Ripper Profile

[Samuelson1982]

Hi all,

I was looking through older threads and although there were some threads that had to do with the Ripper's profile, many of them were very old or strayed off topic quite quickly. I do realize that this whole site is a sort of Ripper profile, but I also think it is good to have a place to organize this info a bit better. Therefore, I am starting this topic up again. One thing I found of interest in older threads was posted back in 2003, but I think may help, so I want to include it here.

http://www.casebook.org/forum/messages/4922/8112.html

It would be good to just get some basic answers to come up with a probable suspect profile.

To me there are two main categories that can describe a person:

Their physical description and their personality. Basically what's on the outside and what's on the inside.

When it comes to the Ripper's physical description, I have always read through witness accounts that he had dark hair. Has anyone heard differently? Are there any witnesses that described him with blond or red hair?

I'm more concerned about him as a person, though. Do you believe he was more the crazy/heard voices/lunatic type of killer or that he was more the focused/intelligent/sane/just plain evil type of killer? Some of both? Is that possible to be both? I think he seems more of the focused/intelligent/sane/just plain evil type.

I've noticed that many times people assume killer's of this sort have a history that will include violence, anger, etc. or that it would be apparent he was different, maybe eccentric or odd. What do you think? Many serial killers act perfectly normal don't they? Do you think he would have seemed perfectly normal(maybe even to the point of making the police overlook him as a suspect) or not? I believe he would have seemed quite normal.

Do you think he lived or worked in the whitechapel area? Seems to me he is likely to have lived near whitechapel.

It always seemed to me that he had a 9-5 job type thing going on from M-F. Anyone believe differently?

Do you think he killed prostitutes because they were prostitutes, because they were easy prey or both? I tend to think it's both. I mean if it were me, I'd much rather just go up to a woman that would willingly follow me into a dark alley, than to have to go into a bar and chat up several woman before I convinced one of them to go back to her place and if I couldn't do that would she follow me into a dark alley? Probably not...

Do you think he was killing to seek attention, to satisfy himself in some way, or because he disliked females/prostitutes, or a combination? I think it was a combination of all three of these. Sometimes I even wonder if he saw it as a game with the police, haha you haven't caught me yet!

Do you believe he had some knowledge of anatomy? I think he had some, but not as much as say a doctor would have.

Any ideas on what his occupation would have been? The criminal profile I added the link to suggests he would have been able to demonstrate his violent tendencies legally through his occupation. idk

It seemed to me(and I could be entirely wrong) that even thinking of Mary Ann Nichols the Ripper seemed to have some sort of knowledge of how to go about killing in a way as to not get blood all over him. He seemed to already have a method that worked well and was clean, not messy. I would assume if this was his first victim he would have been quite sloppy do to inexperience. Do you think he was sloppy at all with Nichols and if not, do you think believe this may not have been his first victim?

Which victim did he take rings from? Any ideas on why he might do this(if this victim was indeed a Ripper victim)?

Do you think the Ripper would have been married or had a partner at the time of the murders?

Ok I suppose that's a good start.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

My speculation of the Ripper, going by what little we 'know' of him, is:

He had dark hair. Probably brown, but it could've been black or dirty blonde. I'm gonna assume by that that he may have had hazel eyes too.

He wasn't crazy. Despite not being wired right, he didn't seem out of control or daft. He probably had average intelligence and a (controlled) vicious temper.

He acted and/or looked normal (apart from murdering and mutilating apparently ;p).

He lived (and possibly worked) in Whitechapel. He very likely had a job on week days.

He killed prostitutes because they were easy pickings; I think he just wanted to mutilate women - period. They were the most convenient.

He killed to satisfy himself. If he wanted attention, he would've been caught. He had issues with women; probably misogynistic and/or sexual.

He didn't have surgical skill. That said, I think he may have looked at anatomical pictures (maybe as a form of pornography o_O). Though I think his 'skill' comes from what I think his occupation was; a slaughterer of some kind.

Polly's murder was the roughest. There's bruising on her jaw which, to me, indicates that he slashed her throat during a struggle either from behind or from the side, roughly lifting her chin to get at her throat with his blade.

He took rings from Annie. He probably thought they were valuable, rather than taking them for trophies.

He didn't have a girlfriend or wife. I can't see him committing with a woman, not with his mindset. Though if he had any children, they may have been the product of his being serviced by a prostitute. But I think it's safe to say that they would've been aborted.

[DarkPassenger]

Jack is like the opposite of the Minstead Man - while the police have accumulated huge amounts of data on this man, and have created a very detailed and consistent profile of him, Jack has been touted as being anything from a woman, to a jew, to a sailor, to a gang of man, to a blackmailer, to a prince. Depending upon who you ask, he's either clearly organised or disorganised.

People just like to think they have some esoteric knowledge, or to feel that they are "right." Jack is a poor victim of Ripperological snobbery and greed.

Jack is likely to be a white male, aged between 35 - 55, who lived within a five minute walk of Wentworth Street. He was a trained butcher or at least had some experience working with sharp knives and at the same time, was used to the sight of gore - the fact that he worked mostly in darkness can be contrast with the fact that the one murder he did have lighting available - Mary Kelly - he made a real job of it. He was not fazed by gore.
He was a drinker and frequented the pubs around Commercial Street, shopped at the market to the north and was a regular user of hookers.
The murders are a mixture of organised and disorganised signs - he picked them up and took them out of the way (or let them do the leading since he trusted they knew the best places to take customers), but left them where he killed them. He took his weapon away with him, suggesting he planned to keep killing but also that he needed the knife, possibly for his work, suggesting he's not just a lacky in some abertoire (spelling!) but possibly a partner in a small local business.
He carried out similar procedures on at least three of the victims (I am a Stride-skeptic) and carried out postmortem mutilations in the dark, after killing them - suggesting a planned murder with the motive of mutilation. Maybe he was taking the organs to sell after all?
Also, he mutilated the faces of two of the prostitutes (correct me if I am wrong) - this, I believe, was indeed because both had some connections to him which, he feared, could be traced.
I believe it's likely Jack had some connection to the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee. He was probably keeping up with the investigation, watching the police, and wished to insert himself into the hunt somehow. It also explains how and why the kidney was sent to Lusk, and not the newspapers or the police.

There's my profile from looking at the evidence, but that it just my opinion.

[Mascara & Paranoia]

Jack is likely to be aged between 35 - 55

55?! I think late thirties was the oldest age in the spectrum. Apart from Long's man (I'm assuming she saw his grey hair or something to estimate that he was "well over forty" judging by a quick glance at his back!) or any of the celebrity 'suspects', all the realistic suspects; the men seen with various victims on the nights of their deaths; were in their late twenties to mid thirties.

[sdreid]

To me, if these were his first murders, 15-35 would be a much more likely age range. I can't think of any killers of this type who "became" at an age after early 40s and that's Chikatilo and who knows if he can be believed.

[Christine]

I pretty much agree with most of what has been said, so I won't go into too much detail, except to add this.

I believe the ripper must have been obviously ill to those around him. Despite the obligatory media comments from neighbors ("He looked so normal!") most serial killers do not seem normal to people who know them well, and the Ripper was clearly deranged and unable to control his impulses well at all. Even "normal" killers like Bundy deteriorate until they become more and more obviously ill.

My belief is that he had family or friends helping him out (because he would have been fired from all his jobs). After Kelly, he probably died, or was put in an asylum, or was locked up by his own family.

As for harvesting organs to sell, he may have had such a thing in mind, but it was obviously impossible because anyone who was offered a part of the victims ("Here's a uterus! Nope, no kidney. I left it in Buck's Row! But next time I'll grab a kidney, okay?") would have gone to the police immediately. So the idea that he was an organ salesman translates into "he was completely delusional," which we pretty much knew already.

[kensei]

To me there are two main categories that can describe a person:

Their physical description and their personality. Basically what's on the outside and what's on the inside.

When it comes to the Ripper's physical description, I have always read through witness accounts that he had dark hair. Has anyone heard differently? Are there any witnesses that described him with blond or red hair?

I'm more concerned about him as a person, though. Do you believe he was more the crazy/heard voices/lunatic type of killer or that he was more the focused/intelligent/sane/just plain evil type of killer? Some of both? Is that possible to be both? I think he seems more of the focused/intelligent/sane/just plain evil type

When it comes to physical description I think much can be made of the clothing described by witnesses in the Chapman, Stride and Eddowes cases. There are some minor differences in details but for the most part they could easily be describing the same outfit- a dark overcoat and deerstalker cap. It also seems the Ripper had a moustache but I have wondered how likely or unlikely it might have been that it was a fake, especially once he decided to continue to go out and do his thing once he'd become a hunted man.

As to personality, I think it may be a much more complex question than wondering if he was a lunatic who heard voices or a sane and focused man who was just pure evil. I almost struggle to find the words to explain what it is I mean, but I think what makes a serial killer is often much more complicated than either of those. It is a lifelong series of circumstances that slowly but surely build up an aberrant thought process, culminating in urges to do terrible things that the person knows full well are wrong and a breakdown in inhibitions not to do them. I think Jack must have had a miserable upbringing, and in adulthood in the misery of Whitechapel he found that not much had changed. He was the ultimate manifestation of everything that was wrong with the East End. I definitely don't think he was obviously crazy and hearing voices. He had to appear normal enough for the victims to come away with him without fear, especially once the Ripper scare was well underway.

Afterthought: I would add that understanding or even sympathizing with the upbringing and background of a serial killer is not at all giving them a free pass. They cross into the realm of evil when they know that their urges are wrong and choose of their own free will to give into them. Most times I hear a criminal described as someone who "didn't know right from wrong" I think it is rubbish. The mere fact that a criminal takes steps to avoid capture shows that he understands he's doing wrong.

[Samuelson1982]

DarkPassenger
Jack is likely to be a white male, aged between 35 - 55, who lived within a five minute walk of Wentworth Street.

Just out of curiosity, why do you think he lived within a five minute walk of Wentworth Street?

He was a drinker and frequented the pubs around Commercial Street, shopped at the market to the north and was a regular user of hookers.

What's the theory for someone like him using hookers? I would think he wouldn't, I thought he hated them. This always confused me. Not that I think the theory is right or wrong, I just don't understand. Unless I'm thinking of the word hookers in the wrong way.

I believe it's likely Jack had some connection to the Whitechapel Vigilance Committee. He was probably keeping up with the investigation, watching the police, and wished to insert himself into the hunt somehow. It also explains how and why the kidney was sent to Lusk, and not the newspapers or the police.

I'm curious to know how many people think the kidney actually came from Eddowes. The more I read about it, the more it seems that it may not have.

sdreid
To me, if these were his first murders, 15-35 would be a much more likely age range. I can't think of any killers of this type who "became" at an age after early 40s and that's Chikatilo and who knows if he can be believed.

I have a hard time believing that Nichols was his first victim. He seemed to already have some experience by then. Of course, I suppose he could have practiced on animals somehow.

Christine
My belief is that he had family or friends helping him out (because he would have been fired from all his jobs). After Kelly, he probably died, or was put in an asylum, or was locked up by his own family.

Does anyone know of any serial killer that had his fantasy kill finally happen and then quit because of it? Does that tend to just make the killer want to kill more? What more could he have wanted than what he did to Kelly? Hard to imagine.

kensei
As to personality, I think it may be a much more complex question than wondering if he was a lunatic who heard voices or a sane and focused man who was just pure evil. I almost struggle to find the words to explain what it is I mean, but I think what makes a serial killer is often much more complicated than either of those. It is a lifelong series of circumstances that slowly but surely build up an aberrant thought process, culminating in urges to do terrible things that the person knows full well are wrong and a breakdown in inhibitions not to do them. I think Jack must have had a miserable upbringing, and in adulthood in the misery of Whitechapel he found that not much had changed. He was the ultimate manifestation of everything that was wrong with the East End. I definitely don't think he was obviously crazy and hearing voices. He had to appear normal enough for the victims to come away with him without fear, especially once the Ripper scare was well underway.

One of the reasons I asked about the crazy/sane question was to try and see if we could eliminate certian suspects to some degree. I know we cannot do this fully, but you get my point. For example, to me Aaron Kosminski just seems to crazy to me. Someone who says the voices told him to eat out of a gutter? Like you said he had to seem sane enough for victims to follow him into a dark alley. If it were me I think I would be avoiding someone like Aaron, no matter how hard up I was for cash lol. Besides we've already realized Aaron was almost as harmless as a teddy bear compared to some other suspects.