Motivation for the Dear Boss

[caz]

Hello Caroline. You are dead on target--the timing is everything here.

I also completely agree that a "damaged" character might be involved.

Your reasoning about eventual discarding is interesting. Do you think that, given no eventual "fruition," the letter would have been "shown the door"?

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn,

I have no idea what the police would have done with Dear Boss had there been no corresponding "next job". Maybe they would not have publicised it, so saving themselves the major headache of all those bandwagon hoaxes. But I doubt they would have binned it, all the while they still had the previous unsolved murders which the author had claimed by implication. As we know, they ended up retaining all manner of missives containing empty murderous threats.

Had no double event taken place there would still be no guarantee that Dear Boss was an empty threat hoax. Murderers are human too and can lie or change their mind, meet with an accident, or be otherwise unwilling or unable to carry out a written promise. All the more intriguing to think that Kate's killer could unknowingly have been keeping a complete stranger's written promise, and keeping it pretty well.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

clarification

Hello Caroline.

"Had no double event taken place there would still be no guarantee that Dear Boss was an empty threat hoax."

Quite. As a matter of fact, the "Saucy Jacky" looks, in some respects, as a clarification of the "Double Event"--"Really intended 2 all along"; "Well, I WOULD have gotten ears, if there were world enough and time" etc.

There was a foul up, somewhere. "The best laid plans o' mice and men gang aft agley."

Cheers.
LC

[Bridewell]

No Need For Coincidence

Hello Errata. Yes, the first 2 killings.

If there were several letters sent, surely the CNA would have forwarded those too?

But I think I understand your view here--basically, a crank who hit upon a remarkable coincidence.

Cheers.
LC

It occurs to me that the delay between the CNA supposedly receiving the "Dear Boss" letter, and their forwarding it to the police, may have served a useful purpose. We always see the envelope and letter published together, but only have the CNA's word for it that the letter was received in that envelope. The envelope could have been sent empty to obtain the postmark and then the letter written a couple of days later with retrospective knowledge. In those circumstances there would be no need for a lucky guess.
Retrospective prophesy has no need of guesswork.

Cheers all, Bridewell

[Bridewell]

The Three Things

But, I think there is a good chance DB/SJ may be from the killer:
predicted wanting to start "soon"
Knew about "squealed a bit"
cutting of the ear

Thats three things right there. And then of course the police did take them very seriously at first.

I agree that the possibility the Dear Boss & Saucy Jack were sent by the killer cannot be discounted. Certainly it has never been proved one way or the other.


I'm not sure that your "three things" are all that remarkable though:

Another murder "soon" is quite vague - today? tomorrow? next month? could all be argued as "soon". Why not be more specific?

"Squealed a bit"? How do we know that Number One squealed a bit? Surely this was known only to the killer and the victim. The latter was in no position to argue and the former was unlikely to come forward. Pretty safe thing to say, I would have thought.

"Cutting of the ear"? The letter promised to "clip the lady's ears off and send to the police just for jolly". The ears were not clipped off and the tiny piece which was detached wasn't removed. The killer had time to slice off a nose, nick eyelids and create cheek wounds, not to mentiion abdominal mutilation & removal of organs. Why didn't he do what was promised in the letter before doing anything else?

(Ignore my previous post btw. I should have noticed my "retrospective" thing doesn't fit the timescale. Apologies, one & all)

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi all

The point though is that everything that is in Dear Boss is pretty much what you would expect a clever, cheeky killer to say. It's much like many of the letters that followed and that emulated it. Does the writer's wiseacre style really fit with the man who eviscerated prostitutes on the streets of Whitechapel? The legend is that Jack wrote these missives but it's quite possible that he did not. As I stated in my blog on this site, perhaps the killer's only communication was in the murders and that he left no other communications. Think about it.

Best regards

Chris

[lynn cates]

dates

Hello Bridewell. Not quite sure I follow. The letter was forwarded to the police on the 29th, just a few hours before Kate's death. At least, that is indicated by Bulling's (?) cover letter.

Are you, instead, referring to the CNA's request for a "poster" BEFORE Kate's death (poster sent October 3, 1888)?

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

announcement

Hello (again) Bridewell. It seems to me the vagueness allows a bit of wriggle room.

To my poor mind, the "Dear Boss" is trying to announce the fact that the killings--on hold for near 3 weeks--are to begin again. Why announce that? Well, that would be an imperative PROVIDED Polly and Annie had NOTHING to do with a murder yet to come.

Yes, the "Saucy Jacky" mentioned that "The first one squealed a bit." Of course the date on that was AFTER Kate and Liz's deaths. Who would know? Well, did not Schwartz claim such of "the first lady"? Whether or not his story is true, he made the claim. And soon it was in the papers.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

I agree that the possibility the Dear Boss & Saucy Jack were sent by the killer cannot be discounted. Certainly it has never been proved one way or the other.


I'm not sure that your "three things" are all that remarkable though:

Another murder "soon" is quite vague - today? tomorrow? next month? could all be argued as "soon". Why not be more specific?

"Squealed a bit"? How do we know that Number One squealed a bit? Surely this was known only to the killer and the victim. The latter was in no position to argue and the former was unlikely to come forward. Pretty safe thing to say, I would have thought.

"Cutting of the ear"? The letter promised to "clip the lady's ears off and send to the police just for jolly". The ears were not clipped off and the tiny piece which was detached wasn't removed. The killer had time to slice off a nose, nick eyelids and create cheek wounds, not to mentiion abdominal mutilation & removal of organs. Why didn't he do what was promised in the letter before doing anything else?

(Ignore my previous post btw. I should have noticed my "retrospective" thing doesn't fit the timescale. Apologies, one & all)

Hi Bridewell
Thanks for the response.

To me soon would mean within the next several days-a week or a month would not be soon.

From IS testimony he said he heard Stride yelled, but not very loudly. That corresponds to squealed a bit-to me anyway.

The Ripper may have tried to cut off Strides ear first but lost it in the darkness, said the hell with it and got right to start on what realyy motivated him.

[lynn cates]

thus

Hello Chris. Thanks.

"Does the writer's wiseacre style really fit with the man who eviscerated prostitutes on the streets of Whitechapel?'

Not a bit of it.

1. I don't believe the wielder of the pen wielded also the knife.

2. I don't believe Kate's assailant killed any one else.

3. Kate, prostituting whilst being hungry, thirsty, tired, discombobulated and needing to wee? Creo que no.

"The legend is that Jack wrote these missives but it's quite possible that he did not."

Jack never wrote ANYTHING in my humble estimation.

"As I stated in my blog on this site, perhaps the killer's only communication was in the murders and that he left no other communications. Think about it."

I have, and totally agree--except I would make that a singular, not a plural.

Cheers.
LC

[Abby Normal]

Hi all

The point though is that everything that is in Dear Boss is pretty much what you would expect a clever, cheeky killer to say. It's much like many of the letters that followed and that emulated it. Does the writer's wiseacre style really fit with the man who eviscerated prostitutes on the streets of Whitechapel? The legend is that Jack wrote these missives but it's quite possible that he did not. As I stated in my blog on this site, perhaps the killer's only communication was in the murders and that he left no other communications. Think about it.

Best regards

Chris

Hi Chris
I think it is exacly the the thing a clever, cheeky serial killer would write and bears much similarity to the tone of other proven leters written from serial killers (zodiac, SoS). Now how would hoaxer get that right, especially since at that time in history nobody had ever seen a letter from a serial killer before.

Of coarse its like the imitation letters that followed it as they were trying to emulate it-the original. And on that note it also leads me to beleive that if the DB letter is a hoax, then perhaps the FH letter was real as it DID NOT try to imitate it by using either Dear Boss or Jack the ripper in the wording (but still had a taunting, "Cheeky tone".)

A man who could pull off the double event, seem to be one step ahead of everyone else, seems to me exactly the type who also enjoyed the hunt, got a thrill out of the danger and might like to add to it by sending missives like the GSG and taunting letters.

[DVV]

Some people think too much, I think.
Chances will ever be that JtR did write the GSG, or at least, purposely left the piece of apron near to it.
The man who wrote the letters taunted the police using americanisms, while the one who killed Stride and Eddowes had Jews in mind, somehow.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Chris
I think it is exacly the the thing a clever, cheeky serial killer would write and bears much similarity to the tone of other proven leters written from serial killers (zodiac, SoS). Now how would hoaxer get that right, especially since at that time in history nobody had ever seen a letter from a serial killer before.

Of coarse its like the imitation letters that followed it as they were trying to emulate it-the original. And on that note it also leads me to beleive that if the DB letter is a hoax, then perhaps the FH letter was real as it DID NOT try to imitate it by using either Dear Boss or Jack the ripper in the wording (but still had a taunting, "Cheeky tone".)

A man who could pull off the double event, seem to be one step ahead of everyone else, seems to me exactly the type who also enjoyed the hunt, got a thrill out of the danger and might like to add to it by sending missives like the GSG and taunting letters.

Hello Abby

I think there is a good case to be made that the Openshaw letter might have been written by the same person who wrote the From Hell letter, and do note that Openshaw is signed "Jack the Ripper." I don't think that the fact that the From Hell missive is not signed with the famous name, realistically makes it more likely to have been from the killer.

You say, "I think it is exacly the the thing a clever, cheeky serial killer would write and bears much similarity to the tone of other proven leters written from serial killers (zodiac, SoS). Now how would hoaxer get that right, especially since at that time in history nobody had ever seen a letter from a serial killer before."

But any fiction writer could get it right. Numerous writers have written plausible novels from the point of view of a killer. The recently published book The Autobiography of Jack the Ripper ostensibly written by James Carnac is one of them. See Ripperologist 124 for a review of the Carnac book by Martin Fido and an investigative article on it by Jim Bennett.

Cheers

Chris

[FrankO]

The Ripper may have tried to cut off Strides ear first but lost it in the darkness, said the hell with it and got right to start on what realyy motivated him.

Hi Abby,

What the Ripper may have lost is the earlobe, which obviously is but a tiny part of one ear. Compared to what he was able to cut off and out of Eddowes’ body in the darkness, cutting off the complete ears seems like a rather simple job. And as Bridewell rightfully wrote, the killer had plenty of time to slice off both ears. He even took time to cut off a piece of intestine and place it beside the body. So why not the ears if the letter was so important to him? After all, this was the moment to let the world know that he was in fact the writer of that letter, that he would do what he promised, that he had the power.

It just doesn’t fit with the notion of a killer who was specifically doing things with an audience in mind. Besides, if he was the actual writer of the letter, he could have done a far better job to let people know he had written it: he could have left another taunting note in one of Eddowes’ pockets…

All the best,
Frank

[Hunter]

Just to make a couple of points of clarification here and add something else to the mix that hasn't been discussed in a while but ties in with the communications in question.

The 'Dear Boss' letter, postcard and another letter was sent by Bulling to Chief Constable 'Dolly' Williamson of the Metropolitan Police. On the 'squealed a bit' suggestions; the postcard was probably posted on Sunday, the 30th, since it was reportedly received on the 1st. The only press report which relayed 'a quarrel' was that of the Star, Oct. 1 in relation to the 'Hungarian' informant.

There was a third letter, as mentioned, reportedly sent to the Central News Agency on the 5th. A transcription along with the original envelope was relayed to Williamson that same night. This was, of course, the 'Dear Friend' letter, purported to have been written in the same hand as the 2 previous communications. In it the writer disavows the Whitehall slaying but promises a 'treble event' the next day which, obviously, didn't materialize.

2 questions to consider:

If all 3 were written by the same hand, what to make of them in relevance to each other?
And... why was only a transcript of the third communication relayed by Bulling to Williamson when, with the first 2, the actual communications were forwarded to the Chief Constable?

[lynn cates]

cards and letters

Hello Chris. Thanks for that.

Are you saying that the "Saucy Jacky" could not have been written AFTER Schwartz's story was in print?

That other letter you refer to--is that the "Moab and Midian" business?

I would be delighted to discuss that. Perhaps you mean another?

Cheers.
LC