Tweet
I was wondering about what the ripper’s attitude was toward risk? What did he think about it; how did he deal with it? There’s no such thing as a risk-free murder of course but some appear to have been riskier than others although options differ on this as we would expect.
Nichols - Killed in a street with various ways that some unsuspecting passer-by might emerge whilst the killer was with his victim.
Chapman - Killed in a backyard with only one exit as far as we know. At any time some member of the household might have decided to visit the outside toilet.
Stride - Killed in a driveway next to a partially open door where a member might exit at any time (to go home or to use the outside toilet) and with a gate open to the street a very few feet away with the possibility of someone (possibly a Constable) passing by and looking in.
Eddowes - Killed in a square with three entrances where someone might pass through at any time (even a Constable)
Kelly - Killed in a room with one exit. Someone knocking at the door and confidently believing that she was inside might not have accepted the lack of an answer to their knock.
So what was the killer’s attitude to risk? How did he approach it? Some suggestions..
1. It’s almost a cliché but did he feel that he was on some kind of mission and that he was protected by higher powers?
2. Did he feel confident that he would be able to deal with any situation as it occurred? For example, would he have planned to kill anyone that opened that backdoor of number 29 Hanbury Street? And at other locations was he confident of escape? In Bucks Row and Mitre Square for example was he confident of hearing someone approaching in enough time for him to escape in the opposite direction? Was he athletic; a fast runner? In addition may he have gained confidence from having local knowledge?
3. Did an element of superiority come into play? Did he just think “these idiots will never catch me, I’m too clever for them”?
4. Did he take a more fatalistic approach, accepting that he was going to get caught at some point so he just continued as long as it lasted?
5. Did he have some form of death wish?
6. I was reminded of my final point when I was thinking about James Kelly. Tully suggested in his book that Kelly was already adjudged a ‘lunatic,’ albeit an escaped one, so maybe the killer thought that he’d just be sent back to Broadmoor and not to the gallows?
Thoughts and suggestions?
Nichols - Killed in a street with various ways that some unsuspecting passer-by might emerge whilst the killer was with his victim.
Chapman - Killed in a backyard with only one exit as far as we know. At any time some member of the household might have decided to visit the outside toilet.
Stride - Killed in a driveway next to a partially open door where a member might exit at any time (to go home or to use the outside toilet) and with a gate open to the street a very few feet away with the possibility of someone (possibly a Constable) passing by and looking in.
Eddowes - Killed in a square with three entrances where someone might pass through at any time (even a Constable)
Kelly - Killed in a room with one exit. Someone knocking at the door and confidently believing that she was inside might not have accepted the lack of an answer to their knock.
So what was the killer’s attitude to risk? How did he approach it? Some suggestions..
1. It’s almost a cliché but did he feel that he was on some kind of mission and that he was protected by higher powers?
2. Did he feel confident that he would be able to deal with any situation as it occurred? For example, would he have planned to kill anyone that opened that backdoor of number 29 Hanbury Street? And at other locations was he confident of escape? In Bucks Row and Mitre Square for example was he confident of hearing someone approaching in enough time for him to escape in the opposite direction? Was he athletic; a fast runner? In addition may he have gained confidence from having local knowledge?
3. Did an element of superiority come into play? Did he just think “these idiots will never catch me, I’m too clever for them”?
4. Did he take a more fatalistic approach, accepting that he was going to get caught at some point so he just continued as long as it lasted?
5. Did he have some form of death wish?
6. I was reminded of my final point when I was thinking about James Kelly. Tully suggested in his book that Kelly was already adjudged a ‘lunatic,’ albeit an escaped one, so maybe the killer thought that he’d just be sent back to Broadmoor and not to the gallows?
Thoughts and suggestions?
I guess stranger things have happened throughout history. So Robert Paul and Charles Cross are the Ripper(s) 
Comment