The Ripper's Signature........

[Ben]

For him, for them.....remember few of these women were even identified easily because they were homeless.

Indeed, Mike, which meant that if the offender was in a position to dispatch and dispose of these homeless women at his own home, they effectively disappear. There are no incriminating connections to his base because nobody suspects they have been murdered, and the number of people bothering to look for them is very slim indeed.

There's no denying the obvious advantage of that!

Nice to catch you here too, Mike.

Best regards,
Ben

[perrymason]

Indeed, Mike, which meant that if the offender was in a position to dispatch and dispose of these homeless women at his own home, they effectively disappear. There are no incriminating connections to his base because nobody suspects they have been murdered, and the number of people bothering to look for them is very slim indeed.

There's no denying the obvious advantage of that!

Nice to catch you here too, Mike.

Best regards,
Ben

Now this is where we have a bridge issue then Ben....because by killing a woman who had a room in her name and could be readily be identified as soon as the lease was checked,... means that at least in this case, the killer in room 13 may not have considered this "personal" element being an issue for him.

That might mean she was without any connection to him so he had no fear in that regard, or it could means that this killer didnt consider the implications of his actions.

Why do lovers kill each other violently when everyone knows they will be among the very few initial suspects usually? Or why do some hire strangers to do it?

Cause many dont think about the investigations when they kill...they do so in an emotionally aroused state.

I think Mr Ripper was as cold a fish as they come when he worked. He planned to kill....he didnt just kill when aggravated. And I think room 13 has some emotional, personal content in evidence.

Im off for a bit Ben, I moved on Thursday and have lots of work to do...cheers Mate, see you soon.

All the best amigo.

[Malcolm X]

Now this is where we have a bridge issue then Ben....because by killing a woman who had a room in her name and could be readily be identified as soon as the lease was checked,... means that at least in this case, the killer in room 13 may not have considered this "personal" element being an issue for him.

That might mean she was without any connection to him so he had no fear in that regard, or it could means that this killer didnt consider the implications of his actions.

Why do lovers kill each other violently when everyone knows they will be among the very few initial suspects usually? Or why do some hire strangers to do it?

Cause many dont think about the investigations when they kill...they do so in an emotionally aroused state.

I think Mr Ripper was as cold a fish as they come when he worked. He planned to kill....he didnt just kill when aggravated. And I think room 13 has some emotional, personal content in evidence.

Im off for a bit Ben, I moved on Thursday and have lots of work to do...cheers Mate, see you soon.

All the best amigo.

it's amazing what people vision in a murder site, Mike sees this totally different to me.....but that's ok..

he prowled the streets for women, that plyed their trade on the streets and not from a room like Mary.....this tells me he was strolling down Dorset st looking for a prostitute out in the open, hoping to take her somewhere quiet, but not necesarily back to her room, OF COURSE A ROOM WOULD BE BETTER, but that's just a dream for the ripper, minus this; a street kill would have to do; he's not that fussy!

so Kelly having a room ?......well the Ripper's in paradise (obviously), it's the icing on the cake....this points towards Blotchy face.

but we have this problem of her waking up..so i'm not sure.

``you can come back to my place, i'm alone all night long, you dont have to leave till the morning and we wont be disturbed``..

JTR would think, ``WOW, GREAT, i can really go to town on this one, as long as i dont kill her too early, this girl is young, she may have loads of friends; especially on a saturday night``

this is honest to God almost definitely what he'd think, but the other prostitutes wouldn't go inside, so he was limited to quick street murders with a fixed M.O, mutilations yes, but only quick gutting...not enough time for anything else.

but was the Ripper right?..... yes his tactics were spot on, he couldn't afford to mutilate any longer than about 5 to 10 mins, not in busy Whitechapel, you'll always see someone in a busy city about once every 15 to 20 mins, a city is never dead at night....and his time to mutilate has to include talking to her, walking with her, strangling etc..... it's the maximum time in her presence both alive and dead, about 15 to 20 mins.

it's like where i live in a small town in HAMPSHIRE, there's always people about late at night, you have to go right into the countryside before it's really quiet at night....in a city you've got partygoers, drunks, people going too and fro late/early shifts/ markets etc, people simply restless/ dossing on the streets etc.... never dead at night....never

i mean.... he even almost got caught at Eddowes, so this 10 to 20 mins time frame is crucial, no longer.

you'll notice, although indoors and with all the time in the world, that he still didn't sever MARY's head..... he therefore never intended to out on the streets either, this is the one of the strongest signs of a Signature! .......if this was a copycat, good grief; he knew a hell of a lot about JTR !

the M.O is correct after the first quick cut to the throat onwards, but before that, you can see that something disasterous hapenned, that prevented him from strangling her, yes she woke up in fright, something disturbed her sleep.

[Sam Flynn]

Cri de coeur!

And that pre-supposes that despite the lack of any accredited evidence that might suggest Mary ever left her room after arriving home at 11:45am, she did anyway.

It was a thought-experiment, Mike, not an excuse to launch into yet another discussion about whether Kelly stayed in or not. I hinted - and hoped! - as much in my post.

Please, please, please let's not turn this into yet another "Kelly stayed in" thread! This is about the killer's signature - not speculating about the behaviour of any one of his victims.

[perrymason]

It was a thought-experiment, Mike, not an excuse to launch into yet another discussion about whether Kelly stayed in or not. I hinted - and hoped! - as much in my post.

Please, please, please let's not turn this into yet another "Kelly stayed in" thread! This is about the killer's signature - not speculating about the behaviour of any one of his victims.

Thats not a problem Sam, that would be a very weak platform to remain perched on in and of itself.

The Signature wouldnt have to be part of that kind of MO departure anyway. Is the Ripper signature just mutilation...general cutting, or was it specific cutting before Mary Kelly is murdered? Jack cut into Polly and Annie and Kate after they had been defeated physically without a knife, and then had their throats opened. Can we say Mary is cut based on the same data? She could easily have received many cuts before the throat cut and while conscious and resisting.

Before Mary, Jack cuts (mutilations) into only dead women. In Marys murder, her killer cut her wherever he could.... while she could still fight back, before her throat was even cut perhaps.

If anything the Ripper up until Mary fights his prey without a knife, and uses the knife only when he has won. Defensive wounds say that was not the case in room 13.

Cheers Gareth, hope things are sunny and warm in Wales.

[qotsa]

this makes me think he broke in queitly to Kelly's room
with knife in hand awaking Kelly in the process

[Sam Flynn]

Is the Ripper signature just mutilation...general cutting, or was it specific cutting before Mary Kelly is murdered? Jack cut into Polly and Annie and Kate after they had been defeated physically without a knife, and then had their throats opened. Can we say Mary is cut based on the same data? She could easily have received many cuts before the throat cut and while conscious and resisting.

Again, that would have more to do with the behaviour of the victim. I mean, we can hardly ascribe the injuries sustained by the victim's self-defence to the signature of the killer, can we?

hope things are sunny and warm in Wales.

I hope not, Mike - it's three hours after sunset here

[Sam Flynn]

this makes me think he broke in queitly to Kelly's room
with knife in hand awaking Kelly in the process

Thanks, qotsa - but, as I've said, this discussion really isn't about Kelly in isolation. There are innumerable threads on the Kelly boards, and some "derailed" threads on non-Kelly boards for that matter, which go into that topic - at greaaaaaaaaat length

[smezenen]

Sam,
Not trying to derail the thread here but the debate over weather Kelly stayed in or went out does relate to the Rippers signature in discussing weather or not those factors would change his signature any if at all.

[Jon Guy]

Hi Smezenen

The Chapman outdoor crime scene almost mirrors the indoor crime scene of Kelly, the indoor scenario allowing for the victim to be undressed.

[Sam Flynn]

Not trying to derail the thread here but the debate over weather Kelly stayed in or went out does relate to the Rippers signature in discussing weather or not those factors would change his signature any if at all.

That would not have any bearing on his signature, Smez - that being what he did to the victims during, and after, their deaths... the "trademark" he left behind.

You may be thinking about his modus operandi, or "MO" - the way he operated before he killed. Even then, a killer's MO needn't remain unchanged, and external variables might well influence how an offender behaves. In other words, MO's can (and will) change depending on circumstance.

Factors such as the weather, the police presence on the streets, and the behaviour of the victims themselves, were entirely beyond the killer's control. The MO therefore cannot be seen as a reliable indicator of whether a given killer was or wasn't involved in a particular murder. People make that mistake time and time again.

Once he'd overpowered his victim, the manner in which he kills and the subsequent mutilations start to become relevant - and now he's free to "sign his name", so to speak. This "signature" element is far less sensitive to external influences than the MO, and is therefore a far better indicator of a killer's work than any "prelude to murder" could possibly be.

[smezenen]

That would not have any bearing on his signature, Smez - that being what he did to the victims during, and after, their deaths... the "trademark" he left behind.

No, I'm sure I was thinking about his signature. As you say what he did to his victims during and after their deaths. I was gearing my remarks toward the "extent of the mutilation" as it has been sugested that this could not have been Jacks kill becouse he took organs from the thorax instead of the abdomin. there are those that argue the signature is not the same, I argue that it is, its just bolder and underlined. the indoor/outdoor debate relates directly to this topic when you discuse time with the victim.

[Sam Flynn]

the indoor/outdoor debate relates directly to this topic when you discuse time with the victim.

Indeed it does, in relation to the opportunity for him to "have his signature writ large", Smez - so you're quite right there.

For the benefit of others, then: how he ended up indoors is fundamentally an MO question, and would have been subject to external factors not entirely within the killer's gift. Likewise, whether or not his victims suffered defence wounds would be entirely down to the victim, and not the killer. Neither are relevant to a discussion about the killer's signature, which is that part of the sequence of events over which he had full control, i.e. what took place after death.

[Malcolm X]

the M.O and signature varies with regards to M.Kelly.

but the important thing is, they dont vary enough to imply that another killer/copycat is at work, they vary due to location/the victim... the only murder that is doubtful is Stride, but if JACK was disturbed, then the M.O is still similar to all the others.

[perrymason]

Indeed it does, in relation to the opportunity for him to "have his signature writ large", Smez - so you're quite right there.

For the benefit of others, then: how he ended up indoors is fundamentally an MO question, and would have been subject to external factors not entirely within the killer's gift. Likewise, whether or not his victims suffered defence wounds would be entirely down to the victim, and not the killer. Neither are relevant to a discussion about the killer's signature, which is that part of the sequence of events over which he had full control, i.e. what took place after death.

Why the killer would change locales for his kills is surely an MO question Sam, and defensive wounds on Mary Jane indicate that he used his knife before she was unable to resist. As was not the case with Polly, Annie and Kate. None showed any indication they were awake and resisting when the knife is first used. Marys murder however does. The signature is arguably mutilating women he has just defeated physically and killed with throat cuts.

I think suggesting the myriad of MO changes that would have had to occur to now find our "Ripper" acting in a manner inconsistent with his previous attributed victims are minor is misleading to say the least. Almost every aspect of the murders of Polly, Annie and Kate are alike. Mary Kellys murder is unlike all 3 of them. In manner of attack, place of attack, actions performed while using a knife and resulting injuries inflicted on the remains,....Mary is a departure, not a continuance.

That room is full of inexplicable activities, placing organs and breasts about her body, stripping flesh off half her right thigh and from the inside on the left one, the facial madness...but when looking at Annies murder for example, I see a woman who was probably choked without knife use, then had her throat cut to kill her and drain blood, then had her abdomen opened to remove and take some contents. Aside from some items by her body that may have fallen from her inside skirt pocket when it was ripped open, its easy to see an ordered death with the goal being to obtain the organs taken. The coroner thought so too.

So, ..How does Marys bony right thigh, breast under her head and destroyed face aid her heart removal again?

Best regards Gareth.