Why didn't Jack rape his victims?

[The Grave Maurice]

Your observation, skypilot, makes a lot of sense.

[protohistorian]

I believe I have said this before, but it bears repeating, he was "DONE" with them. That is to say, whatever amusement they could provide him, ( whether sexual or violent) was over. Dave

[caz]

Jack, to me, was a man simply frightened to death of the female vagina, which in his mind could, literally, swallow him up.

Breakfast time in the Jack household must have been an eye-opener then.

Perhaps an elephant gun would have helped.

Love,

Caz
X

[ianincleveland]

Perhaps he was impotent.that could also explain why he took to ripping up because he couldnt have a normal sexual relationship.Maybe hed like Sutcliffe at one time paid for a prostitute and then couldnt perform the sexual event???,Maybe the prostitute laughed at him and caused him to hate prostitutes.???

[Ausgirl]

Hi, this is my first post on the these forums, and I have done my best to skim the many posts here for what's been already pretty well covered - please forgive if I am reiterating here at all.

I have just read a very interesting book, "Serial Violence" by Drs. Robert D. Keppel and William J. Birnes.

They investigate, among other aspects of the MO and signatures of serial killers, the fact that some killers 'graduate' from rapist to murderer to serial killer and all the while evolve as criminals and refine their crimes accordingly.

What might be relevant to this discussion of JTR's not raping the victims was that some killers, in this process, come to replace the sexual gratification of rape with the more 'powerful' act of penetrating flesh with a knife.

The author's observations are that killers who formerly raped as part of the controlling and dominating behaviours which bring them a sense of gratification sometimes go on to replace penis with knife in the immediate act - it arouses them on some level beyond merely sexual, which they might indulge in later at thier leisure (having taken trophies).

The killer will inflict a series of 'experimental' wounds, shallower stabs or non-fatal injuries, to 'feel out' what will bring him the greatest sense of satifaction. The authors call this 'piquarism' - which leads to the deeper wounds that equate to and replace the act of physical rape.

They state that JTR exhibited this behaviour, along with several others the authors identify as being common among his victims, which they number at six.

Perhaps, then JTR was not incapable or unwilling to find sexual gratification but found torture, mutilation and dominance to be what gave him the most pleasure in the moment, as well as possibly being more expedient to his own safety.

This book is available to read online here.

[Richard E. Nixon]

JTR had no interest in vaginal intercourse. He received pleasure from mutilating dead women. This is why the general feeling is that he was never married nor had any real romantic relationships with females.

[Trevor Marriott]

Hi, this is my first post on the these forums, and I have done my best to skim the many posts here for what's been already pretty well covered - please forgive if I am reiterating here at all.

I have just read a very interesting book, "Serial Violence" by Drs. Robert D. Keppel and William J. Birnes.

They investigate, among other aspects of the MO and signatures of serial killers, the fact that some killers 'graduate' from rapist to murderer to serial killer and all the while evolve as criminals and refine their crimes accordingly.

What might be relevant to this discussion of JTR's not raping the victims was that some killers, in this process, come to replace the sexual gratification of rape with the more 'powerful' act of penetrating flesh with a knife.

The author's observations are that killers who formerly raped as part of the controlling and dominating behaviours which bring them a sense of gratification sometimes go on to replace penis with knife in the immediate act - it arouses them on some level beyond merely sexual, which they might indulge in later at thier leisure (having taken trophies).

The killer will inflict a series of 'experimental' wounds, shallower stabs or non-fatal injuries, to 'feel out' what will bring him the greatest sense of satifaction. The authors call this 'piquarism' - which leads to the deeper wounds that equate to and replace the act of physical rape.

They state that JTR exhibited this behaviour, along with several others the authors identify as being common among his victims, which they number at six.

Perhaps, then JTR was not incapable or unwilling to find sexual gratification but found torture, mutilation and dominance to be what gave him the most pleasure in the moment, as well as possibly being more expedient to his own safety.

This book is available to read online here.

It should be noted that some serial killers could ony obtain sexual gratification at the point of ejaculating when killing their victims to name two such killers Chikatilo and Stewart Wilken.

I dont think the killer was this way inclined he rather had his hands full in other ways.

[Wickerman]

JTR had no interest in vaginal intercourse. He received pleasure from mutilating dead women. This is why the general feeling is that he was never married nor had any real romantic relationships with females.

Deriving pleasure by enacting domination over certain women is a separate issue from having a seemingly normal family life. Like most people who act out a fantasy, this 'acting' only occurs when the subject is away from the family or from people who know him.

Regards, Jon S.

[Jimi]

Serial Killers


Hi All
Hi Ausgirl and welcome to the boards.
I have actually read Keppel and Birnes book, 'Signature Killers' which i found very good at explaining the mindset of certain serial killers. You should maybe try this next as it takes serial killing to the next level.
For example it explains not only the fantasy life of serial killers but also why there fantasy makes them choose a certain type, blondes,nurses or in JTRs case maternal prostitutes. This can also help to explain why so often the wifes of serial killers are amazed by their spouses involvement in such heinous crimes. The killer is living in a fantasy world totally devoid from home life.
One of the things stated is that the kill is more important than rape,but the killer will take trophies to use during self stimulation at a later date.

Keep Well
Jimi

[lynn cates]

maternal

Hello Jimi. Not sure whom you include as "JTR" victims, but surely MJK was no maternal type--prostitute or otherwise?

Cheers.
LC

[Jimi]

Not MJK

Hi All
Hi Lynn
Not sure what you are trying to say here.
I don't think there is any argument that Mary was a prostitute.
As to her being maternal,well, define maternal. We don't know she wasn't maternal just as we don't know she was, in JTR's eyes. Thats what so difficult about fantasists, they evolve and change as there fantasy changes.Probably only slightly, I could point out the differences and the similarities to the other Ripper victims but you probably already know them.
And there is the point of view that Mary was not a ripper victim. Is that what you mean?
Or is it that Mary was not raped? Well, the technology of the time would never have been able to tell whether she was or not, and i doubt if we ever will.
So yes I am puzzled by your statement.
Keep Well
Jimi

[lynn cates]

maternal

Hello Jimi. Actually, I was picking up on your dictum about the victims being:

"in JTRs case maternal prostitutes"

I was wondering if you referred to Polly, Annie and Kate's all being 40 ish? If so, MJK would not count as maternal.

Perhaps you meant something else?

Cheers.
LC

[Jimi]

Victims

Hi All
Hi Lynn
O.k. Lynn, and this is just my take on the victims,I am in no way a 'profiler'or a 'psych....', I am just interested in JTR.
In my view JTR started by killing Martha Tabram and discovered he enjoyed using the knife. His next victims were escalations of his rage/fantasy. Until he murdered Mary Kelly. By this time he was so devolved the victim could be a TYPE, but didn't have to be an exact match. It was the KILLING that was important. Perhaps he was driven to choosing an almost match by the pressure of the police,by the victims parading in pairs or whatever but his need was to kill.
Once again though, how do we know Mary Kelly wasn't of the maternal type? It could have been something she said or done while Jack was about that triggered his response.
I must say,Lynn, i do get the feeling that you are trying to put words into my mouth, such as Kelly wasn't a Ripper Victim or that perhaps that Kelly had a child. I have absolutely no knowledge either way to prove either of these statements, but I wouldn't discount them.
Keep Well
Jimi

[lynn cates]

odds/ends

Hello Jimi. Thanks.

MJK could have been the maternal type--as you say. I was merely checking to see what YOU meant as maternal. That, because I wish NOT to put words in ANYONE'S mouth. I have a habit of wanting to be sure of what someone is saying.

Given the standard interpretation of maternal, I presume she was not. However, you are suggesting that she was perceived as maternal. That's fine.

I never presumed you held such views about Kelly. I take it you fall into the 50%+ who place her with the other 4.

A child? Know of very few who hold that view. However, there is an old "Echo" report where she has a child and is fetching milk when she is killed.

Cheers.
LC

[belinda]

Maternal? Polly,Annie and Kate all had children.Lis had had a stillborn child. Mary is an unknown in that respect.
Maybe they had maternal personalities and that attracted Jack?