The signature of Jack

[CitizenX]

With all this talk of "signatures" and such on other threads i decided to start a new thread so the others threads dont scew off topic all the time.

Signature is an act or ritual that the perp must go through for him to obtain satisfacation from the act. It maybe certain words he has to say, or makes the victim say during the act. Or the way he displays the body after the act, for example not trying to hide or dispose of the body but displaying it in a shocking manner to the person who discovers it. Other factors out of his control or which are not essential to his fantasy mean nothing and can change.

I would like people to list what they think the signature of JTK was and how it evolved and explain why.

This is my thoughts..

Main Signature

1) Mutilation

Jack got sexual pleasure from the stabbing, piercing or cutting of his victims. This is called Picquerism. The fact that he had to kill them was incidental...it was the mutilatations which were the prime focus. This is why he despatched his victims quickly and "humanely" (in his eyes anyway). The mutilations escalated as he became more experienced and bold.

2) Displaying of the body to shock the person discovering the body.

Displaying the body probably made him believe in his superiority over the victim and everyone else.

3) The chance of being discovered

Jack didnt want to be caught but the buzz of imminant discovery must have added tenfold to his fantasy.

Evolving signature

4) The taking of "trophies"

Jack progressed from inanimate objects such as rings and probably other valuless objects we don't know about onto body parts...I think after Kate he realised that the taking of body parts wasn't very practicle as they didnt last too long.

5) The killing of women in his own age group
This is the norm for this type of killer.....

I know this will collapse into people arguing which are MO and which are signature...but that will part of the fun!!

kevin

[23Skidoo]

Is that general or linked to a certain kind of psychology / killer type?

[Simon Wood]

Hi All,

The signature of JtR is timing, the one constant throughout the C5.

Nothing more.

Regards,

Simon

[Natalie Severn]

Hi All,

The signature of JtR is timing, the one constant throughout the C5.

Nothing more.

Regards,

Simon

Yes,I"ll second that Simon....
Natalie

[Doctor X]

Rhythm . . . you forgot rhythm.

--J.D.

[Natalie Severn]

......and the command

[bolo]

Are signatures obligatory in serial killer cases?

And, do rituals like things the killer has to say before he slays his victim really count as signature or part thereof? I always thought a signature is something the killer wants us to see or for which he is infamous for, like mutilated bodies of women lying in public places or rumours about his alleged invincibility.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Doctor X,

I don't know if Jack had rhythm, music, starlight, or daisies in green pastures. But in the words of George Gershwin "who could ask for anything more?"

Jack was too good to be true. He was the Victorian phantom menace, similar to a scenario we are going through today. The only thing he had was timing. Even the cops agreed on that. Take away the timing and there's no mystery—just five dead bodies.

Regards,

Simon

[Doctor X]

I do not know. If a "method" works a killer is likely to stick to it. He may vary that based on new opportunities, experience, et cetera. In the case of the Night Stalker, the Brain-Damaged Mayor publicly revealed what the police knew so he altered his methods. This is for those who consider "signature" to denote things the killer always or nearly always does.

Anyways, it seems most define "signature" more with regards a meaning it has for the killer--something he must do. The problem with that with Jack is it requires surmising his motivations. This can get quite circular if you know the answer.

--J.D.

[Doctor X]

Jack was too good to be true.

Can't take our eyes off of [Right, stop that!--Ed.]

Take away the timing and there's no mystery—just five dead bodies.

Well . . . you know . . . throat cuts . . . mutilations, but I am sure you have been around and around on those. Certainly the timing--killing a bunch in a particular time period--drove the story.

--J.D.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Doctor X,

A translation into coherent English of your last post would be appreciated.

Regards,

Simon

[Natalie Severn]

There is something a bit theatrical and Damien Hurst like about his dead remains.Like he enjoyed the prospect of alarmed horror that leaving his prey disembowelled in the open air would create--- the police stumbling across his murder victims,lots of whistles being blown and harrassed policemen running around in circles, a flock of police officials arriving in hansom cabs -that kind of thing may have turned him onand given him a huge power kick.

[Simon Wood]

Hi Natalie,

I think you're giving too much credit to the murderer.

Regards,

Simon

[Natalie Severn]

The way I see it Simon,is its all about power----the power the murderer has when he takes life, the power he feels at the sight of his lifeless prey,the power he feels when he thinks about the uproar he has caused...and the power he feels when he gets away with it.They are what give him his high.
History has shown him to have succeeded in not getting caught too------and there is,as they say,nothing like the sweet smell of success!

[Doctor X]

A translation into coherent English of your last post would be appreciated.

https://www.dictionary.com

--J.D.