The Ripper's MO....

[perrymason]

I see two problems there, Mike, which is why I'm keen that we keep a degree of separation between the two subjects (call them "MO" or "signature" if you like). The issues are these:

1. As I've hinted, we can only ever speculate on how the Ripper went about his business;

2. The ways in which he might have "ensnared" his victims, the types of victims, the sorts of locations (etc) aren't unique to Jack the Ripper.

So, in discussing what I've called (rightly or wrongly) "MO", we're only speculating about things which are ultimately neither definite nor distinctive. In terms of deciding between whom he may or may not have killed, therefore, one has to conclude that puzzling over his "MO" isn't a particularly useful instrument.

Hi again Sam,

I think you unfairly critique the possible value you offer here, if we stay within defined realms.

If we use the Canonical Group as the most likely of all the women that were killed during the relevant period by Jack The Ripper, we do have medical and investigative opinion on those deaths to use as the criteria, so we can sort of gauge probabilities fairly well.

The Ripper sought victims among the working street class prostitutes out after midnight alone. Whether they were or were not soliciting on that night.....lets set aside for the moment. He gets alone with them in secluded settings, probably in most cases acting as a client would, and when he does he does not engage in sex but rather he likely chokes, then kills them. Lets leave signature issues like "cuts and preferences" from that point on aside as well.

He is known to take things with him when he leaves though....not just biological material and ripped cloth.... he also took Annie's Rings.

So generally, thats an MO. He meets, gets discrete, gets them off their feet, makes their lives till then complete, and leaves sometimes with a treat.

The specifics of Jack though, as I believe you recognize, arent in those details.

Because any man who killed a prostitute with a knife outdoors after midnight and robbed them of something would fit. And we know that other men did just that aside from Jack.

All the best Sam

[Sam Flynn]

I think you unfairly critique the possible value you offer here, if we stay within defined realms.

Thanks, Mike - but even the most stringently defined realms are, nonetheless, imagined... and highly speculative.

Because any man who killed a prostitute with a knife outdoors after midnight and robbed them of something would fit. And we know that other men did just that aside from Jack.

Precisely. And it's for that reason that speculating on how Jack went about his business preparatory to killing, whilst interesting in itself, is of limited value. It logically has nothing to do with how he effected the act of killing itself, nor the nature of any wounds that followed.

[Christine]

Hi Christine,

Susipcious pre-crime "poking about" is precisely what I'd expect from a serial killer intent on targetting a victim in an indoor location. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that there is only a minority of cases where serial killers don't engage in suspicious poking about prior to killing victims in their homes. It would be far more tricky if his dispensed altogether with the type of pre-crime surveillance that characterize most indoor attacks from serial killers.

Best regards,
Ben

But if she invited him in and they shared a drink or a song, then he would be able to assess the situation fairly easily. If he broke in, I agree, he would almost have to look in the window, try the door, look around the area, things like that.

[smezenen]

QUOTE=Ben;85247]A small point of clarification regarding to term "break-in", Smez.

I don't believe anything was actually "broken" or forced.
Best regards,
Ben[/QUOTE]

Ben,
I used the term Break-in to indicate unlawfull entry not the actual breaking of anything. Im sorry if that term confused anyone.

[smezenen]

.you only have to imagine busy Millers court/dorset st in the morning, to realise how rediculous a morning mutilation is.

What time of the morning would millers court get busy?

According to Mary Anne Cox men where leaving for work in the markets sometime between 3 am and 6:30 and elizibeth Prater testified to seeing Carmen dressing horses when she left at 5:30AM.

[smezenen]

JTR burned her clothes to generate additional light so he could mutilate her, but not seen outside, due to the very late hour and no witnesses around.....maybe!

Her cloths where found folded on a chair.

[smezenen]

When its suggested that motis operandi can change its not surprising, its documented that some do change the MO...but what then is the criteria for the inclusion if not within the pattern of the murders preceding it? How can anyone know when we are dealing with a random unrelated death, or a non-traditional Ripper MO?

When the MO changes follow a documentable progression.


Mary Nicholes, cut throat, abdomen mutilation but no organ removed (this is the baseline)

Annie Chapman, cut throat (same), cut to abdomen (same) uterus and its appendages with the upper portion of the vagina and the posterior two thirds of the bladder missing (new)

Elizabeth Stride, cut throat (same) but then for some reason he abandons the kill. Interrupted? Not a ripper kill? Trying a now method and decises he doesnt like it?

Catherine Eddows, cut throat (same) cut abdomen (same) kidney and uterus missing (same) face mutilation (new)

Mary Jane Kelly, cut throat (same) cut abdomen (same) heart missing (same) face mutilation (same) extent of overall mutilation is extreme in this case because he had more time with the body (new)

[Malcolm X]

Her cloths where found folded on a chair.

sorry my mistake, but i think you'll find other clothes were burned in there too.

Millers court/ whitechapel would've been busy most of the time, a large town/city is never truly dead at night...but Millers court would've been far too busy for a morning mutilation as per Richard sais, at about 9am.....that's just plain rediculous.

millers court would've been quietest at 2am to about 4am...i'm not sure, but whatever the case; a break in is still achievable, the worst of all; is to mutilate her and leave her room; after sunrise...which could've been about 7am

( i couldn't find sunrise times for the year 1888 in November....so i'm only guessing at roughly 7am)

[babybird67]

yes

I thought that it was the clothes that Maria (?) had brought round for Mary to mend that were burnt in the fire?

[Malcolm X]

this thread has had it, i see no decent reply to my original question..and i see nothing new here that i haven't read in the past.

there is no other mutilator present in Whitechapel, the torso murders are something completely different

i therefore speculate as strongly as ever, that JTR gained entry at close to 4am and Mary simply woke up.

but it all does boil down to Hutch, he either totally lied and was there as JTR.....or he was there and saw everything (telling the truth).......because strong speculation points to him being there, regardless of Abberline dismising him as unreliable.

my guess is therefore, and this hasn't changed in the last 3 years, that JTR was either Hutch or Chapman.....Blotchy?....he left earlier on.

[Christine]

this thread has had it, i see no decent reply to my original question..and i see nothing new here that i haven't read in the past.

there is no other mutilator present in Whitechapel, the torso murders are something completely different

i therefore speculate as strongly as ever, that JTR gained entry at close to 4am and Mary simply woke up.

but it all does boil down to Hutch, he either totally lied and was there as JTR.....or he was there and saw everything (telling the truth).......because strong speculation points to him being there, regardless of Abberline dismising him as unreliable.

my guess is therefore, and this hasn't changed in the last 3 years, that JTR was either Hutch or Chapman.....Blotchy?....he left earlier on.

Leaving the mystery of Hutch aside, why not Mr. Random? Anyone who was a local and skulking about could have seen her interacting with one or more of the known participants and broken in, or been let in by her.

[perrymason]

Hi all,

A couple of quick remedials......

A Hat rim and some fabric were found in the ashes Friday afternoon, and Maria's laundry was said to have contained a bonnet and I believe some velvet....(Im not sure if Im mistaking the velvet left with Liz's lodging house friend, but its black fabric at any rate).

The door was forced open at 1:30pm by McCarthy himself. It was not broken down.

I see your progression concept clearly now smezenen. The venues or the individual particulars dont seem as troubling to you as they are to me, is what I think our difference is in this investigation. I dont think we disagree on the fundamental issues that I would use to debate some inclusions...we extrapolate differently.

I think in Marys case, the departure from the pre-existing model is dramatic and was not forced upon her killer. I think the methodology likely used suggests someone close to her. I believe that there is already at least 1 documented Ripper "copycat" murder, albeit after the spree, on the books.

In Marys case the wounds dont convince me... despite being for the most part consistent types of injuries to Jacks victims. But the methodology changes do convince me that this murder was unlike the others in some fundamental, "non-knife use" ways.

In Liz's case, the polar opposite opinions seems true for me. That MO could well have been a consistent "pick up soliciting whore", take her somewhere dark....but there are issues with how she is killed with the knife and what happens next, or rather, what didnt.


Cheers smezenen and all.

[Malcolm X]

Yes we all have different theories about what happened, we thus interpret these murders totally differently, over the years you realise that it's impossible to win people over to your way of thinking, it doesn't matter how convincing or well thought out your arguement is, they either agree with you or they dont.

the only thing strange about the Kelly murder is, that it looks like he attacked her with a knife first, which is a departure from his M.O caused by something going wrong.

it's time for a break, i cant think of anything else to say right now

[Observer]

Why would the Ripper change his MO with Kelly? Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes, all dispatched without any bother, why change a successful formula?

Kelly took her killer home with her as far as I'm concerned

all the best

Observer

[smezenen]

( i couldn't find sunrise times for the year 1888 in November....so i'm only guessing at roughly 7am)

Pretty good guess Mallcolm you are only 9 minute off (7:09AM) here is where you can find the data http://www.sci.fi/~benefon/sol.html

Also the temperature that night would have ben between 36.2 and the daily high of 46.3 degrees F. Im sure between midnight and sunrise it would have been closer to the 36.2 degrees. at temperatures of 50 degrees F it only takes 1 hour to be in stage 3 Hyperthermia and at 32 degrees only 15 minutes. Now granted Jack would have been clothed and that would delay the onsset but a drop in body temperature of just 1 degree can cause numbness and a drop of 4 degrees will cause muscle mis-coordination which is an indicater of stage 2. All that being said, if jack had to stake out 13 millers court then he would have had to remain somewhat hidden and still so as to avoid being seen. he would have had between 15 and 60 minutes (approxamated due to clothing) before he felt the effects of stage 2 hyperthermia IF Jack broke in i dont think he would have hung around long staking the place out otherwise he would have been too cold to do anything. He could have come and gone a few times but once again that increases risk. or he could have been just blindly walking into every court and checking each door to see which ones where unlocked.