Modus Operandi and Signature

[protohistorian]

We can interpret the killers physical actions on the victim without positing why. He most certainly used some internal criteria when deciding what to do. Respectfully Dave

[DarkPassenger]

The real clue lies in why he was doing it, which sounds obvious but until we know that, we can't interpret anything.

[Sox]

I simplify all this into 'what he does' & 'what he needs'.

What he does: Possibly engages the victim in conversation, an offer of business would seem most likely, but not certainly. Uses a sudden attack if the opportunity presents itself, strangles the victim to shut off any cries, and once she is unconsious he lowers her to the floor (if the struggle has not already placed her there). Time is of the essence, so he cuts her throat to be sure she will remain silent.

What he needs: Broadly speaking he attacks the 'woman', sexual areas are paramount to his needs, and if he see's what HE percieves to be a trace of beauty, then he eradicates it.

I do not see the death of the victim as being important to him in the slightest, in fact I would be surprised if all the victims were in fact dead when he commenced the mutilations.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

No disrespect intended, but I just don't see how that's necessarily true. Breaking a neck is a lot easier than cutting a throat down to the vertebrae. Like I said, Jack was quick and used a hell of a lot of force, snapping a neck would've been piss easy I'd have thought. I just don't buy into the breaking of necks being a science; be it in a chokehold and jerking the victims' head back or holding both sides of their face and snapping it forcibly to the side, it would've been over in less than 5 seconds.

What I'm getting at is, why would Jack prefer to strangle and cut his victims' throats (which is a little time-consuming) if there were much easier and quicker options, unless he enjoyed it? If he was solely in it for the abdominal mutilations (and later facial), then I wouldn't have thought he'd waste any time (and risk being caught) killing his victims in a complicated way when he could've gotten it over and done with instantly before starting on the body work. The throat cutting (and in some of his victims' cases, strangulation) was something he also probably enjoyed doing.

@ Sam: I agree completely that slashing the throat would get rid of the majority of the blood in his victims' bodies and in doing so would make it less likely for him to get as bloody while performing the mutilations, in fact I said the same thing myself a couple of posts back. I just think Jack may have enjoyed cutting their throats and strangling them too.

[Sam Flynn]

Well, I've never broken anybody's neck before, but I'm fairly certain that it would be an easily doable thing.

I wouldn't bet on it - certainly not as easy as slitting their throat with a razor-sharp knife, nor as quick. Plus, breaking the neck would leave more blood inside the body, in contrast to the massive drainage of blood that would result from a severed carotid artery. Happily - from Jack's point of view - his method meant that the mutilations and organ extractions would be comparatively less bloody. Anyone who had slaughtered a domestic animal, or had seen it done (i.e. a majority of working-classes at that time), would have known as much - so it doesn't necessarily follow that he'd have had any "specialist" knowledge of butchery either.

[BLUE WIZZARD]

Mascara & Paranoia,

what you say is true, however neck breaking is a skill you have to know how to do it, not just anyone can do it. now if Jack did break the neck before gutting then he would have to be a man of more than just gutting knowledge.

BW

[Mascara & Paranoia]

That's a valid point. Kind of lends credence to his killings being an odd sexual thing too.

[CLK]

Perhaps strangling his victims was something he enjoyed doing.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Well, I've never broken anybody's neck before, but I'm fairly certain that it would be an easily doable thing. Jack used a lot of force with that knife, both for slashing the throat and cutting open the abdomen, I'm sure he could've snapped a neck with relative ease and do the job properly. It would've been a lot quicker and spared him quite a bit of time in order to carry out the mutilations; all he'd have to do is talk nicely in the spot, catch them completely offguard and break their neck, vóla. Would've been over in seconds.

[BLUE WIZZARD]

Mascara & Paranoia,

Strangle them unconscious or to death, death preferably, then lay them down on the ground, then cut the throat. When the heart stops no spray and some cuts are clean.

To break the neck takes some skill, do you know how to break the neck?

Not to paralyze but to kill them, remember if you do not do it right, you could have a big problem on your hands.

BW

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Something occured to me, if Jack wanted to kill his victims quickly and quietly and strangled them before cutting their throat, then why didn't he just break their neck?

The only thing I can think of is that he either A) liked getting bloody and/or seeing the anguished look on the women's faces or B) cutting off the circulation and then slashing their throats got rid of the majority of the blood in their bodies in a 'controlled' way, making it easier for him to mutilating his victims without getting conspicuously bloody.

Personally, I think it's a little of both. He liked sliding his hands around in their innards, dismantling one or two of his victims' faces, but he didn't want to get covered in blood as not to get caught.

[Stephen Thomas]

P.S. I've forgotten how to make the proper quote brackets. Could someone offer a reminder here or through PM?

Hi Tom

You just gotta make sure that you don't delete the square brackets either side of the post you're quoting. This can be tricky eg when there's a full stop, sorry period ,though that means something else in Britspeak (no idea what the Woodens call that) Delete as much as you can and then zap the rest, full stop (period), capital letter or whatever.

Works every time. Just don't mess with them square brackets.

Stephen

[BLUE WIZZARD]

I believe that his delusion of superhuman comes from not being caught by the cops, he feels as though he were invisible, and having the power of life and death at his disposal, what more could he ask for?

I also believe that he had a gun, just to take care of cops or witness that may make a positive Identification.

As for his knife, Sweeny Todd could not have said it any better; it was his dear friend.


BW

[Sam Flynn]

Might it not be more a case that the killer believes himself to be super-human? At least there's a certain resonance to the delusionary nature of some mental illness in that interpretation.

Wouldn't the two go together? In order to feel super human, he'd have to dehumanize someone else, in this case women in general or prostitutes in particular.

Hi Tom - quite true, except that he might have had delusions of superiority anyway, without having to dehumanize anyone in order to prove it.

[DarkPassenger]

The problem I have with "signatures" is they imply that a killer cannot develop a technique or must always follow the same pattern.

On the other hand, a killer is likely to stick to what works.

I see more trends than signature.

--J.D.

You're thinking of signature-over-killer. Remember, a killer acts out his fantasy in committing the murder - that's why he's committing the murder. What we see as a rigid, dogmatic signature is actually incidental to the crime - a bi-product. A bit like handwriting - we write to convey information, and how we right is influenced by all kinds of stuff. Mine is influenced by my much neater foster brother's writing, which I tried to copy and some of it has rubbed off. When I write I think about each letter and the image of the writing as a whole - but if you saw my writing after the event, you'd think the style of writing was like a deterministic imprint on my behaviour - which is incorrect.

The killer is murdering people because he wishes to act out his fantasy - and in doing so, leaves behind a pattern we can identify as unique.