Escalation: What would Jack do after Mary Kelly?

[The Rookie Detective]

I would say almost caught red handed with Chapman, and maybe with Stride. He may have already been gone by the time Diemschutz arrived. I think you could say maybe with Eddowes also. He may have still been in Mitre square when the first PC partially entered the square.



I don't remember reading anything about Deeming mutilating his victims. What can be said about him is that he strangled some victims and cut the throats of others, which are both things that the Ripper did.

I guess the question is; what makes the Ripper the Ripper?

Post Mortem mutilation?
Strangulation?
Cutting throat?
Use of knife as weapon?

Deeming did 3 of those
Bury also did 3 of those

Deeming murdered 2 wives and his children

Bury murdered his wife

A person needs to gave murdered at least 3 people and to have committed murder on more than one occasion to be labelled a "Serial killer."

Bury doesn't make the cut when it comes to that...unless he was the Ripper of course.

If he wasn't the Ripper, then he was a domestic killer of his wife and nothing more.

The same goes for James Kelly, who even though he murdered his wife with a knife in a particularly grotesque manner, he didn't make the cut as a Serial Killer.

Only Deeming and Chapman were known Serial Killers.


The fact is that if Bury hadn't cut his wife post mortem, he would never have been considered in the first place.

Bury either did that because he was a Ripper fantasist and/or chose to try and mimic the Ripper by opting to cut Ellen post mortem OR he was the Ripper trying to leave us a clue as to his true identity.

[Lewis C]

As for the profile the one you've proposed is actually very much similar to FBI profile so it's quite reasonable. Although I wouldn't necessary assume that e.g. Ripper was a planner. I think that double event actually shows something opposite: he was very much prone to risk and compulsive. Actually killing and mutilating women in open spaces and frequented streets (even at night) is something very much risky. We tend to think that by finding victims just after murder was something which underlined his skills of evading capture and in my opinion it's quite the opposite. He was almost caught red handed couple of times - with Annie Chapman and Elisabeth Stride. Also he was seen with the victims. It shows that he is oblivious to risk.

I would say almost caught red handed with Chapman, and maybe with Stride. He may have already been gone by the time Diemschutz arrived. I think you could say maybe with Eddowes also. He may have still been in Mitre square when the first PC partially entered the square.

Question of the William Bury case is interesting. It is true that he seems to be one of those who were caught in similar murder. But isn't that also the situation of Frederick Deeming? The reports suggest that he mutilated his wife after murder but it wasn't so elaborate as in MJK or Eddowes cases. She was killed indoors I pressume? I would think that someone who was a central figure of his rage would suffer much worse wounds. Also when he was caught he clearly denied his involvment in Ripper killings and for some reason police believed him. Was he actually living near the sites where murders took place?

I don't remember reading anything about Deeming mutilating his victims. What can be said about him is that he strangled some victims and cut the throats of others, which are both things that the Ripper did.

[John Wheat]

Abby, thank you for reply

As for the profile the one you've proposed is actually very much similar to FBI profile so it's quite reasonable. Although I wouldn't necessary assume that e.g. Ripper was a planner. I think that double event actually shows something opposite: he was very much prone to risk and compulsive. Actually killing and mutilating women in open spaces and frequented streets (even at night) is something very much risky. We tend to think that by finding victims just after murder was something which underlined his skills of evading capture and in my opinion it's quite the opposite. He was almost caught red handed couple of times - with Annie Chapman and Elisabeth Stride. Also he was seen with the victims. It shows that he is oblivious to risk.

But I would agree that he was street smart and knew the area very very well. That's why he was actually able to escape unnoticed.

Question of the William Bury case is interesting. It is true that he seems to be one of those who were caught in similar murder. But isn't that also the situation of Frederick Deeming? The reports suggest that he mutilated his wife after murder but it wasn't so elaborate as in MJK or Eddowes cases. She was killed indoors I pressume? I would think that someone who was a central figure of his rage would suffer much worse wounds. Also when he was caught he clearly denied his involvment in Ripper killings and for some reason police believed him. Was he actually living near the sites where murders took place?

Question of insanity remains open: i think you could be right that he wasn't insane in any way but on the other hand we see that many mutilators are actually very mentally ill: Chase, Gein, Mullin, Napper, Sutcliffe, Vacher. But it's all statistics and probability not certainty cause we have: Kemper, Dahmer, Cottingham and possibly many others who fit that description. By looking at his "work" in case of MJK I'm just more into "mentally ill" proposal. And still it doesn't have to mean that this insanity was clearly visible: he could look quite normal (as far as East End goes). With such victims: most of them homeless, old, sick, drunk - even if he was a creep they still would've gone with him. They had a lot of lunatics it seems at that period in the East End.

Bury never denied his involvement in the Ripper murders. He lived in Bow which neighbours Whitechapel. However at the time owned a horse and cart so could quite easily travel into Whitechapel.

Cheers John

[I1ariusz]

yup. i guess it is!lol. but not intentionally.

btw I1, full disclosure, I do think bury is one of the least weak suspects, but i didnt compile my profile with him in mind.

Abby, thank you for reply

As for the profile the one you've proposed is actually very much similar to FBI profile so it's quite reasonable. Although I wouldn't necessary assume that e.g. Ripper was a planner. I think that double event actually shows something opposite: he was very much prone to risk and compulsive. Actually killing and mutilating women in open spaces and frequented streets (even at night) is something very much risky. We tend to think that by finding victims just after murder was something which underlined his skills of evading capture and in my opinion it's quite the opposite. He was almost caught red handed couple of times - with Annie Chapman and Elisabeth Stride. Also he was seen with the victims. It shows that he is oblivious to risk.

But I would agree that he was street smart and knew the area very very well. That's why he was actually able to escape unnoticed.

Question of the William Bury case is interesting. It is true that he seems to be one of those who were caught in similar murder. But isn't that also the situation of Frederick Deeming? The reports suggest that he mutilated his wife after murder but it wasn't so elaborate as in MJK or Eddowes cases. She was killed indoors I pressume? I would think that someone who was a central figure of his rage would suffer much worse wounds. Also when he was caught he clearly denied his involvment in Ripper killings and for some reason police believed him. Was he actually living near the sites where murders took place?

Question of insanity remains open: i think you could be right that he wasn't insane in any way but on the other hand we see that many mutilators are actually very mentally ill: Chase, Gein, Mullin, Napper, Sutcliffe, Vacher. But it's all statistics and probability not certainty cause we have: Kemper, Dahmer, Cottingham and possibly many others who fit that description. By looking at his "work" in case of MJK I'm just more into "mentally ill" proposal. And still it doesn't have to mean that this insanity was clearly visible: he could look quite normal (as far as East End goes). With such victims: most of them homeless, old, sick, drunk - even if he was a creep they still would've gone with him. They had a lot of lunatics it seems at that period in the East End.

[John Wheat]

yup. i guess it is!lol. but not intentionally.

btw I1, full disclosure, I do think bury is one of the least weak suspects, but i didnt compile my profile with him in mind.

Bury seems to fit pretty much every psychological profile of the Ripper there is.

[John Wheat]

Very similar profile indeed, I agree.

Except the last point regarding a fascination with what a knife could do to a female, is pure conjecture.

Bury was also only just over 5ft and a few inches shorter than witness accounts given by Lawrende, Schwartz and Hutchinson.
That said, Bury could stand by the fence in the garden of 29 Hanbury St and be short enough to not be seen.

It's important to note that witnesses are notoriously unreliable and that we don't know who did and didn't see Jack.

[Lewis C]

Very similar profile indeed, I agree.

Except the last point regarding a fascination with what a knife could do to a female, is pure conjecture.

Bury was also only just over 5ft and a few inches shorter than witness accounts given by Lawrende, Schwartz and Hutchinson.
That said, Bury could stand by the fence in the garden of 29 Hanbury St and be short enough to not be seen.

Hi RD,

It may be conjecture, but I believe Bury is the only suspect in the case known to have mutilated a woman, so if he doesn't quite satisfy the last point, he comes closer than the other suspects do.

[The Rookie Detective]

Isn't your profile pretty much describing Bury Abby?

Very similar profile indeed, I agree.

Except the last point regarding a fascination with what a knife could do to a female, is pure conjecture.

Bury was also only just over 5ft and a few inches shorter than witness accounts given by Lawrende, Schwartz and Hutchinson.
That said, Bury could stand by the fence in the garden of 29 Hanbury St and be short enough to not be seen.

[Abby Normal]

Isn't your profile pretty much describing Bury Abby?

yup. i guess it is!lol. but not intentionally.

btw I1, full disclosure, I do think bury is one of the least weak suspects, but i didnt compile my profile with him in mind.

[John Wheat]

hi I1

to your list i would add gein, dahmer and prostitute killer william suff as being most like the ripper.all post mortem mutilators but out of these gein was most mentally disturbed and was described by people as being an odd ball. i dont think he was diagnosed with schizophrenia though. dahmer and suff did not schizophrenia and on your list i think only chase and mullin may have been diagnosed with it. im not as familiar with napper or spillman. of course as john also mentioned we have bury, proven wife killer and post mortem mutilator and con man .

dahmer, suff, and kemper had a high degree of planning, and i beleive most others weve mentioned had some degree of planning and also knew what were doing was wrong as they took steps to avoid detection. certainly none as far as i know were deemed innocent due to insanity.

As far as the ripper goes i doubt he was schizophrenic nor obviously mentally disturbed and used a high degree of planning and self awarenes as to not get caught. imho no one could pull off the double event nor remain undetected(unsolved) who was obviously insane or didnt use a level of planning and awareness. nor due i think he could pull off rusing women at the height of the ripper scare without appearing to be a normal punter.

as far as profile, im dubious to fbi profiling. from all the evidence and based on serial killer history my profile on tje ripper would be:

white male, 25-40 years old, local and probably english
avg to below avg height
street smart
physically fit, probably strong
experienced with knife
employed
frequented pubs
knew prostitutes
not visibly mentally insane
probable medical or at least anatomical experience
single or dominated wife/partner
knew the streets and locations well
seemed outwardly normal
thought he was smarter than anyone else
fascinated by what the knife could do to the female body

Isn't your profile pretty much describing Bury Abby?

[Abby Normal]

I think that when we're analysing Ripper we should take similar cases into the account. Similar in regards to the ritual (mutilation) and MO aspects. Clearly Ripper was a so-called 'lust murderer'. This term was coined first, i think, by Richard von Krafft-Ebing and we can find some examples in his "Psychopatia sexualis". Often this term comes with the connection to mutilation of the victim after death - especially abdominal and sexual areas. From history similar examples are:

• Richard Chase "Vampire of Sacramento" - very disturbing story;
• Robert Napper "Plumstead Ripper" - especially the case of Samantha Bisset in which her body was severly mutilated and body trophy taken;
• Herbert Mullin - one case in which he admitted to killing a woman and doing dissection of her body;
• Ed Kemper "Co-Ed Killer" - admitted to the dissection of his victims bodies;
• Jack Owen Spillman "Werewolf Butcher" - murdered and mutilated three victims in horrible manner.

There's probably a lot more of them. There was also one case from US in which the killer was apprehended after two murders and they were also very much close to what the Ripper did. Often times that kind of mutiliation comes with some sort of serious mental dissorder, e.g. paranoid schizophrenia. I have to admit that even though I've read and seen crime scene photos of the victims of mentioned murderers, I've never actually seen anything as disturbing as Mary Jane Kelly case. In her murder mutilation is so horrific, destructive and disgusting that it's really hard to believe that the killer was not mentally ill in some capacity. Her body was almost completely destroyed with fury, lust and morbid curiousity that's unmatched I think - there's passion in this you could say. Even when mentioned killers had time to do the same thing we don't really see such grotesque. So it begs the question if it's not true that the Ripper was very ill mentally and after that murder he was apprehended - in some way - as it was impossible to really hold that kind of destructive tendencies inside. To be clear: I'm not suggesting that he was looking clearly as a lunatic but he would've been weird for sure in some way. Schizophrenics most of the time can seem completely normal, if not addressed directly. But again - it's possibility not certainty. Still it's also probable that the killer was seemingly normal and only his fantasy life was such that he dreamed of doing horrible things to women.

Lastly In my oppinion FBI profile of the killer is the closest to what his personality would've been: classic unorganized serial killer (more lucky than cunning), with great hatred and fear of women, from lower class, with deep fantasy life, loner, shy, his anger is internalized (meaning he was taught to keep his anger inside probably by means of harsh discipline and neglect), possibly young and prone to drink (he might've done most of the murders while being intoxicated - alcohol lowers inhibitions). And speaking about escalation it is not necessarly the case that next murders would've been more horrible. It all depends on the circumstances but his primary motive was to mutilate after killing. Killing was just means to reach the goal.

hi I1

to your list i would add gein, dahmer and prostitute killer william suff as being most like the ripper.all post mortem mutilators but out of these gein was most mentally disturbed and was described by people as being an odd ball. i dont think he was diagnosed with schizophrenia though. dahmer and suff did not schizophrenia and on your list i think only chase and mullin may have been diagnosed with it. im not as familiar with napper or spillman. of course as john also mentioned we have bury, proven wife killer and post mortem mutilator and con man .

dahmer, suff, and kemper had a high degree of planning, and i beleive most others weve mentioned had some degree of planning and also knew what were doing was wrong as they took steps to avoid detection. certainly none as far as i know were deemed innocent due to insanity.

As far as the ripper goes i doubt he was schizophrenic nor obviously mentally disturbed and used a high degree of planning and self awarenes as to not get caught. imho no one could pull off the double event nor remain undetected(unsolved) who was obviously insane or didnt use a level of planning and awareness. nor due i think he could pull off rusing women at the height of the ripper scare without appearing to be a normal punter.

as far as profile, im dubious to fbi profiling. from all the evidence and based on serial killer history my profile on tje ripper would be:

white male, 25-40 years old, local and probably english
avg to below avg height
street smart
physically fit, probably strong
experienced with knife
employed
frequented pubs
knew prostitutes
not visibly mentally insane
probable medical or at least anatomical experience
single or dominated wife/partner
knew the streets and locations well
seemed outwardly normal
thought he was smarter than anyone else
fascinated by what the knife could do to the female body

[John Wheat]

I think that when we're analysing Ripper we should take similar cases into the account. Similar in regards to the ritual (mutilation) and MO aspects. Clearly Ripper was a so-called 'lust murderer'. This term was coined first, i think, by Richard von Krafft-Ebing and we can find some examples in his "Psychopatia sexualis". Often this term comes with the connection to mutilation of the victim after death - especially abdominal and sexual areas. From history similar examples are:

• Richard Chase "Vampire of Sacramento" - very disturbing story;
• Robert Napper "Plumstead Ripper" - especially the case of Samantha Bisset in which her body was severly mutilated and body trophy taken;
• Herbert Mullin - one case in which he admitted to killing a woman and doing dissection of her body;
• Ed Kemper "Co-Ed Killer" - admitted to the dissection of his victims bodies;
• Jack Owen Spillman "Werewolf Butcher" - murdered and mutilated three victims in horrible manner.

There's probably a lot more of them. There was also one case from US in which the killer was apprehended after two murders and they were also very much close to what the Ripper did. Often times that kind of mutiliation comes with some sort of serious mental dissorder, e.g. paranoid schizophrenia. I have to admit that even though I've read and seen crime scene photos of the victims of mentioned murderers, I've never actually seen anything as disturbing as Mary Jane Kelly case. In her murder mutilation is so horrific, destructive and disgusting that it's really hard to believe that the killer was not mentally ill in some capacity. Her body was almost completely destroyed with fury, lust and morbid curiousity that's unmatched I think - there's passion in this you could say. Even when mentioned killers had time to do the same thing we don't really see such grotesque. So it begs the question if it's not true that the Ripper was very ill mentally and after that murder he was apprehended - in some way - as it was impossible to really hold that kind of destructive tendencies inside. To be clear: I'm not suggesting that he was looking clearly as a lunatic but he would've been weird for sure in some way. Schizophrenics most of the time can seem completely normal, if not addressed directly. But again - it's possibility not certainty. Still it's also probable that the killer was seemingly normal and only his fantasy life was such that he dreamed of doing horrible things to women.

Lastly In my oppinion FBI profile of the killer is the closest to what his personality would've been: classic unorganized serial killer (more lucky than cunning), with great hatred and fear of women, from lower class, with deep fantasy life, loner, shy, his anger is internalized (meaning he was taught to keep his anger inside probably by means of harsh discipline and neglect), possibly young and prone to drink (he might've done most of the murders while being intoxicated - alcohol lowers inhibitions). And speaking about escalation it is not necessarly the case that next murders would've been more horrible. It all depends on the circumstances but his primary motive was to mutilate after killing. Killing was just means to reach the goal.

We have a similar case in terms of M.O. in Dundee a few months later than Mary Kelly in the murder of Ellen Bury eg post mortem mutilation. Also it's worth noting that William Henry Bury fits the FBI profile extremely well.

[I1ariusz]

Hi I1ariusz, welcome to Casebook. I think that what you're saying here all seems quite reasonable.

Thank you! I'm actually fan of both the case and casebook for about 20 years now . Just recently joined discussion panels.

[Lewis C]

I think that when we're analysing Ripper we should take similar cases into the account. Similar in regards to the ritual (mutilation) and MO aspects. Clearly Ripper was a so-called 'lust murderer'. This term was coined first, i think, by Richard von Krafft-Ebing and we can find some examples in his "Psychopatia sexualis". Often this term comes with the connection to mutilation of the victim after death - especially abdominal and sexual areas. From history similar examples are:

• Richard Chase "Vampire of Sacramento" - very disturbing story;
• Robert Napper "Plumstead Ripper" - especially the case of Samantha Bisset in which her body was severly mutilated and body trophy taken;
• Herbert Mullin - one case in which he admitted to killing a woman and doing dissection of her body;
• Ed Kemper "Co-Ed Killer" - admitted to the dissection of his victims bodies;
• Jack Owen Spillman "Werewolf Butcher" - murdered and mutilated three victims in horrible manner.

There's probably a lot more of them. There was also one case from US in which the killer was apprehended after two murders and they were also very much close to what the Ripper did. Often times that kind of mutiliation comes with some sort of serious mental dissorder, e.g. paranoid schizophrenia. I have to admit that even though I've read and seen crime scene photos of the victims of mentioned murderers, I've never actually seen anything as disturbing as Mary Jane Kelly case. In her murder mutilation is so horrific, destructive and disgusting that it's really hard to believe that the killer was not mentally ill in some capacity. Her body was almost completely destroyed with fury, lust and morbid curiousity that's unmatched I think - there's passion in this you could say. Even when mentioned killers had time to do the same thing we don't really see such grotesque. So it begs the question if it's not true that the Ripper was very ill mentally and after that murder he was apprehended - in some way - as it was impossible to really hold that kind of destructive tendencies inside. To be clear: I'm not suggesting that he was looking clearly as a lunatic but he would've been weird for sure in some way. Schizophrenics most of the time can seem completely normal, if not addressed directly. But again - it's possibility not certainty. Still it's also probable that the killer was seemingly normal and only his fantasy life was such that he dreamed of doing horrible things to women.

Lastly In my oppinion FBI profile of the killer is the closest to what his personality would've been: classic unorganized serial killer (more lucky than cunning), with great hatred and fear of women, from lower class, with deep fantasy life, loner, shy, his anger is internalized (meaning he was taught to keep his anger inside probably by means of harsh discipline and neglect), possibly young and prone to drink (he might've done most of the murders while being intoxicated - alcohol lowers inhibitions). And speaking about escalation it is not necessarly the case that next murders would've been more horrible. It all depends on the circumstances but his primary motive was to mutilate after killing. Killing was just means to reach the goal.

Hi I1ariusz, welcome to Casebook. I think that what you're saying here all seems quite reasonable.

[I1ariusz]

I think that when we're analysing Ripper we should take similar cases into the account. Similar in regards to the ritual (mutilation) and MO aspects. Clearly Ripper was a so-called 'lust murderer'. This term was coined first, i think, by Richard von Krafft-Ebing and we can find some examples in his "Psychopatia sexualis". Often this term comes with the connection to mutilation of the victim after death - especially abdominal and sexual areas. From history similar examples are:

• Richard Chase "Vampire of Sacramento" - very disturbing story;
• Robert Napper "Plumstead Ripper" - especially the case of Samantha Bisset in which her body was severly mutilated and body trophy taken;
• Herbert Mullin - one case in which he admitted to killing a woman and doing dissection of her body;
• Ed Kemper "Co-Ed Killer" - admitted to the dissection of his victims bodies;
• Jack Owen Spillman "Werewolf Butcher" - murdered and mutilated three victims in horrible manner.

There's probably a lot more of them. There was also one case from US in which the killer was apprehended after two murders and they were also very much close to what the Ripper did. Often times that kind of mutiliation comes with some sort of serious mental dissorder, e.g. paranoid schizophrenia. I have to admit that even though I've read and seen crime scene photos of the victims of mentioned murderers, I've never actually seen anything as disturbing as Mary Jane Kelly case. In her murder mutilation is so horrific, destructive and disgusting that it's really hard to believe that the killer was not mentally ill in some capacity. Her body was almost completely destroyed with fury, lust and morbid curiousity that's unmatched I think - there's passion in this you could say. Even when mentioned killers had time to do the same thing we don't really see such grotesque. So it begs the question if it's not true that the Ripper was very ill mentally and after that murder he was apprehended - in some way - as it was impossible to really hold that kind of destructive tendencies inside. To be clear: I'm not suggesting that he was looking clearly as a lunatic but he would've been weird for sure in some way. Schizophrenics most of the time can seem completely normal, if not addressed directly. But again - it's possibility not certainty. Still it's also probable that the killer was seemingly normal and only his fantasy life was such that he dreamed of doing horrible things to women.

Lastly In my oppinion FBI profile of the killer is the closest to what his personality would've been: classic unorganized serial killer (more lucky than cunning), with great hatred and fear of women, from lower class, with deep fantasy life, loner, shy, his anger is internalized (meaning he was taught to keep his anger inside probably by means of harsh discipline and neglect), possibly young and prone to drink (he might've done most of the murders while being intoxicated - alcohol lowers inhibitions). And speaking about escalation it is not necessarly the case that next murders would've been more horrible. It all depends on the circumstances but his primary motive was to mutilate after killing. Killing was just means to reach the goal.