trevor raises here:

1. "He may not even know when administering the poison what the effects will be."

This man repeatedly dosed a woman time and time again, and saw the effects first hand, up close and over a period of time. Having seen that he made that woman seriously, desperately ill for many weeks, and watching her die from his actions, he then did the same with two more women.

How, then, can you say "He may not even know when administering the poison what the effects will be."?

2. There is no evidence that Chapman poisoned his victims in order to "get rid of them", as Trevor suggests. He wasn't married to any of them, so he could have simply left them, or chucked them out.

Helena
Its called removing incriminating evidence so that it doesn't to come back to haunt you !!!!!!!!

If you decide to poison someone and administer that poison with a view t killing them how are you to know how long it will take to take effect and what doses are needed to finalize the task.

Clearly if you administer a substance and it does not have the desired effect as quick as you want you top it up until it does. Isnt that what he did?

He had no choice other than to watch the pain and suffering. If he wanted to kill as you suggest and he was the ripper why didn't he simply cut the throats and be done with it quickly.
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-28-2013, 06:26 AM
HelenaWojtczak HelenaWojtczak is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hastings
Posts: 875
Default

Trevor, it reads as though you think he killed all three women accidentally. Perhaps you could clarify if this is what you are suggesting. I would not want to misunderstand you.

Helena
__________________
Helena Wojtczak BSc (Hons) FRHistS.

Author of 'Jack the Ripper at Last? George Chapman, the Southwark Poisoner'. Click this link : - http://www.hastingspress.co.uk/chapman.html
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-28-2013, 08:26 AM
Trevor Marriott Trevor Marriott is offline
Commisioner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,779
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenaWojtczak View Post
Trevor, it reads as though you think he killed all three women accidentally. Perhaps you could clarify if this is what you are suggesting. I would not want to misunderstand you.

Helena
Helena
You have already misunderstood me .

None of my posts suggest that !
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-28-2013, 08:36 AM
HelenaWojtczak HelenaWojtczak is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hastings
Posts: 875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trevor Marriott View Post
Helena
You have already misunderstood me .

None of my posts suggest that !

You wrote: "If he wanted to kill as you suggest..."

So that means that YOU think that I am suggesting he "meant to kill" them. And this comment seems to imply that you do not hold the same view as me, therefore, you must think that he did not mean to kill them.

Why don't you just explain what you mean instead of just telling me I have misunderstood? In fact, as you are an experienced writer I would have thought you could express yourself in a way that could not be misinterpreted.

Helena
__________________
Helena Wojtczak BSc (Hons) FRHistS.

Author of 'Jack the Ripper at Last? George Chapman, the Southwark Poisoner'. Click this link : - http://www.hastingspress.co.uk/chapman.html
Quick reply to this message Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-28-2013, 08:42 AM
Michael W Richards Michael W Richards is online now
Assistant Commissioner
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 3,148
Default

One wonders what motive he may have had for killing the women in 1888, since it seems his motives for poisoning were in part at least for personal gain.

Also...the claim is that the women were not known to the killer in 1888...again, a glitch in the Killer Profile category for Chapman.

Killers who kill strangers do so for all sorts of reasons, when they continue to kill, they do so for the same reasons they killed in the first place. Unless the murder is to deal with a witness. But when people kill people in their own lives, not only is the risk of discovery far greater, but also the Motive for the killing is often somewhat easier to determine.

The Ripper murders are alleged to be committed by someone who had a mental illness of some variety, and that illness allowed or enabled him to do things that were very illegal, and socially and morally repugnant. That theory presupposes that all the Canonical Victims died because of the killers illness.

The fact is that the jury is still out on that.

Cheers
__________________
Michael Richards
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 01:10 PM.


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