The mind of "Jack The Ripper"`

[corey123]

Do you?

Do you feel it safe to rely on this inquest report and the statement made by one doctor????Because I sure dont.
please explain why you find this to be without a doubt true and that the doctor was right.

...he killed Annie and then extracted her uterus. That is all we can say for certain.

That's all you might be able to say about it Sam, but...

Dr. Phillips: "Very well. I will give you the results of my post-mortem examination. Witness then detailed the terrible wounds which had been inflicted upon the woman, and described the parts of the body which the perpetrator of the murder had carried away with him. He added: I am of opinion that the length of the weapon with which the incisions were inflicted was at least five to six inches in length - probably more - and must have been very sharp. The manner in which they had been done indicated a certain amount of anatomical knowledge.

The Coroner: Can you give any idea how long it would take to perform the incisions found on the body?

Dr. Phillips: I think I can guide you by saying that I myself could not have performed all the injuries I saw on that woman, and effect them, even without a struggle, under a quarter of an hour. If I had done it in a deliberate way, such as would fall to the duties of a surgeon, it would probably have taken me the best part of an hour. The whole inference seems to me that the operation was performed to enable the perpetrator to obtain possession of these parts of the body.

It seems clear to me that the man that examined her thought the murder was committed so the killer could obtain what he took...with some skill.

All the best SF

[corey123]

Lust

Lust murders are characterized by attack of the sexual reproductive organs. I believe that in the report by Dr.Killein(spelling) he noted "That the breast, belly, and private parts were the principle targets"

yours truly

[Sam Flynn]

he killed Annie so he could extract her uterus post mortem.

...he killed Annie and then extracted her uterus. That is all we can say for certain.

[lynn cates]

rage

Hello Corey. What you say is quite possible. But it seems to me that a "rage" murder would more likely come down as Tabram's did, replete with multiple stab wounds (cf. the Tate-la Bianca killings, 1969).

What do you think?

The best.
LC

[corey123]

Again

You state your theory on the belief, not fact, that Jack the ripper wanted to kill ONLY to obtain the organs he stole from the victims. I dont believe that to be true. As I said befor I belive Jack killed to express his rage towards women, not to obtain materials. Also I do belive that it was reported that the organs taken could not be used in any normal, medical, or benefituary way. So then why kill to take the organs??? Why even slit the throat if it would be more easy to strangle the victim till they passed out then perform the neccisary procedure to obtain said organ??? I just dont see what you see.

And about the zodiac I was merly pointing out that killers DO show patterns of trial and error.

yours truly

I have also found a similar behavior pattern in the "Zodiac" case.

On December 20th 1968, A couple parked on a gravel parking area along lake Herman Road were murdered. David Arthur Faraday and Betty Lou Jensen. The killer approached the car and shot the rear right window out, apparently trying to force them out of the vehicle. He shot Faraday as he emerged point blank in the head and then shot Jensen five times in the back as she fled. The murder weapon was a 22 semi-automatic pistol.

On July 4th 1969, the zodiac struck again. This time murdering Darlene Elizabeth Ferrin and Mike Renault Mageau in a secluded parking lot in Blue RockSprings park. A car pulled up next to them and a man with a flashlight exited the car and preceaded to their vehicle. Without any words the man took out a pistol and began fireing. After five shots he left. Ferrin died from five shots and Mageau survided being shot four times. This time he used a 9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Next, on September 27th,1969 the zodiac killed again, using a different m.o. all together. The victims were Cecelia Ann Shepard and Bryan Calvin Hartnell. The couple was killed on a shore line of lake Berryessa. They were laying on a blankit when Shepard noticed a man in a "unusual costume" and a gun walk up towards them. He tied them together with a plastic closeline and began stabbing them. Hartnell was attacked first, then Shepard. After the attack the Unsub walked causually away from the scene leaving them to die. Shepard was stabbed five times in her front and back, and died on the 29th from her injuries, and Hartnell stabbed 6 times in the back, he survived.

The last victem was unusual. It was one man. Named Paul Lee Stine. He was killed on October 11,1969 on washington cherry st. He was shot point blank in the head by a 9mm semi-automatic pistol.

The zodiac killer showed the same behavior of a learn and go killer as I see with Jack the Ripper.

yours truly

What we know of Zodiak is that he wanted to kill.....what we know about Jack is that he killed to enable what he really wanted to do......which was cut into cadavers and take out organs.

I can see a man who wants to kill trying a variety of methods to satisfy his need to cause death.....but I dont see Jack as having a need to cause death. His needs were visceral, not emotional.

Best regards

[corey123]

Proof of behavior

I have also found a similar behavior pattern in the "Zodiac" case.

On December 20th 1968, A couple parked on a gravel parking area along lake Herman Road were murdered. David Arthur Faraday and Betty Lou Jensen. The killer approached the car and shot the rear right window out, apparently trying to force them out of the vehicle. He shot Faraday as he emerged point blank in the head and then shot Jensen five times in the back as she fled. The murder weapon was a 22 semi-automatic pistol.

On July 4th 1969, the zodiac struck again. This time murdering Darlene Elizabeth Ferrin and Mike Renault Mageau in a secluded parking lot in Blue RockSprings park. A car pulled up next to them and a man with a flashlight exited the car and preceaded to their vehicle. Without any words the man took out a pistol and began fireing. After five shots he left. Ferrin died from five shots and Mageau survided being shot four times. This time he used a 9mm semi-automatic pistol.

Next, on September 27th,1969 the zodiac killed again, using a different m.o. all together. The victims were Cecelia Ann Shepard and Bryan Calvin Hartnell. The couple was killed on a shore line of lake Berryessa. They were laying on a blankit when Shepard noticed a man in a "unusual costume" and a gun walk up towards them. He tied them together with a plastic closeline and began stabbing them. Hartnell was attacked first, then Shepard. After the attack the Unsub walked causually away from the scene leaving them to die. Shepard was stabbed five times in her front and back, and died on the 29th from her injuries, and Hartnell stabbed 6 times in the back, he survived.

The last victem was unusual. It was one man. Named Paul Lee Stine. He was killed on October 11,1969 on washington cherry st. He was shot point blank in the head by a 9mm semi-automatic pistol.

The zodiac killer showed the same behavior of a learn and go killer as I see with Jack the Ripper.

yours truly

Hi again,

I thought I should temper my tendency to give credence to a story that Baxter thought that was relevant in the cases of Polly and Annie, and add that the reason the women were killed in paramount in these cases. If this was blood lust or some uncontrolled mania or psychopathy we should see that erratic behavior and mindset in some of the acts performed.

I dont think that is the case with the first 2 victims. I believe that the acts performed were directly related to the achievement of the "final objective", which was probably in both cases the extraction of an organ or 2 from the women's abdomens, or specifically the organs taken from Annie's.

There is so little to work with in Strides case that we'll likely never be able to absolutely reconcile that with the same killer to the satisfaction of the majority of the students, but in Kate's case there is some erratic and seemingly meaningless activity...in that not all that was done was to serve the "final objective"...as the first 2 cases seem to have in common.

She has her nose almost severed from her face, she has cuts under her eyes and through her eyelids, she has a 2 foot piece of colon placed between her body and left arm, and she has a very sloppy "rip" up her middle with stabs and cuts in and around the pubic area.

But the man does do something rather remarkable if his "final objective" included her kidney, because taking it out in the dark through her midsection while she lay face up is not something a novice or unskilled laborer could do. I think the skill exhibited is what ties this crime to the first 2, despite the variances and superfluous acts.

Thats not to say that the man or men who killed Polly and Annie had to have been the man or men that killed Kate, just that both or all of the men had some knife skills and knowledge of what they were doing.

That doesnt apply to Marys case obviously, because there is no such skill evident and plenty of superfluous time wasters...but there are those skin flaps.....that were seen with Annie.

If thats the only real similarity in the acts performed then I would suggest that the flaps were simply learned through the press coverage prior to the killing. I dont think other than the flaps one act in room 13 was skillfully executed.......yet the killer of Polly, Annie and Kate all had at least one act that showed some of both attributes.

Thats why I think the mind of the Ripper must be dealt with using a logical victim base....this may have just been one cold son of a bitch.

Best regards all

[lynn cates]

stable

Hello Corey.

"There we stand on stable ground"

Well, that was nearly true for both Polly and Liz. (Sorry, I needed a bit of mirth.)

The best.
LC

[corey123]

Pizer

Mike,
There we stand on stable ground, I also belive Pizer to be innocent of the claims of him being "Leather apron".

yours truly

Hi Michael,

Not too long ago I reported a story that appeared on the local news. A young woman was the victim of an attempted rape. She screamed for help and attempted to fight him off. Fortunately for her she was successful and the man ran off. Since rapists by definition rape, are we to assume that he was not a rapist or that suddenly he lost his desire to rape in mid-attack? You are arguing that since Liz was not mutilated it couldn't be Jack. As in the above story, could there be any possible reason why he did not do so or is it simply an open and shut case? He didn't mutilate and therefore there is no way that he could be Jack.

c.d.

I know I tend to portray this issue as purely "Black and White" cd, and I know that few people see this murder or any Canonical murder in such finite terms. When emotional whirlwinds like Lust and Anger fuel the fires you really never know what people will do in certain circumstances, but, ...in terms of motivators for killing, they are not all are based in either of those 2 emotions. Some are more clinical murderers. Killing a witness for example. Or killing for economic gain.

When I see murders that suggest the killer cuts into the victim only when they are unconscious and not resisting, I see something that hints at a killer who is not doing this just for the "Kill Kick". The actual murder of these women, some of them, sounds like it was very controlled and quiet....and quick. To perform what is done to Annie and Kate in particular....(Polly moreso due to the venue)....shows us that the majority of the time he is with a victim is spent accessing and cutting organs free. In Kates case particularly, that is a prominent detail.

I dont think the man that killed Polly, or Annie needs to be mentally ill in the manner that we seek to categorize him here. Cold, yes. Without remorse, yes. Clinical and dispassionate, yes. Ruthless, yes. Cruel, undetermined. Overtly Mentally challenged, undetermined.. but unlikely. Incapable of self control,...demonstrably incorrect.

That wouldnt lead to a profile of a man like Kosminski maybe, but it would to a man like Leather Apron sounds like......(I for one dont believe Pizer was LA by the way.)

Cheers cd, all the best.

[c.d.]

Hi Michael,

Not too long ago I reported a story that appeared on the local news. A young woman was the victim of an attempted rape. She screamed for help and attempted to fight him off. Fortunately for her she was successful and the man ran off. Since rapists by definition rape, are we to assume that he was not a rapist or that suddenly he lost his desire to rape in mid-attack? You are arguing that since Liz was not mutilated it couldn't be Jack. As in the above story, could there be any possible reason why he did not do so or is it simply an open and shut case? He didn't mutilate and therefore there is no way that he could be Jack.

c.d.

[corey123]

Please only comments dealing with victims.

Thanks C.D. but as you can tell this is a thread for another subject non related to grammer thank, I have been doing good with my grammer(or at least what I can help)and am grateful for peoples corrections, but there is a point where it gets a bit annoying if you know what I mena, so please only related issues.

best regards.

[c.d.]

It's victims, Corey, not victems.

c.d.