Motive....

[Observer]

Hi Fleetwood Mac

Kelly wasn't any different to the other victims in that she needed to be silenced quickly, in order to shut her up. In reality Jack the Ripper and the word compassion should not appear in the same sentence. Let me ask you a question, do you really believe that Jack the Ripper was exhibiting compassion by quickly killing his victims, or are you delibrately courting controversy?

Observer

[Fleetwood Mac]

To make this point clear...

If I'm in a pub and slag you off it is not humilation if you're not present....it is simply slagging someone off. But where you're present and you respond with a half-hearted attempt then that is humilation as you're in the company of people and don't offer much of a defence.

Similarly you can't humiliate a dead person - no matter who sees your guts spewed all over.

For humilation to be complete it is all a matter of the objects emotions - and the feeling of being humiliated. The object is crucial to this - it is not humiliation where the object does not feel humiliated.

Honestly - if people genuinely believe that Mary Kelly was humiliated you really need to read up on the psychology of humiliation as it may radically alter the thinking of people who spend a lot of time researching this case.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Hi Mac,

the almost complete destruction of a human body like in Mary Kelly's case seems quite spiteful to me. Her murderer stripped her of all dignity and left the remains of her maltreated body and intestines lying there for everyone to see. If that isn't humiliation at the highest possible level I don't know what is.

Regards,

Boris

Hi Bolo....

Because humiliation is very personal. It would have to had have been he humiliating her while alive....not something which she wouldn't have known about when dead.....but something that she was aware of when alive...that is the the whole point of humiliation....him directing and her being aware of it (if she's not aware of it then it ain't humiliation....for it to be humilation she must feel the humiliation as it's on her part).

As I read this site the more I appreciate that there is a distinct lack of knowledge around sadism and humiliation. I'd suggest that people on here have a chat with someone who engages in consensual humiliation with a partner and I guarantee you it ain't humiliation where she isn't aware of it - she has to feel it to be humiliated....and he has to see her humiliation to get a kick from it.

[bolo]

Hi Mac,

the almost complete destruction of a human body like in Mary Kelly's case seems quite spiteful to me. Her murderer stripped her of all dignity and left the remains of her maltreated body and intestines lying there for everyone to see. If that isn't humiliation at the highest possible level I don't know what is.

Regards,

Boris

[DVV]

I could go with that apart from Mary Kelly.....if he wanted humiliation he could have achieved that in a private room....by keeping her alive while toying with her......but killing someone quickly is not humiliation or sadistic or spiteful.

Leaving the dead body of a woman in the street, legs apart, mutilated and disfigured, intestines on the shoulder, isn't....what you said ??

Your thoughts are sad, my friend.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Compassion? You've got to be joking. What of the spitefull slashing and cutting of Eddowes face, hardly the work of a compassionate man. In my opinion the quick kill was a result of the killers need to silence his victims as quickly as possible.

Observer

I could go with that apart from Mary Kelly.....if he wanted humiliation he could have achieved that in a private room....by keeping her alive while toying with her......but killing someone quickly is not humiliation or sadistic or spiteful.

[bolo]

Hi,

Agreed.

The facts are. Quick kill - mutilation - organs removed. A quick kill suggests some sort of compassion i.e. minimum suffering and so organs being removed is a viable objective of the killer - though not the only one. I really wouldn't have this down as being the work of a woman hater.

All victims belonged to the same class and all of them were women. Their job and social position made them primary targets but there's no reason our man couldn't have chosen a homeless beggar sleeping in a railway arch or a senselessly drunk sailor for his "entertainment" had he been an opportunistic killer who just wanted to have "fun". This tells me that he had a thing to settle with women in general or specially the class of women he attacked, i.e. a hatred of some sort which he projected on females, and the removal of certain organs of some victims was part of that but not the main focus.

About the quick killing - in my opinion, this was a necessity rather than a sign of compassion, the latter is an emotion I refuse to believe the murderer ever had. He killed the victims as quickly as possible to avoid noise. This coincides with the testimonies of various witnesses or residents around the crime scenes who never heard a single thing (with the exception of Prater in MJK's case but that's another can of worms).

Regards,

Boris

EDIT: Observer beat me to it.

[Observer]

Agreed.

The facts are. Quick kill - mutilation - organs removed. A quick kill suggests some sort of compassion i.e. minimum suffering and so organs being removed is a viable objective of the killer - though not the only one. I really wouldn't have this down as being the work of a woman hater.

Compassion? You've got to be joking. What of the spitefull slashing and cutting of Eddowes face, hardly the work of a compassionate man. In my opinion the quick kill was a result of the killers need to silence his victims as quickly as possible.

Observer

[GregBaron]

Motive........

Boy, I think determing a motive a very difficult task. I don't believe we can
say Jtr wasn't a woman hater or in any way use the term compassion in the
same sentence. He may have been a woman hater and was savaging the
female reproductive organs to satisfy some subconscious craving. Perhaps he
would have carved up a man if that wasn't a more challenging task but I
certainly doubt it. He may not have tortured them but taking a life is hardly
a compassionate act even if a life lived in squalid circumstances. I can't
imagine there wasn't an easier & safer and less cruel way to get organs if that was truly the only desire. It's very difficult to get into the minds of these psychos but we see in Jeffrey Dahmer the removal, eating and storing of organs in some sort of ritual of total possession. If I was to hazard a guess, not being a trained phychologist, I would say the motive was a hatred of prostitutes(not necessarily women in general) and a desire for their
complete humiliation where the taking of organs was simply trophy retrieval to assist in a future reliving of the good deed(sic). We saw this behavior in Ted Bundy. This can make for an interesting discussion but I can't see this going anywhere but in infinite circles.....



Greg

[Pippin Joan]

Agreed.

The facts are. Quick kill - mutilation - organs removed. A quick kill suggests some sort of compassion i.e. minimum suffering and so organs being removed is a viable objective of the killer - though not the only one. I really wouldn't have this down as being the work of a woman hater.

I agree with this comment. My view of Jack is that he was probably a butcher/slaughterer of some kind, but severely deranged. He fixated on the possibilities of the human animal, and realized he had ample opportunity to follow his imagination with these poor "disposable" women. Once at it, he became more and more crazed. His kills were quick, showing that he had no desire to make his victims suffer. However, his experiments must have sickened him to some extent, and he blamed his victims by performing needless mutilations.

[DVV]

I don't think that there is any proof that he indulged in cannibalism this idea is based on the 'from hell' letter which a) was probably a hoax and b) if it was from 'jack' may have been designed to shock and is not necessarily true.

Hi Rubyretro,

I agree with your post but still cannibalism is a possibility (I'm not saying so because of the FH letter).
That wouldn't be surprising at all - see Shawcross, for example.

Amitiés,
David

[Fleetwood Mac]

I don't think that there is any proof that he indulged in cannibalism this idea is based on the 'from hell' letter which a) was probably a hoax and b) if it was from 'jack' may have been designed to shock and is not necessarily true.

Agreed.

The facts are. Quick kill - mutilation - organs removed. A quick kill suggests some sort of compassion i.e. minimum suffering and so organs being removed is a viable objective of the killer - though not the only one. I really wouldn't have this down as being the work of a woman hater.

[Rubyretro]

Hi Fleetwood Mac,

JtR has been defined as a "necro-sadist", a strange category, I have to admit...
I have no doubt about Kelly being her victim, and MJK1 and Bond's report tell us what the poor guy liked to do... Mutilations, trophy, perhaps cannibalism...

Amitiés,
David

I don't think that there is any proof that he indulged in cannibalism this idea is based on the 'from hell' letter which a) was probably a hoax and b) if it was from 'jack' may have been designed to shock and is not necessarily true.

[DVV]

You're confusing emotions and actions. The actions may vary but they are driven by the same emotions: those emotions being the desire to induce fear in their victims and this demands that the victim is alive while being toyed with.

I'm not confusing anything, sorry.
Especially not sadism and necro-sadism, which are, I repeat, two distinct categories.

[Fleetwood Mac]

Well, can't you understand that a sadist and a necro-sadist are two different categories ?
John Gacy, for example, was a sadist.
His crimes are different from Jack's.
Quite simple.
JtR motive may be unclear, but it's at least pretty obvious that he "liked" to mutilate dead bodies, while Gacy's job was to inflict pain and terror to his victims.

You're confusing emotions and actions. The actions may vary but they are driven by the same emotions: those emotions being the desire to induce fear in their victims and this demands that the victim is alive while being toyed with.