Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

More than just murder?

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by mike74 View Post
    Iam still thinking that there was definately more to these murders than just a random killing spree!. If it was just a man with a hatred for prostitutes or even just women in general why all the mutilations?. Entralils over the shoulder?, two upside down v shapes on catherine eddowes cheeks?, items laid out neatly at annie chapmans feet?, come on this to me was not just a crazy lunatic walking the streets there had to more to it.
    You echo my sentiments exactly. Anytime a killer takes the time to attack and mutilate a human being, there is something personal involved.

    There are too many people that dismiss these killings as the work of a 'madman'. Madmen get caught. Jack the Ripper didn't. There was definitely more to this than is being attributed by a vocal lot that want to live in the darkness surrounding these murders.
    ...I'm back.

    Comment


    • #32
      There was nothing ritualistic about it, removing the uteris is significant. I still subscribe to the view the aside from being a nutter he either was (A) got a disease from a prostitute when he was younger and wanted them to pay in a symbolic way or he was born unto a Prostitute and had such a crappy life also wanted to make them pay in symbolic sense. But I think that the escalating rage has a sexual release element to it - he wasnt going to stop

      Comment


      • #33
        Has the FBI or Scotland Yard ever done a profile on the killer based on all the evidence or have I been watching too much TV?

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by perrymason View Post
          This was a man with sexual psychosis, violent erotic fantasies, ....it involves female anatomy, between the chest and knees.
          Okay, let's use logic here.

          All men are guilty of sexual psychosis and have violent erotic fantasties involving female anatomy, specifically between (and including) the chest and knees.... Masons are men... therefore Masons have erotic fanta...... My God! They did it!

          Mike
          huh?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by The Good Michael View Post
            Okay, let's use logic here.

            All men are guilty of sexual psychosis and have violent erotic fantasties involving female anatomy, specifically between (and including) the chest and knees.... Masons are men... therefore Masons have erotic fanta...... My God! They did it!

            Mike
            This is completely unacceptable. I categorically deny that it was anyone in my family, including my brother Free and his wife and kids. Cant we just forget the Masons....when we all know it was the guy that wrote those kids stories....that Carroll guy, thats who you should be after. The Carrolls. l'll find their address and email for all those that want to persecute them.

            Best regards,
            Perry....not one of the Rippers family....Mason.

            Comment


            • #36
              Michael,

              I think Carroll was a Mason.

              Mike
              huh?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by The Good Michael View Post
                Michael,

                I think Carroll was a Mason.

                Mike
                Oh, ....you meant those Masons, ......then nevermind.

                Cheers Mikey

                Comment


                • #38
                  Just found this thread that I think may be useful to ask a question. It is often thrown forward on the boards that Jack was a very sadistic killer, and that he was filled with hate. But is this really true?
                  I believe that there is a very good chance that Jack would have settled happily for finding the occasional dead woman in the street, leaving him with the opportunity to eviscerate away, and sparing him the trouble of doing the killing himself.
                  What do you think, ladies and gentlemen?

                  The best, all!
                  Fisherman

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I consider it quit doubtful, Fisherman. Someone who had an unhealthy interest in dead bodies wouldn't just kill people outright without also having a strong disregard for human life. Someone who kills people to mutilate has chosen to do that instead of making do with what he could get at a butcher shop or trying to work at a mortuary. The Ripper's mutilations were an expression of destruction and violence, not just idle curiosity about someone's inner workings or a desire to be see protruding entrails.

                    Dan Norder
                    Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
                    Web site: www.RipperNotes.com - Email: dannorder@gmail.com

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Hi Dan, and thanks for answering!

                      What I am after here is that I see no real intention to put people through pain. Of course there is a disregard for human life, but as Lord Byron said: "Iīd rather suffocate a newborn child in itīs crib, than look away from my own desires". That is my own translation, by the way...
                      The problem with butchers shops is that they donīt provide human uteri. Mortuaries? A/ He could have worked at such a place for all we know, B/ Maybe he did not have a societal position that allowed him to work in a mortuary, he could have been slightly retarded or something, and C/ I think he wanted fresh meat, still warm.
                      It is easy to see that he left behind what could be interpreted as an expression of destruction and violence, but what I want to know is to what degree it was of importance to him that he did so. It came with the killing and cutting, inevitably, but if his sole intention was to eviscerate and procure inner organs, then the element of destruction suddenly becomes very secondary, does it not?
                      If we are to delve into a little bit of shaky psychology here, then maybe he was not all that interested in the primary killing (of the woman) that led to the secondary killing (of the possibility to create life, as per the uteri - ultimatley perhaps displaying a hatred for the organ that put him into the world).
                      To me, the archaic moments, if you will, of the deeds all seem to suggest a very hurried man taking care of what must be taken care of (the killing and the silence gained by the throat cuts) in order to get at the abdomen.

                      The best!
                      Fisherman

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by mike74 View Post
                        Iam still thinking that there was definately more to these murders than just a random killing spree!. If it was just a man with a hatred for prostitutes or even just women in general why all the mutilations?. Entralils over the shoulder?, two upside down v shapes on catherine eddowes cheeks?, items laid out neatly at annie chapmans feet?, come on this to me was not just a crazy lunatic walking the streets there had to more to it.
                        Actually, the story about objects laid out at Annie Chapman's feet is an urban legend. Let's face it, usually the most simple explanation is the correct one. There was no big conspiracy involved in the Whitechapel Murders. Just a very cunning psychopath and a botched investigation, that is all.
                        What's all this then?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by mike74 View Post
                          I just don't buy it, sorry!
                          That's because you're an... Well, you can figure that out on your own. (And here's a clue, I was not going to call you a "Freemason."
                          What's all this then?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Hey FM,

                            Originally posted by Fisherman View Post
                            but if his sole intention was to eviscerate and procure inner organs, then the element of destruction suddenly becomes very secondary, does it not?
                            If that were his sole intention, yes. I just don't see that as being likely.

                            If he had just been out to procure organs without any violent mindset behind it, with evisceration being a step toward that or a side effect, then the extra mutilations were wholly unnecessary. If he liked eviscerating human beings and tearing out parts then he already clearly favored violence. I can't see any scenario in which he did the things we know that he did that doesn't include a preference for active human destruction.

                            Dan Norder
                            Ripper Notes: The International Journal for Ripper Studies
                            Web site: www.RipperNotes.com - Email: dannorder@gmail.com

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I'm afraid my answer is going to be very simple.


                              JTR both hated and feared women. Maybe these ladies reminded him of mommy or a particularly nasty stepmother. From what I've seen,his hatred of women was visceral and bone deep. Those pics of CE and MJK chilled me to the bone when I first saw them.

                              He went after prostitutes,because then as it is now,they represent an easy opportunity for a serial killer. I'm no expert but I would think upper and middle class women of that time wouldn't be out at the time of night/early morning that JTR creeped about. If they were,they would certainly not be alone. JTR was a coward. I don't believe he would've attacked a woman if she was accompanied by a man. I believe Whitechapel was where he lived,so he stayed close to home. The women he chose were easily obtained and had no problem going off with strange men. He cut them up because it got him off. I don't believe in Freemason rituals or the Queen's doctor or any other conspiracy theory. JTR ripped up those poor women because he hated women and he liked tearing them apart. It is hard for those of us who aren't psychopaths to understand such things,but I believe this is why he committed these murders.
                              I am quite mad and there's nothing to be done for it.


                              When your first voice speaks,listen to it. It may save your life one day.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Nicola,

                                You just gave the most common concept. It doesn't make it right, however.

                                Cheers,

                                Mike
                                huh?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X