The Ripper and Risk

[New Waterloo]

I think the murder sites are different but as far as risk I see them as 3 types of site.

I see Bucks lane and Mitre Square as streets. Whatever way we look at it they are public places where members of the public have free access. The Police also have free legal access to enter and patrol.

Hanbury street back yard is a private place. That is its legal status. The public do not travel through the house into the yard as a transit route. People enter as authorised people or they use the yard for illegal purposes but it is not a public place.

Dutfields yard is a private place with no legal access without permission. Police do not enter the yard as part of their patrol.

Kellys room is a private place with no public flowing in and out

I see the greatest risk in the street locations but I agree there are so many factors and thoughts that will enter JTRs mind when he is calculating even if he only thinks of it briefly although he is reducing risk by working at night so there is forethought going on here.

NW

[scottnapa]

Nice question, Lock.

“Were the risks lower than we might assumed?

Yes. to some degree.
Bucks row and Meyer Square are warehouse districts. Less residents and the police behave like watchmen, protecting the propery. ilstening for a break-in.
I assume the Ripper knows the timing of the police beats.
Witnesses speak of how they hear coming and going of the police when they hear the new leather boots on the streets.

John Douglas refers to the Jack the Ripper as lucky because he doesn't choose to hide the body, which is a sign of a disorganized killer who therefore it has lower intelligence and is greater risk to being caught. I don't think that applies to Victorian London. When Alfred Crow saw the body of Martha Tabrum on the first floor landings of George Yard Buildings he assumed this was sleeping, just another homeless person.
As Dorset Streets is deemed “do as you please “ the implication of constant danger will cap one's curiosity.
Best to give a wide birth to other people's business to avoid theft and violence.

I see Hanbury Street as the greataest danger for the Ripper, not only because it happens in a private house backyard but especially because the murder happens at daybreak. The other murders are cloked in darkness with rain and fog
We're often dismissive of Elizabeth Long as a witness because she says “I wasn't really looking at them.’
The reason she sees them is because of first light stikes Chapman’s face.
If Long were walking the oppisite direction, she would have had a clear view of the Jack the Rpiper. I wonder if he would continue with the murder? There is less risk in the shadows of alleyways at night

Untreated syphilis. is a valid observation
There were a large “soup” of maladies affecting East enders suffering from a dramatic number of toxins in their homes, in the sewer and in the air:. lead, arsnic, phosphorus, radium, soot, raw sewage in the water.
Canadian serial killer researcher Sasha Reid discovered a indicator of serial killers, who as children, lived in houses with lead paint and pipes, (Her work is a good read. Madness starts at home. i assume there's multiple serial killers in Victorian England who are less “visible” than Jack the Ripper

[The Rookie Detective]

The killer liked some variation...

Stairwell in block of flats
Pavement in the street
Back Garden of a communal building
Side alley leading to a yard
An open Square
A rented bedroom

The killer did like to mix up his kill sites.


That implies a level of risk taking in itself.

[c.d.]

Keep in mind that it is not like he robbed a bank and an alarm went off. Naturally he didn't want to linger on the scene but simply needed to exit the area quickly without drawing attention to himself. I think that simply required a working knowledge of the area and not some sort of master escape plan.

c.d.

[Fiver]

And yet the killer must have known all of the viable escape routes to avoid the police.

Regardless of who led who, it's clear that the killer knew the area intricately.

It is more likely that the Ripper knew the area well, but the Ripper did not need to know the area intricately nor know all viable routes of escape. Luck certainly played a part, no matter how well the Ripper knew the area.

[New Waterloo]

To me JTR is bright and calculating. He is avoiding risks. He is not killing people in the local shop or pub. However his own opinion of himself is that far better than he really is.
I have been thinking about this risk thread and the comments so far are excellent.
I think we are able to see not only a progression in level of mutilation but a real reason for the locations of the crimes based on the risks he was taking.

A suggestion;

Nichols is murdered in the street and early attempts made at mutilation but held back by location and risk. Its a street and people as we know were about at the time. Importantly coming from all directions.

So he choses (Not Chapman) but himself, the back yard at Hanbury Street for his next murder. Why is this yard less risk. Think about it. A person has to go into the yard. One way traffic to look out for. A street has two way if not more traffic. People walking and carts going by. Hanbury street yard is not brilliant but it is more suitable for him to carry out the required mutilation's with less risk.

Dutfield yard is selected because its a yard. However JTR has miscalculated the risk totally and fails, never the less we are able to read his thoughts and see his progression in attempting to reduce risk. Dutfield yard is his slip up. and all he is able to do is kill Stride in the time he has.

He is in a massive hurry to satisfy his blood lust and returns to the street. Kills Eddowes in Mitre Square and has a bit of luck this time and is able to do more mutilations. Satisfied for the time being.

He is thinking, calculating, considering the risks. There is only one thing for it. Find a victim with a room. He does and extensively mutilates Kelly with considerably less risk than the other murders. Is this why there is such a gap in time between Eddowes and Kelly. He has to find a victim with the appropriate vulnerability but with their own room.

My thoughts only revolve around the risk. There are probably thousands of reasons this wont work but its an idea.

NW

[The Rookie Detective]

I believe there was less risk simply because the women took the killer to their own sites where they knew less traffic, police, etc. None of those sites were random or picked by their killer.

And yet the killer must have known all of the viable escape routes to avoid the police.

Regardless of who led who, it's clear that the killer knew the area intricately.

[Sunny Delight]

List updated with number 11 after a suggestion by Joe Chetcuti.


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?

7. Did he have someone as a lookout?

8. Did his compulsion to kill outweigh the risks?

9. Were the risks lower than we might have assumed?

10. He got a thrill from the risk.

11. The ripper may have suffered from untreated syphilis.

1) I don't think he would have felt that he was on a mission or was being protected by something more powerful. Granted provenance was a popular thing back then.

2) I think the impulseiveness over rode the fear of capture or surroundings. Likely he felt secure enough that his victims had led him to a secluded area and there is always a possibility they told him to be quick as a PC would be on the beat and could be back in 10'-15minutes in some cases.

3) All serial killers feel that way don't they. Invincible. Superior. They have an egomania in many cases.

4) I don't think serial killers think that way, do they? Usually once they have killed once or twice and not been caught their confidence grows and then see point 3.

5) Highly unlikely. He was a very sick man mentally who had an insatiable desire to mutilate women. The thought of capture and then death probably didn't really feature in his thoughts.

6) Again unlikely to my mind. Killers like this don't think so far ahead.

7) Absolutely no chance. No lookout, no accomplice. Just a lone wolf killer who acted out his deranged fantasies.

8) Bingo.

9) I don't think the risks were lower than we have assumed. Whitechapel was saturated with Police, both uniformed and in plain clothes. 50 years after escaping on the night of the Double Event Walter Dew was still baffled. Granted there were no fingerprinting, DNA, CCTV and other modern techniques but the risks the Ripper took were huge.

10) Maybe. I don't think so though. I think he just had a desire to mutilate and the desire was insatiable, to the point where he took massive risks, just to try and relieve some of that impulse.

11) Again, probably not. It appears the Ripper was only interested in Prostitutes because they were on the streets, they were soliciting and they were available and vulnerable. In other words there was no work in it really. Untreated syphilis also kind of relieves the Ripper of responsibility. His mad was warped by a sexual disease. No, rather I think he was a very rare kind of serial killer who derived sexual pleasure from the act of mutilation.

[Duran duren]

I believe there was less risk simply because the women took the killer to their own sites where they knew less traffic, police, etc. None of those sites were random or picked by their killer.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Is this whole risk thing being over analyzed? I mean if you want an omelet you have to break some eggs do you not?

And of course there is always the famous quote from bank robber Willie Sutton. When asked why he kept robbing banks his reply was because that's where the money is.

c.d.

All true but I just wondered how the killer viewed it because I was thinking of situations that I saw as ‘too risky.’ The killer might have viewed the situation differently because in reality it was, or because it’s how he perceived it…then what made him perceive it differently. You’re right that we can over analyse though. We can never know and even if we could know how would it help us?

Great quote btw.

[Geddy2112]

And of course there is always the famous quote from bank robber Willie Sutton. When asked why he kept robbing banks his reply was because that's where the money is.

c.d.

Also this famous one...

Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd break into a distillery. Daffy turns to Elmer and says: “Is this Whisky?”

Elmer says: “Yeth but not as whisky as wobbing a bank!!”

[c.d.]

Is this whole risk thing being over analyzed? I mean if you want an omelet you have to break some eggs do you not?

And of course there is always the famous quote from bank robber Willie Sutton. When asked why he kept robbing banks his reply was because that's where the money is.

c.d.

[c.d.]

It was known the Capone refused all treatment for advanced syphilis.

He was subsequently released, the court having determined that at that point he had the mental capacity of a child and did not really pose a threat to anyone.

c.d.

[Herlock Sholmes]

List updated with number 11 after a suggestion by Joe Chetcuti.


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?

7. Did he have someone as a lookout?

8. Did his compulsion to kill outweigh the risks?

9. Were the risks lower than we might have assumed?

10. He got a thrill from the risk.

11. The ripper may have suffered from untreated syphilis.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I just logged in to JtRForums and saw that id received a PM on the 12th (I hadn’t logged in for a while) from Joe Chetcuti. He mentions an article that he’d written in the Feb 2011 Whitechapel Journal called ‘Malady’ which looked at the high risk behaviour of the ripper and how it might be related to the symptoms of untreated syphilis. He mentions the high risk behaviour exhibited by Al Capone in Alcatraz which led a psychiatrist to recommend him being put into isolation for not only his own safety but for the safety of others. It was known the Capone refused all treatment for advanced syphilis. An interesting point and one that I can add to the list.

Thanks to Joe Chetcuti