Motive....

[DVV]

Ahhh come on Superintendent Suzi......can't you educate me? I'll buy your book on the matter in return?

No need to buy anything, just click on "victims".

Amitiés,
David

[Fleetwood Mac]

Well, what can I say ?
JtR was apparently not a necrophiliac, nor a sadist, but a "necro-sadist" - deriving his pleasure from the mutilations he inflicted on dead bodies.

Amitiés,
David

I'd suggest cannibalism and cutting up dead bodies is nothing to do with sadism.

[DVV]

I'd suggest cannibalism and cutting up dead bodies is nothing to do with sadism.

"Necro-sadist" is indeed an oxymoron, but an oxymoron isn't necessarily a non-sense, far from it.

[Fleetwood Mac]

"Necro-sadist" is indeed an oxymoron, but an oxymoron isn't necessarily a non-sense, far from it.

It could be of use to have a chat with a sadist - a sadist who engages within the realms of consent of course - to understand what exactly drives the behaviour and from what do they derive pleasure.

[DVV]

It could be of use to have a chat with a sadist - a sadist who engages within the realms of consent of course - to understand what exactly drives the behaviour and from what do they derive pleasure.

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.

[j.r-ahde]

Hello you all!

He could really have been a necro-sadist, but I am thinking more about some difficulties with female-relationships!

By the way, Fleetwood Mac, a nice artist-name!

All the best
Jukka

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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

[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

[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.