No announcement yet.

Escalation: What would Jack do after Mary Kelly?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Escalation: What would Jack do after Mary Kelly?

    Is it reasonable to assume that there is a definite escalation of violence and ferocity with each of the canonical victims, excluding Liz Stride (but interruption could have been the reason for this being an anomoly)?

    If so, what do we think Jack could possibly have done after killing Mary Kelly? I can't see how he could possibly have done anything worse than that, and can't think of any murders since that could be comparable in atrociousness (though I don't doubt there could have been).

    I can't see how any human mind could possibly remain intact after witnessing let alone carrying out such an atrocity, leaving me to believe the perpetrator must have either had a complete mental breakdown, or took his own life.

    Anyone agree/disagree? Is it possible for someone to fade back into 'normal' life after committing such a crime? Any knowledge shared would be most appreciated.
    "We want to assemble all the incomplete movements, like cubists, until the point is reached where the crime can commit itself."

  • #2
    I absolutely do think that it's possible that Jack faded back into ordinary life :

    One of the possible reasons that the FBI gave for Jack stopping his spree was that the police could have been that the police were getting too is now known that serial killers DO stop. Someone quoted an example on another post here (can't remember the name of the killer -the post was my own under George Hutchinson). I think that french serial killer Emile Louis confessed to having killed 7 girls between 1975 and 1980, in 2000
    (I saw him interviewed, then married with a small child).

    I am sure that the police in 1888 subscribed to the popular view that serial killers are 'mad', you must be able to tell somehow as it 'must do something to their brains', and they will only stop by suicide (remorse) or by being incarcerated -and that's one reason that they had the wrong profile.

    I think that it's a mistake commonly made by members of this site -and certainly rife on the internet.

    I think that people in circumstances such as war can let out the "serial killer" in themselves -witness the war of Vietnam, Rwanda, Bosnia...Pol Pot & all that..sadly the list goes on.. Soldiers are capable of savage butchery of children, pregnant women etc and are then able (successfully or not depending on individual cases) to fade back into being citizens, husbands & fathers.

    Nazi concentration camp workers were able to commit horrendous crimes -and witness them -not in the direct line of fire or danger of war and were able to go home to being ordinary citizens & family members.

    Maybe lots of unsolved murers have been by killers who simply stopped before they were caught, either by self preservation, or because the psychological state (addiction, rejection..) no longer existed ?
    Last edited by Rubyretro; 06-11-2010, 04:33 PM.


    • #3
      Go Mad? Hardly.......

      Yes, Ruby is correct, people like this can move back into society
      and continue a seemingly normal existence. When you think of going
      mad after such an atrocity you are thinking of yourself or a fairly
      normal human being........that is your mistake......these people are
      subhuman savages but they don't look like it or talk like it or smell
      like it.......this is the insidious nature of the psychopath....think
      of Ted Bundy......he performed the most horrifying acts imaginable
      then went back to his girlfriend, and law school and the weekend party
      and charmed all in his path........we wish these brutes looked like
      the Hunchback of Notre Dame or the Elephant Man but they don't and
      hence the terrible unseen danger they pose...........



      • #4
        There is remarkable book which I highly recommend titled "A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier" by Ishmael Beah. True story of a kid caught up in a civil war in Sierra Leone in Africa in the late 1980s I believe it was. A completely normal kid forced to become a soldier at the age of 13 who turns into a bloodthirsty killer. Later rescued by the United Nations and rehabilitated. Absolutely amazing story. Almost 500 reviews on



        • #5
          Perhaps he got picked up on a lesser crime?


          • #6
            Alice McKenzie, 1889. Frances Coles, 1891. Both possible Jack the Ripper murders after Mary Kelly, though less gruesome than hers'. Perhaps he forced himself to stop after Kelly, sated for a time by the extreme brutality, but over time the urge creeped back in and he did a couple more, basically starting over, until he finally died or was arrested for something else or whatever.


            • #7
              Though esculation in the violence is a great belief amongst researchers, I do not think personally that we have esculation here. It is simply a case of time and oppurtunity. He could very well have inflicted facial mutilation to Chapman like he did Eddowes but was interupted. There is every chance that he would have done the same damage to Nichols as he did to Chapman. The only reason, in my opinion, that the violence to Kelly was because he had the time, the place and the oppurtunity, not an esculation.
              Best regards,

              "They assumed Kelly was the last... they assumed wrong" - Me


              • #8
                Yes -I agree that the fact that there was an escalation in the mutilations,
                was due to the fact that Jack had more time and pivacy, rather than an escalation in his need to mutilate.

                Anyone that knows me on Casebook will know that I have a favourite suspect and theory -Hutchinson and the fact that he was an ex-groom. After discussing with Garry Wroe, I accept totally that there is no proof that Hutchinson ever was a groom, I will put a lot more 'ifs' into my thinking
                (Hutchinson is still my favourite suspect, 'ifs' aside).

                Talking to an ex french legionnaire about war crimes and what makes a killer, I told him about my fears for my teenage son playing violent video games.
                He contende that the violent killers had invariably started by horribly killing animals before graduating to humans. I think that it is very likely that Jack had already done a 'Kelly type crime' on animals before killing Polly.


                • #9
                  Many thanks! All very intelligent and convincing replies. I hadn't considered the war crimes angle before. It's true a lot of sick people must have gotten away with truly appalling things during war and returned to society.

                  Is there any record of animal abuse cases at that time or before the murders? I'm guessing probably not.
                  "We want to assemble all the incomplete movements, like cubists, until the point is reached where the crime can commit itself."


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Rubyretro View Post
                    Yes -I agree that the fact that there was an escalation in the mutilations, was due to the fact that Jack had more time and pivacy, rather than an escalation in his need to mutilate.

                    I dunno, Eddowes was cut up pretty bad, compared to Nichols and Chapman, and Jack only had a few minutes with her. Of course, it could be because he was feeling more sure of himself, at this point.


                    • #11
                      I think my take on this is that he simply got better at it. As for the idea that he simply stopped and faded into normal life I think he could certainly have given that appearance. To appear normal after deeds such as his would take a particular mindset but not a unique one.


                      • #12
                        It's hard to believe the urge to kill would have faded though and that his appetite would be completely sated by the murders. If he did never kill again, but continued living a 'normal' life, would the fact that he had committed these atrocities and gotten away with it be satisfaction enough for him? It's tempting to come back to the theory that MJK was the ultimate target/prize/trophy, and that once she was dead there was no longer any need to go on. Hutchinson still seems a likely candidate to me.
                        "We want to assemble all the incomplete movements, like cubists, until the point is reached where the crime can commit itself."


                        • #13
                          DNA has been used more than once to pluck a perpetrator from anonymity. His ability to to present a normal front to the world may well have been a lifetime habit.


                          • #14
                            I dont believe leaving the area was a likely option for JTR. He was, i believe, socially,emotionally and quite probably economically limited to this small area of East London, just as unsophisticated, petty urban criminals are bound to urban neighbourhoods to this day.


                            • #15
                              Even if we grant for the sake of argument that Jack was escalating in violence, I don't see how one can conclude that the Mary Kelly murder marks the absolute peak in savagery. Nor do I think that this act would lead to some mental breakdown for Jack. It is only horrific from most people's (our) perspective. For someone capable of inflicting this amount of damage on another human being, obviously there are many other things that he could have done. While there is no need to list possibilities, they are there. I suspect that Jack - had he not stopped for whatever reason - might have continued to experiment with victim staging for max shock value.