just an idea - thoughts please :)

[Shelley]

The killer could have at least made an attempt to cover up or dispose of the bodies. However he did not. In another thread, I wrote the following during a similar discussion, a comment that seems appropriate.

The bodies were left in the open. This could be the product of circumstances, but over the course of several killings a general sense of showmanship seems to be present. This could either be an off handed dismissal of the women's bodies, the killer's desire to display the ruined corpses, or he had no choice in the location of the crime, but felt it needed to be carried out none the less. The first impression I have of the photographs and the locations of the bodies is a 'look what I did' sensation. So I would tend to lean toward the idea that the killer was displaying his work.

If the death of the women was the purpose of the act, then the knife wound to the neck should have sufficed. The fact that the killer took the time to disfigure or disembowel his target may imply that the act itself had meaning. If that is the case, then the killer may want the product of his rage known to the public, he worked hard, now he's showing off his finished product.

The old maxim comes to mind; “If the act has no meaning then the act is the meaning.”

It all depends on what mental condition you are suffering from at the time, many disorganised killers have never made an attempt to conceal the body.
If he were that much into showmanship why not post a piece of all the organs into the Police along with a letter telling them which body it came from as well? That would be real showmanship.
personally i do not beleive any of the letters came from JTR and the one that is classed as from hell came with a piece of kidney sent to George Lusk of the Vigillante committe, it left no name & no signature, not even a description of where it came from such as ' The body in the Square ' or ' The body in Mitre Square ' ' from a liitle missus ' who had sweet Michaelmas daisies about her skirts etc. As far as i know some serial killers start sending in letters with thier first victim or at least thier second, with a bit of correspondence then more, but always a hint of the personal to make an assurity, that hit's the news headlines better and more of a showman's art. I can't find this type in JTR's case. We are all entitled to draw our own conclusions, but on this one, i just don't buy it.

' If the act has no meaning then the act is the meaning '......Yes, the act is a very disturbed killer, then the mutilation of Eddowes face is an act and projection of the killer's anger, however he did not do this with Nicholls or Chapman, neither of them smelt of stale alcohol only Eddowes did, triggered by a memory possibly of a drunken mother. this is not showmanship this is the killer's mind & personality.

[Mutt]

A lunatic killer was a type of murderer that the Police were looking for. Modern professionals also regard this type of killer as a relatively easy one to locate. The truly deranged killer does not care if he is caught. 1888, the Whitechapel murderer does appear to care. He was slick enough to avoid numerous police officers, and carry out his deeds under their noses and still avoid detection.

I also do not think it wise to focus to much on the organized or disorganized terminology. These are dated terms, not much in use by practitioners. The general rule of thumb now is that every killer displays varying degrees of both levels of organization, and should not be typed solely into either category.

Maybe he was a very lucky nut. However, I would bet money that is not the case. The killer’s actions had purpose (at least to him). Patterns of behavior unnecessary for the commission of the crime exist in these murders. And if a killer took the time to remove a women’s intestines and place it on the shoulder of a body left in the open, then the same killer could conceivably pen a quick note to see if his work was appreciated. He may have, may not have. My point is that it is possible, especially given the circumstances of these killings.

[Shelley]

Mutt,
Oh things are being changed all round for instance they are scrapping ' Borderline Personality Disorder ', which is a bag of they don't know what the person is suffering anyway.
When you say:
....And if a killer took the time to remove a woman's intestines and place it on the shoulder of a body left in the open, then the same killer could conceivably pen a quick note to see if his work was appreciates. He may have, may not have. My point is that it is possible, especially given the circumstances of these killings '.
Mutt, have you missed the point that the killer took organs from Chapman and that the intestines were just moved out of the way and happened to rest over her shoulder, so the killer could then go in and remove the organ he wanted to take with him, and that's all to the story. I mean when you cut a person open theres a fair mess involved and numerous bits, not to mention an awful lot of intestines, upper & lower.
Oh, i do agree that there will be an amount of organised in everyone, and humans are apt to adapt. Ed Gein who was a schizophrenic did not hide much around his house, when he had visitors. Still even Ed didn't want people going into his Nazi memorbelia room, and had human bones as furniture, but took care not to mention it to the visitors, he also took care as to ensure people didn't see him take his victims either, but he left a blood trail without cleaning it up from the woman of the local shop.Ed Gein was not a showman he was just severley mentally ill.As with Gein, i think that JTR was suffering also, but not displaying showman type characteristics, maybe JTR just didn't have a place that he could bring an unfortunate back to, so it was done in the street where he had picked them up, so personally i would go that he was suffering and not being a showman.

[Bridewell]

Why Not?

just had a thought. now i dont believe for a minute that this killer would have written to the police

I don't see any reason why not. Plenty of serial killers have done so: the Dusseldorf killer, Peter Kuersten, David Berkowitz (aka Son of Sam), the Zodiac Killer, Dennis Rader, (aka the BTK Killer), to name but four. (There may be others).

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi Bride,

Yes, or in more modern times communicated by telephone as well, fulfilling the same need. It's a myth created by profilers that killers won't communicate, so we're going to keep hearing that 'there's no way Jack would write a letter'! Having said that, I don't see Dear Boss as coming from the killer, since he didn't bother to give us ANYTHING that would force that conclusion.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[RedBundy13]

An accomplice?

As far as an accomplice goes I dont really see that happening. It would be a hell of a coincidence for two people to find each other that both happened to have the same hobby...Murder. And one person helping out the other? No, I'm having a hard time seeing that. Why, you might be asking? Well my only question is whats in it for the other person? What does the look out gain from all this? Answer, nothing. He gets nothing out of it. So in my opinion JtR acted alone. Again, just an opinion.
Im not saying it couldnt have happened, where 2 people worked togehter to commit murder, because we all know it has happened before. But in those cases usually each person played a role, or they took turns. Each person got something out of it. Not one person killed while the other watched on every single murder. They changed it up, usually.
It could be said, maybe thats what they did here, switched it up with each other, one killed and the other was look out. Then on the next one they changed positions. If that is the case, well, there just isnt a Jack the Ripper anymore. Its Jack's the Ripper's.

[lynn cates]

agreed

Hello Red.

"well, there just isn't a Jack the Ripper anymore."

Well spoke. I heartily agree.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Two well-dressed men, one aged 28-30, and the other "middle-aged, to over 40" - ish ?

[Malcolm X]

yes maybe, especially Tabram and Stride, whatever the case JTR looks to be British, a Joe Local, or a Joe Local visitor.

the BTK killer was on tv last night, this tends to make GH as Toppy/ JTR more believable, long periods between murders, bringing up a family or even stopping for good, it was all mentioned last night, along with Arsenic poisoners too in the next show.

[ChrisGeorge]

As far as an accomplice goes I dont really see that happening. It would be a hell of a coincidence for two people to find each other that both happened to have the same hobby...Murder. And one person helping out the other? No, I'm having a hard time seeing that. Why, you might be asking? Well my only question is whats in it for the other person? What does the look out gain from all this? Answer, nothing. He gets nothing out of it. So in my opinion JtR acted alone. Again, just an opinion.
Im not saying it couldnt have happened, where 2 people worked togehter to commit murder, because we all know it has happened before. But in those cases usually each person played a role, or they took turns. Each person got something out of it. Not one person killed while the other watched on every single murder. They changed it up, usually.
It could be said, maybe thats what they did here, switched it up with each other, one killed and the other was look out. Then on the next one they changed positions. If that is the case, well, there just isnt a Jack the Ripper anymore. Its Jack's the Ripper's.

Hi RedBundy

Sorry, your premise that a second person would get nothing out of it is a bit naive. I think there are a number of cases where there were two murderers, although one of the two dominated the other, as in the case of the Moors murderers, Ian Brady and Myra Hindley, and the killers in the 1993 murder of Liverpool toddler Jamie Bulger, Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, themselves 11 and 12 at the time of the crime.

Best regards

Chris

[GregBaron]

Two heads better than one...

Hi all,

Actually an accomplice is an attractive theory because it offers an explanation of how someone could repeatedly get away with outdoor murder. We have BS and Pipeman at the Stride affair, the night watchman in Mitre Square and a man in a Wideawake at Miller’s Court. One could envision a lookout in Buck’s row and someone hiding in the passage at Hanbury St.

It sure would answer some perplexing questions.

I could see LeGrand having a crony knock off prostitutes out of vengeance or a desire to control the streets but the disemboweling seems so personal and bizarre that it’s hard to give this serious consideration.

Beyond that I can’t make any guesses.

I don’t support this idea seriously but without more evidence I don’t think it can be ruled out…


Greg

[Wickerman]

I don’t support this idea seriously but without more evidence I don’t think it can be ruled out…
Greg

Thats how I feel, not serious but not impossible, ...like Burke & Hare, and Hopkins & Stearne (thats the Witchfinder General & his sidekick).
Yes, the murderous duo is part of British history.

Regards, Jon S.

[The Bounder]

Anything is possible, but there have been plenty of other murders over the years where people have just got lucky and got away with it through sheer luck or police incompetence. That other famous ripper Peter Sutcliffe was eventually caught but not before he got away with killing thirteen people, and the inquiry into his crimes was massive beyond belief. He had no accomplice, yet he still got away with it for far longer than he should have done.

[Wickerman]

I don't think anyone is suggesting that one man could not have accomplished several murders. The issue of "accomplice" arises largely due to the different descriptions & ages of suspects.
Whether a suspect looked "28", or "30-35", even "over 40" might be more to do with poor lighting, angle of view, and distance.
Even today we can over estimate the age of a person viewed from behind (Mrs Long?) due to the style of clothing they wear, I'm sure it was no different a hundred years ago.

Regards, Jon S.

[The Grave Maurice]

As appealing as the concept may be, I simply can't accept the idea that the Whitchapel murders were an example of folie a deux. The only witness description that I believe without question is Joseph Lawende's. So, the one guy I'm looking for is 5' 8"-ish, 30-ish, and fair-ish. No others need apply.

(P.S. Can anyone tell me how to do an accent aigu on this website?)