Was Jack enraged by watching soliciting

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
When one talks of Jack the Ripper, visions of him approaching prostitutes as a punter appear, however was this the actual case?
Was Jack enraged by the act of soliciting, was the anger fuelled by seeing these women accost men?
In the case of Tabram, we know that she and Pearly Poll, flaunted themselves with soldiers, and we know that Martha went off with one of them .
I ask the question ..did her killer wait until she was alone before moving in , actually entering George yard buildings finding the tired and drunken Tabram on the first floor landing.
In the case of Nichols, we know there is a time discrepancy between the time she was seen by Emily Holland , and her death in Bucks Row, which could indicate ample time for her to attempt to attract a punter, especially with the ''jolly bonnet''
Did Jack observe such a scene, and follow her , possibly accosting her in Brady street,
In the case of Chapman, we have the perfect case of possibly a ''watcher'', it is entirely possibly by the time frame, that Mrs Long saw Chapman and a punter about to enter the yard, and entirely possible that he left the passage into Hanbury street, leaving the exhausted Annie sitting against the fence, and Jack moved in , and the ''No'' and thud was heard.
In the case of Stride we have the whole evening of apparent soliciting, leaving the ''Brickmakers arms''. the scenes in Berner street, and the loitering outside the club..
Was Jack ''Broad shoulders'' or the loitering pipeman..both strong candidates.?
In Kate Eddowes, once more we have the apparent solicit in church passage, the hand on chest, which could indicate a ''back off, as well as a sign of affection,if the former then it is possible that the sailor type walked off , and the Ripper followed her into Mitre square..
In the case of Mary Kelly, we have her apparently on the pick up on the eve of the 8TH, seen with a young man, also we have Hutchinson's account, even Mrs Maxwell's porter at 845am on the 9TH.
We could have the same observer scenario present here also..
I feel that the stalker option , is an alternative to the punter approach that most of us adhere to..
The rough abusive killer is my idea of ''Jack''
Regards Richard.

[kensei]

I'll answer both yes and know to your post. Yes, I think Jack was clearly enraged at watching prostitution take place around him. But no, I don't think he took the approach you describe. I think he posed as a customer.

With one possible exception, that being Martha Tabram. And this is just my imagination, but I see him walking past George Yard Buildings minding his own business and being in a bad mood for whatever reason when Martha- drunkenly sheltering there after her last client the soldier has left- sees him and tosses a slurred and lurid invitation at him. I see him stopping in his tracks, slowly turning his head toward her with furrowed brow, and the sheer rage that is seen in the nature of her wounds shows what happened next.

After that, I think that the cases in which witnesses saw the victims with a man just before their deaths were indeed sightings of the Ripper deliberately posing as a customer. The descriptions if viewed in a general sense seem to describe what may have been Jack's regular garb when he went out trolling for victims- a dark overcoat and a peaked or deerstalker cap, described in slightly different ways by people who glimpsed him from different angles and in different lighting conditions. In the case of Mary Kelly, Astrakan Man would be an exception if that was him, but that is a whole other debate.

[martin wilson]

It''s an interesting thought, it may indicate that Jack had a type,as opposed to the idea that the victims were just wrong place wrong time.
The obvious (to me) inference is that given the age of four of the victims they are 'mother' types which then leads to the thought that Jacks' mother may have been a prostitute,neglect,abuse and perhaps even more sinister activities could easily provide motive.
OK,plenty of children had mothers who were prostitutes,but then serial killers are rare, there were a hell of a lot of people struggling to survive at that time, thus increasing the probability that someone appeared with the correct psychopathy for a serial killer.
So why were there only 5 killings attributed to Jack at a time when prostitution was rife in the East end? If it's just prostitution that sets him off,given the ample opportunity he had why were there not more killings or assaults?
Could it be that his victims had to be a certain type of prostitute?,thus supporting the theory that the victims were stalked rather than chance encounters?
And where the heck did Mary Ann Nicholls' bonnet come from,given she was destitute?(sorry, that's just something thats always puzzled me).
On a related subject I cant find the full text of a letter which appeared in the
East London Observer on the 15th of September 1888, (source East End Chronicles, Ed Glinert) from 'Josephus' which along with the murders had biblical references to pharisees and the daughters of eve, anybody know of it?
All the best.

[Phil H]

One of my earliest ideas (c 1972) on beginning to read seriously about the Ripper, was to the effect that Nichols' new bonnet might have been a clue. especially as a later (possible) victim (Coles?) also had two bonnets on her at the time of her death.

But "Polly" had had money that day and spent it - she told Emily Holland so -and thus I have conluded that it was "new" to her, but she had bought it as part of her "spree".

After mature and long consideration, I don't see any scenario in which "Jack" needed to tempt these unfortunate woman with anything so alluring as a bonnet. Fourpence would have done in most cases. Neither do I see the killer as the type to make a down-payment (a bonnet) but claim a meeting later and expect the woman to turn up! No. To me Jack was a meet and kill kinda guy - instantaneous. Besides, Nichols was so drunk she would probably have forgotten who and where by that time in the morning!

Neither do I think Tabram is a good example re Jack - to me the multiple wounds/weapons suggest more than one man was involved. I wonder these days whether she tried to dup her soldier-client and he went back, found his mates and they taught her a lesson once for all.

Phil H

[richardnunweek]

Hi,
One thing that puzzles me , is considering all of these women appeared to have been picked up by men, ie Tabram, Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, Kelly, [ we can only speculate on Nichols] there were no signs of sexual contact, which may imply that the killer was disgusted by the idea.
However that would put my watcher theory in the bin, unless oral was the normal, or signs of intimacy were missed.? the latter is likely.
I can not have Jack as a person with conversational skills , and proposing sex.
I see him as a rough violent man, with no patience, very like Broad-shoulders.
Regards Richard.

[Robert]

Hi Richard

Re your scenario, there was very little time for Eddowes to have been soliciting before she was killed. Your "backoff" suggestion doesn't really fit with your theory, for why should this enraged Jack kill her when she'd just turned a customer down? I think if you are going to have a "watched" Eddowes, then your best bet is to drop Stride as a victim - that would give the "watching Jack" a bit more time.

[Phil H]

IMHO Jack almost certainly got his "jollies" in the killing.

He may not have been capable of the sexual act (hence his problem/hatreds) psychologically unable to sustain an erection or for other medical reasons.

Almost certainly Nichols was picked up by a man (I am unsure why you leave her out). She, Chapman, Eddowes and Stride (if a jtR victim) were all next to wooden gates or fences which would have provide "give" during the act/"connexion". Thus, the woman almost certainly chose the spot.

Phil H

[richardnunweek]

Hi Phil,
The reason why I excluded Nichols was nobody actually saw her with anyone, not like Tabram,Chapman, Stride, Eddowes, Mary Kelly.
I should add, that in no case was sexual connection present, even with wooden gates or fences to aid.
In the case of poor Polly, if the commotion heard in Brady street was her being ruffed up, then I hardly think that she choose a suitable place for sex, some hundred mitres away..
Regards Richard.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Robert,
How would an observer know, if the act had not taken place with Eddowes and sailor man, they were standing close together, with her hand on his chest, if he had not long been close by , and Kate's chap left, maybe at her request, he could have formed that impression.
Regards Richard.

[Robert]

Hi Richard

But how long is he supposed to have been watching these women for? If you take Stride, if he was watching her the whole evening, then it's strange that someone that patient should fly off the handle at virtually his first sight of Eddowes.

If you take Chapman, she was looking for her doss money. If she had just serviced a customer, wouldn't she have been off to her lodging house? Of course, Jack could have stepped in at the last minute with an offer of an extra "trick," but I get the feeling somehow that the theory is being forced into the wrong shaped hole.

[Phil H]

Richard: We cannot be certain that anyone saw Chapman with a man. The Darrell/Long sighting has its problems.

On the sexual connexion point - all the locations were suitable for a "bit of business". I don't think Polly went to Bucks Row on her own - thus the implication must be she was with a "client" (or at least thought she was). Whether he ever intended to do more than kill is another question.

I think we have moved away from the old convention that he was behind her and so forth. The absense of any "secretions", which were clearly looked for on the victims even in 1888 - speaks for itself.

Phil H

[richardnunweek]

Hi Robert,
It would not be the first time I have tried to force a theory into the wrong shaped hole..
However, lets not forget, that Stride has always been suggested as the killer having being disturbed, so we have to consider the frustration factor.
As for Chapman.
I have her still recovering from having serviced Long's man, and composing herself in the yard, not humming a tune walking back into Hanbury street.
Regards Richard.

[Errata]

It strikes me that he may have used either scenario, depending on the environment. The stalking scenario has chancier timing, given that he has to wait long enough for the customer to get out of hearing, but no so long that the woman moves out of the secluded area and onto a busier thoroughfare. But it's not impossible. I just think "enraged" would be a mischaracterization. It implies loss of control, and while that's true to a certain extent, it did not apply to his approach. He certainly never charged in swinging. Anger may have initially chosen the targets, but after that it was the hunt that fueled him.

[Robert]

We can't be certain exactly what the police found in Kelly's room, but it seems reasonable to assume that no money was found on or by any of the victims. It would be odd if Jack managed to rob all of them, given the fact that prostitutes would have been well used to being frisked by thugs and pimps and doubtless had their hiding places for their takings. So then we will be forced to bring in assumptions such as that they were bilked by their last customers, or that the mortuary attendants pinched the money. It just doesn't ring true for me.

[richardnunweek]

Hi Phil,
The Darrell/Long sighting actual fits well, in with a service in the backyard, an exit by her client, and a possible entry by the killer, and a surprised Chapman, and the thud.
I agree that the absence of any ''secretions'' does not mean that none were present.
Regards Richard.