Jack the Ripper(s)

[corey123]

Hello Wickerman,

I agree, his opinion was flawed but it was popular concensus at that point in time. Funny, as he made so many mistakes in his conclusion, that one of his level would be so scarce to make.

In the end you are right this single killer theory is total bogus, but I believe there is some proof to a killer who took part in the single-handed death of six women. If you are interested I could send along an essay I wrote in the Casebook Examiner this December which discusses it.

Of course, do remember McKenzie's murder occured after Tabram, it was Emma Smith who might have been raped, which I find very unlikely.

Odd that he forgot to include Nichols.

Also odd that Ebbing's opinions were so flawed.

Yours truly,
Corey

p.s Do know I do not subscribe to Ebbing's theory.

[DVV]

Hi Wickerman

when the victims are prostitutes, viciously stabbed around the genitals, or worse.....the case isn't one of lust murders ?

Amitiés
David

[Wickerman]

...If you are interested I could send along an essay I wrote in the Casebook Examiner this December which discusses it.

Much abliged, thankyou, I would be interested.

Of course, do remember McKenzie's murder occured after Tabram,..

Certainly, I thought to list them in order of progression (Less to More), not chronologically, I guess that was a mistake.

p.s Do know I do not subscribe to Ebbing's theory.

Understood, I still find it surprising how many fall back on this work by Krafft-Ebing when they promote the "lust-murder" hypothesis.

My selection of those crimes suggest to me that the sole intent of the killer of Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes was to get those organs. I know, it's not a popular hypothesis, though I think this is what the evidence suggests.
Kelly is a different kettle of fish, too many arguments to the contrary.

[corey123]

Hello Wickerman,

I will send you a pm. By the way, the lust-murder hypothesis is not based on Ebbing's work, I merely used him as an example as he is one of the first to use the term. Please do remember lust-murder has absolutely nothing to do with motivation.

Anyway, I should digress, I believe Tabram to be far more henious than that of McKenzie.

Edit: It won't let me pm you for some reason.

[Wickerman]

Hello Wickerman,
Edit: It won't let me pm you for some reason.

Ok sorry, you're good to go (PM).

Hi Wickerman

when the victims are prostitutes, viciously stabbed around the genitals, or worse.....the case isn't one of lust murders ?

Amitiés
David

Prostitutes were easy pickings, "stabbed around the genitals"? - is that a general statement or do you have any group of victims in mind?

The common medical procedure in the 19th century for removal of the uterus, or abdominal operations in general was to slice the patient from the pubes to the breastbone. That is from medical operational procedures of the period.
What should we read into it other than what it was?

Regards, Jon S.

[corey123]

Hello Jon,

Email has been sent!!

[DVV]

Prostitutes were easy pickings, "stabbed around the genitals"? - is that a general statement or do you have any group of victims in mind?

Regards, Jon S.

Hi Jon

Are you suggesting JtR had an obsession with shoulders ? or that these crimes have no sexual connotations ?

All the best
David

[Tom_Wescott]

An accomplice?

Hello DVV, Corey, Wickerman, Siter, et al,

I personally don't think the evidence begs for their to have been an accomplice, and for most suspects in consideration, an accomplice would not make sense. However, since researching Le Grand - the only contemporary suspect WITH criminal accomplices - I've become more open to the idea of the Ripper possibly being a two-man team, with one in the lead. So, in short, the question whether or not there was a suspect has to remain relative to the suspect under consideration, because there's absolutely nothing in the evidence of any of the murders that REQUIRES there to have been an accomplice, nor is there anything that NEGATES there having been one. Just my two sense.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[mariab]

The BS-Pipeman tandem can certainly also be interpreted as a team of leader + accomplice, plus it fits with Le Grand's MO when beating up prostitutes.

Let me read you a line from Psychopathia Sexualis
Quote:
Lust-murders dependent upon psychopathic conditions are never committed with accomplices. - Pg. 398

Hello Corey,
Kraft Ebbing might have been one of the father of psychopathology, still, he has not conducted statistical research in a systematic fashion as done today. Thus, as with Freud, quite a few things Kraft-Ebing has said should be taken with a grain of salt. I can think of one example which belies the line by Kraft-Ebbing you're quoting: Bernardo and Homolka.
Truth be said, they are an extremely rare case.

[corey123]

Hello Maria,

I am well aware of his status, only that as history has provided, his hypothesis is rather accurate, most if not all lust-murders occur without an accomplice.

Hello Tom,

You are absolutely correct.

Corey

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon

Are you suggesting JtR had an obsession with shoulders ? or that these crimes have no sexual connotations ?

All the best
David

David.
I don't think "obsession" comes into it.
Considering all the Whitechapel Murders between '87 & '91, I believe there were a number of killers, or we could say a host of victims killed by various hands. The only victims where, in my opinion, a pattern exists is between Nichols, Chapman & Eddowes.
The method of overcoming the victim appears the same.
The initial first cut to the jugglar.
The second cut across & around the throat, deep & vicious.
The same rip to the abdomen, from pubes to breastbone.
The removal of organ(s), successfull in two cases, perhaps interrupted in the first case.
I would not categorize this determination as obsession until I know the motive.
This killer displayed intent, but for what reason?

Regards, Jon S.

[DVV]

So, in short, the question whether or not there was a suspect has to remain relative to the suspect under consideration, because there's absolutely nothing in the evidence of any of the murders that REQUIRES there to have been an accomplice, nor is there anything that NEGATES there having been one.
Tom Wescott

That's right, Tom, agreed.

[DVV]

Hi Jon

Considering all the Whitechapel Murders between '87 & '91

There's no "Whitechapel murder" in 1887 that I'm aware of, Jon.

I would not categorize this determination as obsession until I know the motive.
This killer displayed intent, but for what reason?

The Ripper has been characterized as a "necro-sadist". Couldn't this explain that ?

All the best

[mariab]

The Ripper has been characterized as a "necro-sadist". Couldn't this explain that?

Agree about the necro-sadist part. This profile obviously fits with Tumblety. Now, if we were to consider Le Grand as the suspect, initially I've had my problems with the "necro-sadist" part, but then I recalled the threat letters Le Grand wrote to several old ladies, where he graphically described what all one if his exploding devices would do to the body of said ladies. In the letters it's pretty obvious how much gratification he derived from phantasizing about postmortem mutilations.

[Tom_Wescott]

Hi all,

There's no question that it's extremely rare for serial killers to work in tandem, but of course it must be said that the Ripper crimes were virtually an anomaly in the annals of crime. In the event there were two killers, we have to expect both would have required each other to 'get their hands dirty' from the start. This perhaps explains the two knives used on Tabram. From that point forward, one of the killers may have taken the lead, which is why we see a more practiced and less frenzied approach on Nichols.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott