Has Anyone Suggested This Before?

[RivkahChaya]

I've been wondering lately if JTR was a terrorist, along the lines of the Zodiac, rather than a sexual thrill killer, like Bundy or Dahmer.

Thinking along those lines, it occurred to me that he might have taken Eddowes' apron intending to send it to the police or Lusk or someone, along with the kidney, or maybe as a separate package (this assumes the Lusk kidney was authentic, but if JTR was a Zodiac-type terrorist, then there's a good chance it was).

JTR may have simply changed his mind about what to do with the apron when he stumbled across someone else's anti-Semitic graffito. I have always thought the graffito had a plain meaning to whomever wrote it, and that it was a part of an exchange between two individuals-- it doesn't make a lot of sense to us because we don't have the whole exchange. It probably didn't make much sense to JTR either, but he got the anti-Semitic tone, and thought the same thing Warren did-- that if people associated the graffito with the murders, it might start a riot. The specific meaning of the graffito was probably as cryptic to the killer as it is to us, but if he appropriated it as a generic bit of anti-Semitism, the specific meaning isn't important.

At any rate, he decided to leave the apron.

[GUT]

G'day Rivkah

Do you mean that his purpose was to either:

Start a war per se between Jews and Gentiles OR

He wanted to strike terror into the hearts of the population, either a specific sub-set or in general?

[RivkahChaya]

I'm just saying he saw an opportunity to stir up a little trouble and took it.

It does explain why he took the apron, and then discarded it.

Of course, it's also possible he just discarded it as cumbersome, and it coincidentally met the graffito, but I'm not giving up on the idea that it was meant to go in the package with the kidney.

[GUT]

G'day Rivkah

The motive has always intrigued me.

As has the question why stop.

As you say there seems to be a better chance of stopping with that type of killer v a Sexual Maniac.

[C W Davies]

Very interesting thought, Jack the Anarchist perhaps...

[RivkahChaya]

I wouldn't say anarchist so much as a two-year-old mentality: the rules apply to other people, but not to me. I always thought if the Zodiac were caught, we'd see an uneven collection of intellects: a certain cleverness, or cunning, or ability to engineer schemes, if you will, but great immaturity. Probably someone who hadn't had many friends growing up, and had read lots of spy, or "caper" type novels, as well as non-fiction where he learned engineering skills, and maybe someone who had been in the military long enough to receive intelligence or ordnance training, but not long enough to make a career, and possibly even someone who had been given a general discharge for not getting along well with other people. At his heart, he aspired to be the greatest bully of all time.

We might even find the same thing with Dan Cooper, although I'm pretty sure he was smarter than the average bear, and patient to a point. The guy suspected of the Tylenol murders is also like that, from what I can tell.

[Errata]

If he was a terrorist type, I would have to conclude that either a: he wasn't that bright (which happens, so it's not out of the realm of possibility) or b: he was targeting a very specific population pushing him more into the revenge category.

He caused a stir, he caused outrage. But he didn't make the majority of England feel unsafe by targeting such a specific population. Zodiac worked because his kills were as random as his brand of sadism allowed. BTK worked because he was targeting normal middle class people. Jack was targeting unfortunates in a very specific part of town. The wives of lawmakers were not exactly in fear for their lives, unless they were prone to hysteria. So either he was a terrorist, and was just bad at it because he didn't think it through, or he was a terrorist aiming at a very small population, and aiming at a minority usually means a grudge, not a philosophy. You can terrorize a minority, but outside of some long historic rivalry people tend to only terrorize a minority for payback.

[RivkahChaya]

Well, then maybe it was more attention seeking-- or something like a power-reassurance rapist, who can terrorize one woman by raping her, or a whole class of woman with one messy corpse. (Rape isn't about orgasms, after all.)

I'm trying to work out the idea that the aftermath was important to him. I posted elsewhere that he doesn't seem to have killed a new victim until after both the inquest and funeral of the previous victim. If it were just the act of murder that interested him, I don't think the timing of the inquest and funeral would have mattered.

But I am just speculating, and am prepared to accept that it was merely coincidence.

However, certain things make more sense, to me, like the large piece of apron being taken, then discarded, and the corpses being left in the open, apparently found within a very short time of being killed (with all the risk that entailed), and the possibility that some letters may be authentic, if JTR was interested in public reaction.

[Barnaby]

I think the "shock" factor certainly contributed to the killer's satisfaction in his work, as illustrated by the way he posed the bodies, but I don't think he had an ulterior motive beyond narcissism. And I don't think that the sensationalism was the primary reason for the murders. I'm still not sure how to classify his "issues," but I'm of the camp that this was some form of sexual sadism that had the added bonus of getting his name in the papers.

[GUT]

G'day Barnaby

I don't think he posed them I think it's just how they ended up after he ripped away.

[Damaso Marte]

Why no acts of terrorism at other murder sites, then?