Hi Nats,
I respect your opinions, but speaking purely personally I'm not sure that the WM was the sort of killer who actually got a sexual thrill out of what he did.
But again, who knows?
Cheers,
Graham
So who was Jack the Ripper.
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Observer View Post,Hi Graham
Someone who possibly expelled all his demons with the destruction of Kelly, and also realising (possibly being interviewed for the crimes) that he could not continue and remain undetected he decided to hang up his knife. Something very similar happened regarding Ridgeway, the Green River killer. The police were homing in on the killer, Ridgeway was interviewed and cleared. Ridgeway had also remarried, making it all the more harder to murder, fact is he gave up his killing for 20 years, unlike Jack he killed again. It would be interesting to search marriages in that area, 25 to 30 year olds.
all the best
Observer
Cheers,
Graham
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by rain View PostTwo doctors, Bond and Monro believed that Alice Mckenzie who was killed 7-16-1889 was killed by jtr.
Leave a comment:
-
Two doctors, Bond and Monro believed that Alice Mckenzie who was killed 7-16-1889 was killed by jtr.
Leave a comment:
-
The reason I have doubts about him being a "local" is that not only the women most obviously in danger but everyone in the East End was on the look out for him.So if he was local in the sense of living there,various "neighbours" would have reported it---in fact we know they did report on their neighbours. Anyone checking in new lodgings would have raised alarm too and if the newcomer began acting at all suspiciously ,someone somewhere would have reported it.
What is particularly surprising is that the prostitutes didnt appear to "know" him, and this was true as much at the time as afterwards when the murders had stopped.
So my view is that while he certainly knew the East End very well, that knowledge was probably from working there or arriving there regularly to sneak round the red light areas and possibly play a peeping Tom when he saw clients being led up dark alleys.I often wonder if this is what happened regarding Kate.Highly aroused still and hotfoot from Berner Street ,he saw Kate leading her mister into Mitre Square and went straight to the secret spot he had for himself to wait and watch there and when her" liaison" was over and the man had moved off he pounced before Katehad time to rearrange her five skirts and three pockets!
He may also have been a regular client,though somehow I doubt this because I for one see Jack as someone who was averse to sex in any normal sense,though he may have had a very prurient turn of mind and enjoyed the outlandish fantasies he had about "laying out women and cutting them up and seeing them "re-arranged ---inside out"!
Leave a comment:
-
,Hi Graham
Originally posted by Graham View Post
- not a 'wife beater' or anyone with 'everyday' violent tendencies but a person who, for reasons we probably still don't fully understand, needed a 'fix' of ultra-violence every so often. This defect was not openly visible to those who knew him.
Someone who perhaps tried to conquer these tendencies: possibly a reason for the long time-lag between Eddowes and Kelly (assuming that the latter was a C5 victim). Perhaps he held off for as long as he was able prior to Kelly.
all the best
ObserverLast edited by Observer; 07-11-2008, 09:51 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Red Zeppelin View PostHi Graham,
Wouldn't you say that Joseph Barnett fits your above profile better than any of the other named suspects? He practically ticks all of your boxes.
Well, certainly he fits the top four on the list but then so do literally thousands of other men. If Barnett's objective was to kill Mary, why didn't he kill her first? Why kill the others? And why didn't he kill her the night previous to her murder or earlier on the day of her murder? No, I don't favour Barnett at all.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by celee View Post
I think that Jack the Ripper killed Kelly indoors because Kelly took him there. I do not believe that Jack was looking to find a woman he could kill indoors that night.
Your friend, Brad
Just my opinion of course, there's also room for the intruder theory as well.
all the best
Observer
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by rain View PostI don't think Barnett killed Mary Kelly. Someone around her apartment would have recognized him and he knew it.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Graham View PostFor what it's worth, my take on the Ripper is:
- someone local to, or with easy access to, the area.
- someone, given his ability to 'disappear', knew the area like the proverbial back of his hand.
- someone who aroused no suspicion either from the public or the police.
- someone who was probably known to at least some of his victims.
- someone without any previous convictions for violent crime.
- not a 'wife beater' or anyone with 'everyday' violent tendencies but a person who, for reasons we probably still don't fully understand, needed a 'fix' of ultra-violence every so often. This defect was not openly visible to those who knew him.
- someone who perhaps tried to conquer these tendencies: possibly a reason for the long time-lag between Eddowes and Kelly (assuming that the latter was a C5 victim). Perhaps he held off for as long as he was able prior to Kelly.
- physically powerful: even a sick and ill-nourished woman surely has the ability to offer at least some resistance.
- I don't necessarily hold with the theory that all serial killers simply carry on
until they're caught or commit suicide. I think Jack was probably in sufficient touch with reality to 'quit while he was ahead' before he was caught, as I think he inevitably would have been had he continued his killing. I also rather suspect that, assuming Kelly was a Ripper victim, she represented the absolute ultimate in his deranged ambition - what else was there left for him to do to a victim? Eat her, maybe??
Where's all this lead to? I haven't a clue! They're purely my thoughts on the type of person Jack might have been, and if they point towards any known, named suspect then that's just coincidence.
Sorry for the long post.
Cheers,
Graham
Wouldn't you say that Joseph Barnett fits your above profile better than any of the other named suspects? He practically ticks all of your boxes.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by richardnunweek View PostSo who was 'Jack'?
Newbie here but have been following the forum for a while. My best guess is along the same lines as yours. I wouldn't 100% bet on the ripper being somebody we actually know but of those so far named I go along with Joe Barnett more than any other known suspect. In fact, I don't even seriously consider any of the others that have so far been fingered, particularly the likes of Druitt, Tumblety, and Kosminski.
Either Joe Barnett...or nobody we are aware of.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mike Covell View PostMany years ago a good friend of the family was working in a late night cafe, when a young man knocked on the window. The cafe was closed and all the fryers and cookers had been turned off, but she felt sorry for the bearded truck driver.
She let him in a made him a hot pot of tea, and fired up a stove to make him some soup. She piled the bread up and re-filled his pot.
After a while he politley asked if she would join him, as he had been on the road all day and was hungry for conversation. He asked about her family, complimented her, on her hair, and said her food was "Delicious".
He produced some money and feeling sorry for him, she said it was on the house, and was pleased he liked it.
He gave her a hug, and left, getting into his delivery truck and driving off into the night.
Although she never saw him again in person, she did see on the news that he had been arrested.
She described the Yorkshire Ripper as being one of the nicest men she had met, mild mannered, charming, and great to talk too!
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: