What Would It Take To Put Jack's Neck In A Noose?

[Doctor X]

Hey don't get your nipples all twisted over it. It was just a joke.

As was mine. . . .

The Grave Maurice:

Any statistics on how "successful" such a defense was at that time? I know some anecdotes.

Yours truly,

--J.D.

[NOV9]

This was discussed a few times on the old boards. Under the rule in effect in 1888 (and still in effect in many jurisdictions) Jack would not have been criminally responsible if he was suffering from a mental disability that prevented him from comprehending the nature and quality of his acts or whether those acts were right or wrong.

Since Jack obviously planned his attacks and was careful not to be caught, he most probably would have been found fit to stand trial. As someone on the old boards said, in order to invoke the defence of insanity successfully, he would pretty much have to wait beside a victim until the police showed up and then proudly display his handiwork to them.

That is absolutely true.

NOV9

[The Grave Maurice]

Another question would be- If Jack had been caught, how likely would he have been to be judged insane, thereby sending him to an asylum and sparing him from the noose?

This was discussed a few times on the old boards. Under the rule in effect in 1888 (and still in effect in many jurisdictions) Jack would not have been criminally responsible if he was suffering from a mental disability that prevented him from comprehending the nature and quality of his acts or whether those acts were right or wrong.

Since Jack obviously planned his attacks and was careful not to be caught, he most probably would have been found fit to stand trial. As someone on the old boards said, in order to invoke the defence of insanity successfully, he would pretty much have to wait beside a victim until the police showed up and then proudly display his handiwork to them.

[NOV9]

Sorry to make you cry.

Relax.

--J. "About that Adult Behavior and Not Throwing Tantrums, Sparky?" D.

Hey don't get your nipples all twisted over it. It was just a joke.

NOV9

[Doctor X]

"What Would It Take To Put Jack's Neck In A Noose?"

How about Jack reading a post from Doctor x and Dan Narcissistic, now that would make Jack put his own neck in a noose.

Sorry to make you cry.

Relax.

--J. "About that Adult Behavior and Not Throwing Tantrums, Sparky?" D.

[NOV9]

Hi c.d.

A confession

"What Would It Take To Put Jack's Neck In A Noose?"

How about Jack reading a post from Doctor x and Dan Narcissistic, now that would make Jack put his own neck in a noose.

NOV9

[kensei]

Another question would be- If Jack had been caught, how likely would he have been to be judged insane, thereby sending him to an asylum and sparing him from the noose?

[Christine]

Well, the profilers suggest that Jack was probably not quite able to function in normal society without someone watching over him. And even if you don't buy that, anyone who lived with him could hardly have failed to notice the odd coincidences and mess clothes.

And there's the claim that some of the witnesses named a name but didn't want to testify against a fellow Jew.

Adding it all up, it appears likely that someone knew at the time, and if that person decided to come to court, then it would probably have done it.

[sdreid]

Hi c.d.

Yes, he would probably have to have some knowledge to show that he was likely the guy. There couldn't be anything that would eliminate him either, such as, he was out at sea September 30.

[c.d.]

Hi Stan,

I would make that a believable confession as opposed to those drunken idiots who had a few pints too many and went to the police station to confess.

c.d.

[sdreid]

Hi c.d.

A confession

[c.d.]

I can envision a number of scenarios that would result in Jack being arrested but what would it take to get him convicted and hanged?

Certainly being caught in the act by a P.C. would do it. Being stopped and searched and having organs and/or personal items from the victim would probably do it. I don't know about the organs but he might be able to say that he found the personal items. Could one eyewitness do it and would they actually have to have seen Jack in the act of killing the victim? What about having bloody clothes? He could probably explain that away. Pawning items from the victim? Again, he could claim that he found them.

Given the nature of the crimes, a jury might be much more willing to convict on thin evidence.

What do you think?

c.d.