Does The Killer Scope Out Locations Before He Kills?

[Michael W Richards]

I should add that the above indicates a man that knew the area well enough to trust the actual location to circumstances, so it doesnt seem that he felt a need to scope out anything before he acts. Not a Victim nor a location.

[Michael W Richards]

How many times did Robert Napper offend indoors, compared with outdoors, Michael? Do you know? What would have been his preference, given an option on every occasion?

You presume that Jack the Robot had some kind of built-in stop button, preventing him from killing indoors, when reality suggests he simply had to make do with outdoor activity on all but one occasion, because the most vulnerable women were also outdoors at night, having to make do with it. If there was nowhere indoors for them to go, he had no choice - unless or until he encountered a prospective victim with a room of her own.

You might be better off considering the ratio of women the killer could have met and engaged with who were homeless, to those who had a private room. But you don't seem that interested in the women themselves, except when you are imagining what one did to cross a man who wasn't Jack.

Love,

Caz
X

I don't presume anything here Caz, and therein lies the difference in our approaches. I review the same evidence, I can make the same connections, and I can connect the dots as best I can. The real truth about the Jack the Ripper series is that the contemporary officials gave it life. And it still is breathing today.

Anyone of us can see that using ONLY whats there, it would be very unlikely that the first 2 murders were by different men with different goals. It was one guy, one troubled guy. After that the "series" that has been proposed takes twists and turns, which folks like yourself would then like to categorize as some sort of standardized serial killer trait, killing in different ways for different reasons.

Im sure that sophisticated data from modern, studied, serial killers interviews is valuable in understanding what they did. But if the killer who becomes Jack the Ripper to history killed only those first 2 women, how valuable is it to study what men that killed 5, 10 or 100 people were driven by each time they killed? Both victims alone in the middle of the night, approximately the same age and body type, both incapacitated physically in some form, both were killed by 2 deep neck cuts...unusual trait, and both women were placed in similar fashion and had their abdomens mutilated post mortem. On the very spot of the attack, wherever that might be. These 2 murders are almost identical, the only important difference being the location and the degree of injuries inflicted. Which it turns out, is self explanatory. More privacy=more cutting.

If this man just kills because he cant control himself, then why don't we see lots more of these? I think he kills, the guy who kills Polly and Annie, because of some fascination for female abdominal organs. Thats his mental illness showing. He happens to have the knife skills to pull an attack like this off. And a burning curiosity. And a mental illness driving this whole thing. First time he gets itchy and commits in a bad spot. Cant finish. Waits a while, let things cool, then goes out again. Second time he asks for somewhere discreet and is led there. Not a great spot either, but better...he gets to complete his objective this time. Almost a month later a woman of the same general description, age, known occupation,...is killed in a 2 second single cut altercation that is complete unto itself.

I think when you have evidence like we do its best to filter it individually, after all its easiest to solve puzzles with a variety of perspectives to apply.

[DJA]

From the inquest evidence.

Joseph Lawende: I reside at No. 45, Norfolk-road, Dalston, and am a commercial traveller. On the night of Sept. 29, I was at the Imperial Club, Duke-street, together with Mr. Joseph Levy and Mr. Harry Harris. It was raining, and we sat in the club till half-past one o'clock, when we left. I observed a man and woman together at the corner of Church-passage, Duke-street, leading to Mitre-square.
The Coroner: Were they talking? - The woman was standing with her face towards the man, and I only saw her back. She had one hand on his breast. He was the taller. She had on a black jacket and bonnet. I have seen the articles at the police-station, and believe them to be those the deceased was wearing.
[Coroner] What sort of man was this? - He had on a cloth cap with a peak of the same.
Mr. Crawford: Unless the jury wish it, I do not think further particulars should be given as to the appearance of this man.
The Foreman: The jury do not desire it.
Mr. Crawford (to witness): You have given a description of the man to the police? - Yes.
[Coroner] Would you know him again? - I doubt it. The man and woman were about nine or ten feet away from me. I have no doubt it was half-past one o'clock when we rose to leave the club, so that it would be twenty-five minutes to two o'clock when we passed the man and woman.
[Coroner] Did you overhear anything that either said? - No.
[Coroner] Did either appear in an angry mood? - No.
[Coroner] Did anything about their movements attract your attention? - No. The man looked rather rough and shabby.
[Coroner] When the woman placed her hand on the man's breast, did she do it as if to push him away? - No; it was done very quietly.
[Coroner] You were not curious enough to look back and see where they went. - No.

[Chava]

I'm a Blotchy 'fan' too, Chava [perhaps not the right word!], but not to the extent of ruling out suspects on that basis. Similarly, I'm nowhere near 100% on Tabram, but when I compare Robert Napper's murder of Rachel Nickell in the summer of 1992 [outdoors, 49 stab wounds] with that of Samantha Bisset in November 1993 [in her own home], I find it impossible to rule out Tabram on the differences in MO between her murder and that of Mary Kelly:

'On 15 July 1992 on Wimbledon Common, Napper stabbed the young mother Rachel Nickel forty-nine times in front of her son Alex, then aged two, who clung on to his mother's body begging her to wake up. Napper was questioned about unsolved attacks on other women during the year, but was eliminated from inquiries.

In November 1993, in the Bisset home in Plumstead, Napper stabbed 27-year-old Samantha Bisset in her neck and chest, killing her, and then sexually assaulted and smothered her four-year-old daughter, Jazmine Jemima Bisset. In her sitting room, Napper mutilated Samantha's body, taking away parts of her body as a trophy. The crime scene was reportedly so grisly that the police photographer assigned to the case was forced to take two years' leave after witnessing it.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Napper

The differences between Tabram and Kelly could be put down to the location, time available, the killer's experimentation, his relative experience and desired outcome.

I am also open to the same man inflicting the terrible injury on Emma Smith, which caused her death.

Love,

Caz
X

You make excellent points re MO. I'm not so sure about Emma Smith--although the coroner at the Nichols inquest which didn't end until 17th September so everyone knew about the murders by then--saw her as the first in four killings which he believed were clearly linked. That would be Smith, Tabram, Nichols & Chapman. However for me the injury to Smith was more overtly sexual in nature than the Whitechapel Murderer's ministrations.

[Chava]

Where did you get that lot from?

From the inquest evidence.

[Abby Normal]

How many times did Robert Napper offend indoors, compared with outdoors, Michael? Do you know? What would have been his preference, given an option on every occasion?

You presume that Jack the Robot had some kind of built-in stop button, preventing him from killing indoors, when reality suggests he simply had to make do with outdoor activity on all but one occasion, because the most vulnerable women were also outdoors at night, having to make do with it. If there was nowhere indoors for them to go, he had no choice - unless or until he encountered a prospective victim with a room of her own.

You might be better off considering the ratio of women the killer could have met and engaged with who were homeless, to those who had a private room. But you don't seem that interested in the women themselves, except when you are imagining what one did to cross a man who wasn't Jack.

Love,

Caz
X

exactly. "jack the robot" indeed. seems alot of people have that problem. he was human being, and a serial killer no less. strange and mysterious creatures and subject to the same unpredictable circumstances with the rest of us. he got lucky with kelly.

btw-I agree with your views on blotchy too.

[caz]

ALL of the previous killings, including the other ones in the Unsolved File, were outdoor murders. Just what sort of ratio is at your comfort zone?

How many times did Robert Napper offend indoors, compared with outdoors, Michael? Do you know? What would have been his preference, given an option on every occasion?

You presume that Jack the Robot had some kind of built-in stop button, preventing him from killing indoors, when reality suggests he simply had to make do with outdoor activity on all but one occasion, because the most vulnerable women were also outdoors at night, having to make do with it. If there was nowhere indoors for them to go, he had no choice - unless or until he encountered a prospective victim with a room of her own.

You might be better off considering the ratio of women the killer could have met and engaged with who were homeless, to those who had a private room. But you don't seem that interested in the women themselves, except when you are imagining what one did to cross a man who wasn't Jack.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Funny you would write that but not take it into serious consideration with Kellys murder. So uncharacteristic of the known facets of the Ripper.

Based on how many killings? Hardly a large enough database to draw hard and fast conclusions as to what the killer might or might not do.

If he wanted the luxury of more time alone with the victim then killing indoors would be the answer.

c.d.

Indeed, c.d.

Michael bases his 'known facets of the Ripper' on just two killings, in Buck's Row and the rear of Hanbury Street. Any killing that is not a carbon copy of these two is attributed to another knifeman, as if the victims were identical rag dolls, who could have had no influence over when, where or how they were killed, so if Jack the Robot had got them, he'd have been able to dictate the proceedings and do precisely the same each time. So for him to have killed Kelly, he'd have done it outdoors, just like he did with Nichols and Chapman, and she could not have tempted him to change his ways for once and share her room, even though it was now November, the weather was miserable, and it would give him the best opportunity yet to roll up his sleeves and really get stuck in. No, Michael has some other deranged ghoul taking full advantage of the situation.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

I suspected he killed Tabram for ages. But the MOs are markedly different. Bayonet vs knife. Frenzied stabbing vs not-at-all frenzied cutting. And more than that--because I am a Mr Blotchy fan--I think his MO had been carefully thought-out over a long time...

I'm a Blotchy 'fan' too, Chava [perhaps not the right word!], but not to the extent of ruling out suspects on that basis. Similarly, I'm nowhere near 100% on Tabram, but when I compare Robert Napper's murder of Rachel Nickell in the summer of 1992 [outdoors, 49 stab wounds] with that of Samantha Bisset in November 1993 [in her own home], I find it impossible to rule out Tabram on the differences in MO between her murder and that of Mary Kelly:

'On 15 July 1992 on Wimbledon Common, Napper stabbed the young mother Rachel Nickel forty-nine times in front of her son Alex, then aged two, who clung on to his mother's body begging her to wake up. Napper was questioned about unsolved attacks on other women during the year, but was eliminated from inquiries.

In November 1993, in the Bisset home in Plumstead, Napper stabbed 27-year-old Samantha Bisset in her neck and chest, killing her, and then sexually assaulted and smothered her four-year-old daughter, Jazmine Jemima Bisset. In her sitting room, Napper mutilated Samantha's body, taking away parts of her body as a trophy. The crime scene was reportedly so grisly that the police photographer assigned to the case was forced to take two years' leave after witnessing it.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Napper

The differences between Tabram and Kelly could be put down to the location, time available, the killer's experimentation, his relative experience and desired outcome.

I am also open to the same man inflicting the terrible injury on Emma Smith, which caused her death.

Love,

Caz
X

[Michael W Richards]

The murder sites were not all similar. Nichols is killed on the street, Chapman and Stride in yards, Eddowes in a square, Kelly indoors. Martha, if you include her, was killed in an even more fundamentally different kind of location.

If the killer were selecting the scene of the crime, would you expect them to be more similar to each other?

Excluding Kelly they all have at least one common characteristic...they are outdoors. So its a matter of separating the wheat from the chaff...which of the outdoor murders seems most connected by the killers actions and activities?

For me thats Nichols, Chapman, Eddowes and MacKenzie.

[Michael W Richards]

Mrs Fiddymont's?

https://wiki.casebook.org/mrs-2.html

To my mind an excellent candidate for Annies murderer too. He could not have gone on killing though...so for many he is set aside. Pity.

[Abby Normal]

Mrs Fiddymont's?

https://wiki.casebook.org/mrs-2.html

yes thats the one! thanks JR!

joseph taylor was the witness:



Resident of 22 Steward Street, Spitalfields.

Was passing the Prince Albert public house in Brushfield Street when he was alerted to a suspicious man who had just been seen by Mrs. Fiddymont and Mary Chappell in the pub.

Joseph Taylor states that as soon as his attention was attracted to the man he followed him. He walked rapidly, and came alongside him, but did not speak to him. The man was rather thin, about 5ft. 8in. high, and apparently between 40 and 50 years of age. He had a shabby genteel look, pepper and salt trousers which fitted badly, and dark coat. When Taylor came alongside him the man glanced at him, and Taylor's description of the look was, "His eyes were as wild as a hawk's." Taylor is a perfectly reliable man, well known throughout the neighbourhood. The man walked, he says, holding his coat together at the top. He had a nervous and frightened way about him. He wore a ginger-coloured moustache, and had short sandy hair. Taylor ceased to follow him, but watched him as far as Halfmoon-street, where he became lost to view.^[1]

[DJA]

Lawende's man in the Eddowes killing sounds suspiciously familiar--fair complexion; fair/sandy/full moustache. Lawende estimates him as an inch or two taller. But we don't know how tall Lawende himself was and I think that tends to make a difference when someone is estimating someone else's height. Also there is a reference somewhere to him having sandy eyelashes but I can't find that right now. Both guys are broad-shouldered as well.

Where did you get that lot from?

[Joshua Rogan]

yes. so we have blotchy, lawendes man, wilsons man, and as i said another red haired man that was acting suspiciously and being followed after the chapman murder. does anyone know what that sighting was?

Mrs Fiddymont's?

https://wiki.casebook.org/mrs-2.html

[Abby Normal]

Lawende's man in the Eddowes killing sounds suspiciously familiar--fair complexion; fair/sandy/full moustache. Lawende estimates him as an inch or two taller. But we don't know how tall Lawende himself was and I think that tends to make a difference when someone is estimating someone else's height. Also there is a reference somewhere to him having sandy eyelashes but I can't find that right now. Both guys are broad-shouldered as well.

yes. so we have blotchy, lawendes man, wilsons man, and as i said another red haired man that was acting suspiciously and being followed after the chapman murder. does anyone know what that sighting was?