Mad Men- Degrees of Separation

[Guest]

Hi all,

No this isnt about the TV Series.

Ive been trying to reconcile the fact that the blend of suspects that we have all studied do not fit easily into a category of "Madmen". The blend of Suspects in the Memorandum is a perfect example of what I mean, juxtaposed with a man who is evidently in control of himself enough to maintain a career and a normal public social life, is a pathological thief and petty criminal and a man with identified mental disorders.

I started to think that there were 2 very distinct types of Madmen within the suspects of the investigators and suspects we have since added to the list.

Some seem to have severe metal disorders that would prevent them from living normal productive lives. They seem to be lacking in the emotional and intellectual controls all of us have, and as such are capable of actions that are socially and legally unacceptable and were potentially aggressive and dangerous.

There are also some men that would have had the ability to consciously suppress "evil" thoughts or fantasies to be able to function in the relatively normal way that we see many of them did.

Take Druitt for example. Or Chapman. Neither of those men are obviously "mad", but we know one was "mad" enough to kill people and just go on with his life as if nothing happened, and we suspect that the investigators believed that Druitt lost his ability to keep his "dark side" in check, and killed himself in order to stop from killing again.

We see the word "mad" all over the press coverage and for I think many of us we assume that this madness the Ripper had must have been one that he was unable to suppress or hide. Like a Pizer. Or Kosminski, or Bury, or Cutbush, or Cohen, or Puckridge, or a Fogelma.

Well.....this thread was created to suggest that I think the Ripper we should be looking for is among the men that could suppress their desires or impulses, men that could work and function "normally". Perhaps with normal social lives. Not monied men, but one of the faceless men that went to work each day in the East End, and in Jacks case case, spent at least a few nights a month out at night walking the streets.

Im beginning to believe that the only way to reconcile the fact that the first few murders seemed to the authorities done by a man with some anatomical skill and surgical type knowledge is to assume that the man we seek was to some degree, educated. That would rule out most identified mentally ill men right there. I believe the physical evidence shows that he was cognizant of leaving traces of himself which he then ensured he did not....I think his coolness and daring, if he just stepped back out into the streets after a kill shows self control, and I think the only possible communications from the killer, the GSG and the Lusk Letter...in my opinion, back up the supposition that he may even have had superior intellect to many of those that chased him.

That Druitt is even mentioned as a very viable suspect should indicate that the police were open to the notion that the killer was 90% of the time perfectly normal and that he chose when to kill....he wasnt compelled to do so whenever a desire crossed his mind, lacking the ability to censure his subconscious.

Any thoughts?

Best regards all.

[corey123]

now were talking

ok so here is a killer.he is at least slightly eduacted,he has a compelling knowledge of the streets and allyways of the east end(and possibally a good knowledge of the places that the prostitutes solicited),he has a compulse to kill but can controle that impulse untill he seems fit,he can kill a person and feel no remore nor guilt about doing so,he may have a suprioror knowledge to the police,he feels proud of what he does,he may have some degree of anatomical knowledge,he has a disturbed state of being as in why he titled the lusk letter from hell,he has a weekly job,and lives in the vecinity.these qualities would make it easy for the ripper to kill and kill unnoticed.i doubt any of the 'suspects' listed probally have anything to do with the ripper murders.you are right the police probally did have an idea about the ripper not being a lunatic as in the case with druitt.this is a topic that is the basis to finding the rippers identaty.like i said befor in previous posts i belive if the police did house to house searches the chance of them finding the ripper would be upped almost 80%,also a good sweeping of jobs in the east end would also help.

yours truly

[lynn cates]

models

Hello Mike. Once again, you are singing my song. I would love to reach at least some broad consensus on the ripper's mindset.

Not having studied psychology since my undergraduate days when it was my first (along with history) I don't feel terribly qualified here. However:

Klosowski (Chapman) seems to fit the classic definition of the sociopath. We see something like this in the contemporary chap, Scott Peterson. If I recall (after nearly 30 years!) the characteristics, the sociopath has no conscience. But this does not preclude his/her having some broad understanding of others' moral categories. Hence, when cornered, the sociopath has been known, not only to show some kind of contrition, but also grossly to exaggerate it.

Kosminski was almost certainly schizophrenic--possibly paranoid. A simple schizophrenic may be harmless (his behaviour AFTER incarceration); or violent. I used to ride the bus with the harmless type. One such chap used to preach sermons to the windows.

Kaminski (Cohen?) seems described as a paranoid schizophrenic. This is quite dangerous and such a chap is often violent--as he was alleged to be.

Druitt was chronically depressed and likely bipolar. (When I was in school, in the neolithic period (chuckle!), this was referred to as manic-depressive or cyclothymic personality.) Left untreated, suicide is a not unlikely result.

If only I were a young chap, I would go back to school and study more abnormal psychology. It is a fascinating field.

Well, in looking at this post I think I may have succeeded in obfuscating things.

The best.
LC

[perrymason]

Hi Lynn,

You didnt obfuscate, ...but you did base your comments on suspects with likely various forms of mental disorders, not the obvious presence of any said disorders.

Chapman is someone who was disturbed enough to kill but exhibited no obvious mental illness that affected his abilities to socialize or work, evidenced by running his own business and his ability to find and court women. Until he is caught for the poisoning he is considered as innocuous and probably very ordinary. Not so with some other candidates, like Kosminski.

I think Jack is functional and normal 90% of the month. Maybe even successful, on a pay scale that makes sense in that part of town at that time. Meaning, maybe he had a full time job and his own place. I see the man being single too. Any man leaving a wife or girlfriend alone for hours in the middle of the night and coming home with bloodstains wouldnt have stayed hidden for very long.

Women that would lie to protect a man that they think may be actively killing women are scarce I would imagine.

Cheers Lynn, all.

[lynn cates]

diagnoses

Hello Mike. You wouldn't happen to know the clinical diagnosis of any modern day serial killers? Sutcliffe, perhaps?

The best.
LC

[corey123]

yes,but i belive the probability of jack being married is very slim.he probally had some type of cycological disorder that could go unnoticed by others or im sure the police would have noted it and investigated.i dont think it could have been bi-polar disorder because that usually doesnt progress into murderous tendencys.and the disorder couldnt be great enough to damage his mental stability because he would need to be mentally stable to commit the atocracys in the way the ripper did.

in barnett the disorder echolalia isnt a kind of disorder to resort to murderous tendencys.
then again alot of murders were paraniod so i belive the ripper probally was a paraniod schizophrenic.

yours truly

[corey123]

here lynn

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1279311/

[perrymason]

Hello Mike. You wouldn't happen to know the clinical diagnosis of any modern day serial killers? Sutcliffe, perhaps?

The best.
LC

I dont know Lynn, as with you, I am not terribly well informed on the subject of psychoanalysis or various psychosis and their manifestations,.....Im just using the general "sound mental health" tag for the purposes of the thread.

Cheers LC

[Sam Flynn]

in barnett the disorder echolalia isnt a kind of disorder to resort to murderous tendencys.

Barnett's echolalia is entirely speculative, anyway, Corey. Bruce Paley came up with it in his book JTR: The Simple Truth - evidently to try to find something "wrong" with Barnett, in order to make him fit the FBI's "Ripper profile" a bit better.

As you indicate, echolalia doesn't strike one as predisposing to murder - although it might give rise to a few repeat offenders

[corey123]

hey

hello sam

you are correct we dont know for a fact if barnett had the disorder ecolalia.and on the notion on how i cant progress to murderous behaviors we can also speculate that barnett maybe had another disorder to progres to murderous tendacies.but this isnt very likely

yours truly

[corey123]

echolalia

heres a good website about the disorder

http://www.spdsupport.org.uk/echolalia.html

echolalia can be found in those which suffer from various phycological disorders like autism and schizophrenia.maybe barnett had one of those disorders if he is a schizophrenic then that may be a reason why he may have killed.

just some thoughts

[Barnaby]

Hello Mike. You wouldn't happen to know the clinical diagnosis of any modern day serial killers? Sutcliffe, perhaps?

The best.
LC

Many serial killers (well, many males populating prisons in general) have a antisocial personality disorder diagnosis, characterized by a complete lack of feeling for anyone else. Interestingly, these people can be superficially quite charming (think Ted Bundy).

[lynn cates]

diagnosis

Hello Barnaby. Not to mention that he also seemed to be highly intelligent. (I think the judge at one point remarked that fact.)

Do you know if this was Sutcliffe's diagnosis?

The best.
LC

[perrymason]

I think I would in my amateur way categorize Bundy as a Functional Psychopath, and thats the type of man I was referring to in this thread.

Someone who had they not been caught, would have never been under serious suspicion because of their seemingly normal exterior. Even when linked with the victims in some manner....wasnt one victim a co-worker at a Crisis Line Call Centre?

I think a man who ate from a gutter, or one that stabbed womens backsides, or the one that wore slippers all about town, or the ones that had already been institutionalized before or even after the murders for other crimes or anti social behaviours....the known mentally ill, the obviously mentally ill.......could not have committed some of the more skilled and knowledgeable murders.

They would have been the first people looked at, everyone who saw them would watch them so they would stand out among the crowded streets during the day or night, and they would not likely have either any formal education or the ability to make functional use of any knowledge they may possess.

M.J. Druitt is obviously considered a prime suspect in these cases, despite any known mental affliction or obvious inability to function "normally" socially or at his work. Now we know there was an "incident" that gets him dismissed, but because of his station, he keeps that or his family keep the reason quiet. So anyone outside of that small group in the know, would have no reason to suspect anything out of the ordinary about M.J. Druitt. Yet some family rumours about him make their way to Senior Investigators, and he becomes a serious suspect....with no known or diagnosed mental illness. His note indicates that he thought he was going the route of his mother and becoming insane, but that is not something that is attached to him before the suicide.

That... to me, the kind of fellow we need to focus on. Not the drooling feeb.

And a educated man might still choose an ambush over a direct interaction, due to the fact he is so obviously out of place on the East End streets after midnight.

Best regards all

[lynn cates]

glassy eyed and frenzied

Hello Mike. Once again, our thinking seems to converge. (Are you worried yet?)

I have a difficult time envisioning a glassy-eyed, frenzied chap. If I'm wrong, then sure, "pouncing" would need to be his MO, else how explain a prostitute's ease with him?

Do you think a sociopath like Peterson would be fruitful as a model?

The best.
LC