Why do you think Jack stopped?

[Beowulf]

Or did he change the locations of his killing ground and continue to kill ?

Yes, I was thinking that, and particularly in remembering your book and the mention of similiar murders in South America.

I do think the other strong possibility is he was placed into an asylum. In House's book he reprints the contents of a letter sent to Anderson referring to a female informant and makes for a consideration of that possibility.

"My dear Anderson,

I send you this line to ask you to see & hear the bearer, whose name is unknown to me. She has or thinks she has a knowledge of the author of the Whitechapel murders. The author is supposed to be nearly related to her, & she is in a great fear lest any suspicion should attach to her & place her & her family in peril.

I have advised her to place the whole story before you, without giving you any names, so that you may form an opinion as to its being worth while to investigate.

Very sincerlely yours,
Crawford" (26th Earl of Crawford who took an interest in the Ripper crimes)

Question is did this letter refer to and lead to Kosminski being a suspect and finally to his admittance to an asylum?

[DVV]

I just can't help but think- if James Thomas Sadler was found by the court to have been incapable of having killed Frances Coles, then who else that she just blunders into by chance in Swallow Gardens is going to cut her throat for no other reason than to kill her? No robbery, no rape, just the snuffing of a life. The mysterious and anonymous stranger still haunting the East End.

Hi Kensei, he wasn't "found to have been incapable of having killed Frances Coles", the Court couldn't prove his guilt. The common belief that the Whitechapel murderer could only be caught red-handed was quite true, and I don't think the police was convinced he was innocent.

[kensei]

Hi Kensei, he wasn't "found to have been incapable of having killed Frances Coles", the Court couldn't prove his guilt. The common belief that the Whitechapel murderer could only be caught red-handed was quite true, and I don't think the police was convinced he was innocent.

Hi DVV, I was referring to the testimony that Sadler was probably too drunk to have committed the crime. I guess I could've worded it better.

[Scorpio]

Since this seems to be touched on in quite a few threads, I thought it might be worth starting one of its own (I can't find a dedicated one). Basically, I would be interested in hearing everyone's opinions on why the murders stopped (if, indeed, you believe that they did). I'll outline the major reasons that are usually posited, along with my own thoughts on their pros and cons, and would welcome all or any discussion on alternatives and opinions.

1. Suicide. I often see this suggested (primarily with regard to police suspect Montague Druitt killing himself shortly after the crimes). Personally, I find it most unlikely: the killer seemed happy enough to let his crimes escalate, which would suggest a lack of remorse. I'm also unfamiliar with any known cases of serial killers who have committed suicide BEFORE getting caught or suspected, but I'm happy to be corrected on this point. To play Devil's advocate, however, it is possible that a killer in 1888 might have been more likely to have been conflicted over his actions than one operating today; religion and church played, I would imagine, a more significant role in people's lives then, and the general lack of knowledge about psycopathy may well have led to the Ripper loathing himself because he didn't understand himself.

2. Death by some other means. Mortality was, of course, much higher in 1888 than today, and it is possible that the Ripper simply died of one of the many illnesses which would have been endemic in lower class Whitechapel. However, I do find it somewhat stretches credulity to believe that Jack conveniently dropped dead soon after committing his 'climactic' crime.

3. Conviction for some other crime. Possible, of course, but I tend to think that a canny operator like Jack would have been unlikely to have been caught for something else. Further, it would presumably have to have been something serious, as a minor offence would only have incapacitated him for a short time (after which we might reasonably expect him to have resumed ripping), whilst only a serious crime (another murder) would have sent him to the gallows. The problem there is that a controlled killer like the Ripper would, in my opinion, have been unlikely to have committed a murder in a slapdash and 'unfamiliar' manner which might have led to his arrest.

4. Moving away from the area. This seems fairly popular and plausible a theory. People, for example, suggest a trip to America might have been possible, with the Carrie Brown murder cited as evidence that the Ripper continued his work on the other side of the Atlantic. However, I think that we can also question why there was never another 'series' of murders matching the Ripper killings in another fixed location. Was he perhaps simply afraid to start up again in an unfamiliar setting?

5. He simply stopped. It is not unknown for serial killers to stop either for good or for varying lengths of time. As Mary Kelly was such an 'extreme' kill, it might be argued that the Ripper felt gratified enough to stop killing, having achieved his ultimate thrill. My problem with the notion of a break or a full stop, however, is the fact that the canonical victims were all killed within such a short time frame. I just find it hard to accept that the Ripper murders sprung up in August 1888 (and with such a level of savagery) only for the killer to have tired and/or achieved his ultimate goal within a few short months. Were they more spread out (over years rather than months) I could understand their 'drying up', but Jack seemed to take to his task with alacrity, and it's therefore hard to envision him considering his work 'complete' only months after beginning.

6. He didn't stop, but changed MO. This, I think, is quite possible (within reason). If one accepts that Jack MIGHT have exhausted the 'ripping' method during the Kelly murder, I find it entirely possible that he sought some other means of satisfaction. If he didn't stop altogether in 1888 (for whatever reason) then I believe he could well have changed his method, and moved onto something akin to the Elizabeth Jackson murder. However, I'm afraid that I can't quite see him moving on to poison or another such variant method - his pleasure seems to derive from mutilation, and I would tentatively suggest that any future crimes with Jackson-type mutilations should be examined if one believes that he didn't actually stop killing in 1888.

Anyway, I look forward to all and every personal opinion or theory about when/why/how/if Jack stopped killing after Mary Kelly!

Here are a few more bones( of contention )for the stew-pot.
Perhaps the cessation of murder after such a busy temporary phase can be taken as sign that all the victims associated with JtR, were killed by different
people. The murder spree was a domino- effect situation that would eventually burn itself out if no single dedicated individual were present.
Or, the killer(s) felt that the murder of Kelly brought closure for some unspecified reason.

[lynn cates]

class

Hello Beowulf. If the letter refers to Kosminski, as some suppose, it would be helpful if a link could be found between Aaron and either Martin Kosminski or Jessie Kosminski. They were fairly high up with respect to class; Aaron, seemingly less so. And it would seem that few of the lower social classes would be noticed by one of the peerage.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

what a thought

Hello Scorpio.

"Perhaps the cessation of murder after such a busy temporary phase can be taken as sign that all the victims associated with JtR, were killed by different
people. The murder spree was a domino- effect situation that would eventually burn itself out if no single dedicated individual were present."

Now THERE'S a thought. (Or possibly, SOME of them were.)

Cheers.
LC

[Beowulf]

Hello Beowulf. If the letter refers to Kosminski, as some suppose, it would be helpful if a link could be found between Aaron and either Martin Kosminski or Jessie Kosminski. They were fairly high up with respect to class; Aaron, seemingly less so. And it would seem that few of the lower social classes would be noticed by one of the peerage.

Cheers.
LC

I'm not sure I follow you. It has been documented evidently that Kosminski lived with his sister, and that is the person Crawford is possibly referring to, however I don't follow what you mean by 'few of the lower social classes would be noticed by one of the peerage'.

[lynn cates]

social class

Hello Beowulf. The short version is this. Why would a Lord listen to the plea of a poor working class family?

On the other hand, a family like the Druitts might--given they were of a higher social class.

Cheers.
LC

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Beowulf and Lynn

The tone of the Crawford letter strikes me as if the woman who related the story had some sort of social standing and was not a lower class woman who was Jewish. I might be wrong about that, but that's the impression I received from the letter as quoted in Stephen Ryder's dissertation, "Emily and the Bibliophile: A Possible Source for Macnaghten's Private Information." The letter is enigmatic and hard to pin down but there appears to be no notion that the woman was other than gentile and of sufficient social standing to approach a peer or some intermediary who contacted Crawford, as evidently was the case since the peer indicates, her "name is unknown to me."

Best regards

Chris

[Ginger]

Why would a Lord listen to the plea of a poor working class family?

Why not? Peers are people too. Perhaps he simply felt sorry for them. The socially prominent are going to understand better than most how it can feel when a relative does something to bring shame and notoriety on an otherwise blameless family.

-Ginger

[lynn cates]

family of good name

Hello Chris. Thanks. That is PRECISELY the way I see it too. It sounds like a family "of good name" being fussed over.

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

above and below

Hello Ginger. Perhaps so. But my take on LVP mores indicates that the lower social classes were even more unwilling to ask for help from above than some of the peerage were to extend it below.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Here's a simple incident that could quite easily have been the cause of the cessation of the Whitechapel murders.

At LAMBETH, JOHN BENJAMIN PERRIMAN, 40 hairdresser, living in Pennethorne-road, Peckham, was charged with being drunk and disorderly in Old Kent-road. On Wednesday night detectives Leek and Reed were in the Old Kent-road, and hearing a disturbance, went to the spot. They found the prisoner surrounded by a crowd, and it was feared he would be roughly handled as he had declared himself to be "Jack the Ripper," and had acted in a very violent manner. He flourished his arms about, and exhibited a black leather bag, about which he made some remarks. He caught hold of several women, and caused much alarm. The officers, after much difficulty, got the prisoner to the station, being followed by an excited mob. At the station the bag carried by the prisoner was searched, and in it were found two pairs of scissors, a dagger and sheath, and a life preserver. Mr. Partridge asked whether the prisoner wished to account for carrying these things about, and the prisoner said he was going to have them ground. It was further stated that the prisoner was known as the "Mad barber of Peckham." A sister of the prisoner said he had been intoxicated for a long time. She knew he had a dagger, but for what purpose he kept it she did not know. Mr. Partridge said he should remand the prisoner, and if he was not right in his mind it would, perhaps, be necessary to send him to an asylum. The prisoner, who seemed to treat the matter as a joke, asked to be allowed out on bail, but Mr. Partridge declined to accede to his request.
Times, 16 Nov. 1888.

As much as many might like a banner headline announcing the capture of the Whitechapel fiend. Quite likely he was unknowingly removed off the streets, one among many, and placed in an asylum never to be heard from again.

Regards, Jon S.

[Casebook Wiki Editor]

I've always thought septicemia could have brought an end to Jack's little games.

[Beowulf]

Hello Beowulf. The short version is this. Why would a Lord listen to the plea of a poor working class family?

On the other hand, a family like the Druitts might--given they were of a higher social class.

Cheers.
LC

Interesting stuff, and I am thinking about it, which will take prob months more actually for me, lol, but do you not think with a madman on the loose and the town in an uproar that they would listen with just about anyone who had a tale to tell?

If a working class family member who was Jewish came forward, in all likelihood she must've had some reason for real, why else would she put herself up for possible interrogations she would not welcome?