What's your profile for Jack?

[The Good Michael]

Lynn,

The sarcasm was a bit lost. I got it, however.

Mike

[Semper_Eadem]

Hello Same. Thanks.

Fido's theory is not bad. He tries to link Cohen to "Leather Apron." Surely he is on the right track as someone was wandering around Whitechapel and Piser was not the main culprit.

Cheers.
LC

I forgot that Fido tried to link leather apron to Cohen. It's been 20 or so years since I read Fido's book. I need to re-read it but there are always other books I want to get first. I agree that someone was going around Whitechapel either murdering women or eating food out of the sewers. Sounds like someone really needed help. I don't know as I am not really current with the new theories. In fact that is really why I stop by Casebook to see what I have missed. I will say that I feel that ripperologists should pay more attention to what the original Policemen who worked the case had to say about the killer as they worked the case and shifted though the evidence, although there is a lot of documents MIA. I usually study the high medieval era. So I am more comfortable there.

SE =~)

[lynn cates]

lunatics

Hello Same. Thanks.

Yes, WC had several wandering lunatics. A few of them were violent.

"I feel that ripperologists should pay more attention to what the original Policemen who worked the case had to say"

Absolutely.

Cheers.
LC

[Errata]

Hello Same. Thanks.

Yes, WC had several wandering lunatics. A few of them were violent.

"I feel that ripperologists should pay more attention to what the original Policemen who worked the case had to say"

Absolutely.

Cheers.
LC

I feel that we need to pay more attention to what policemen say about the facts of the case, but I don't think we can rely on their conclusions about the case, if for no other reason than that our understanding of mental illness, neurology, brain mapping, and behavioral analysis has advanced by leaps and bounds. For example, masturbation has made someone a murderer a grand total of never. And we're still not sufficiently knowledgeable to fully explain serial murder or violent compulsion or even psychosis, but we do know that the genuinely delusional make up a very small percentage of killers. Less than two percent. So if the only thing recommending a suspect is that he is barking mad, then clearly the cops are looking for the wrong criteria.

[lynn cates]

Brave, brave Sir Robert

Hello Errata. Thanks.

"masturbation has made someone a murderer a grand total of never."

Ah, but tell Sir Robert that.

Cheers.
LC

[Michael W Richards]

Since the only murders that can legitimately be considered almost certainly committed by the same man are Mary Ann Nichols and Annie Chapman, the profile for the man who is nicknamed Jack the Ripper in a hoax letter dated Sept 27th should be based on what we know about those first 2 murders;

-Married or single male
-May live alone, may live with wife
-No children
-Local resident
-Regularly works nights
-Has some anatomical and knife wielding skills
-Undiagnosed mental illness
-Likely a butcher, slaughter houseman, failed med student, or someone with that type of skill set
-Moderate physical strength
-Previous history of harassing street women, perhaps just verbally

I believe that the profile originally applied to the unknown killer after these first 2 murders lends itself well to someone much like the Leather Apron character mentioned by some street women. Although the leather apron in the yard at Hanbury was the initial, erroneous cause for the supposed link between this unknown man LA and the unknown killer, I would think that the character type is still fitting here.

Pizer agreed to a statement that exonerated him by the Police, he didnt volunteer that he was indeed called Leather Apron, and in fact he and his family stated they never heard that name associated with Pizer before the allegations and search for LA immediately after the Chapman murder.

I think LA was likely their killer, and its likely it wasnt Pizer.

Cheers

[caz]

I think mine might be a little different.

White male
Mid thirties
English
Grew up in Whitechapel, but bettered himself out of it.
Job that requires some education. Clerk, business owner, priest,
Single
Dominant and abusive mother, possibly highly religious, possibly a prostitute (possibly died just before the first murder)
Seemingly meek in manner, quiet, possibly pious, goes unnoticed at work and in social situations.
Easily dominated by people in power
Possible hypochondriac, convinced of some defect
Compulsive about the acquisition of knowledge. Reads incessantly, any number of subjects. May attend lectures.
Fascinated by knives.
May concentrate on the plight of poor children.
No history of arrests, appearance of model citizen
Is hesitant about marriage and family
Knows the streets of Whitechapel
Familiar with the basic habits of local prostitutes through observation
He would not stand out talking to a prostitute, but he may well be awkward while doing it.

I think this was about control and revenge. I think he specifically targeted the organs of generation because he believed that he was somehow damaged by a prostitute, either by being born to one, or fearing an inability to procreate through having sex with one. I think he targeted women who reminded him of his mother in some way. I think that the only way he ever felt control was committing these mission oriented murders. I think in his regular life he would have exhibited more confidence for a few days after each murder. I think he was sterilizing them, I think he was silencing them. I think all his anatomical knowledge came from books, and had little practical experience with cutting flesh before the murders began. I think he felt that his advancement that got him out of the neighborhood was either unearned, or he felt like it could never compensate for the circumstances of his birth.

Hi Errata,

While you may be right, I thoroughly dislike hearing about such killers holding their mothers even partially responsible for the way they turned out and being believed by the profilers. What about homosexual killers who only targeted male victims? Do they also get to blame their mothers if they had miserable childhoods? What about all the women who had dominant or abusive mothers, who almost never take to serial murder, let alone go round slaughtering strange women for looking or acting like their mother did? Is it because women are better at dealing with such emotional scars, or are we looking at all this from the wrong angle? What about all the fathers who are abusive to their daughters as well as their sons? What kind of serial killers do they produce, and are the victims likely to be the same gender as the abuser?

As I have said many times in the past, I would hold our old friend testosterone responsible for the male serial killer and the gender of his victims, before looking at his dear old mum for any reliable answers.

The killer Levi Bellfield told his girlfriend that "blondes are slags and should all die". That was his lame excuse for taking a hammer to his victims' skulls. He didn't have sex with them; he wasn't interested. He just wanted to smash their heads in. He didn't kill men or boys. I would rather nobody suggested his mother was blonde and was horrid to him as a small boy.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

That's the one!

Hello Caroline.

"are we looking at all this from the wrong angle?"

Well, I wasn't going to say anything, but . . .

Cheers.
LC

[lynn cates]

No little darlings.

Hello Mike.

Why no children?

Cheers.
LC

[Semper_Eadem]

Sorry to but in, Caz you have a point.

What about all the women who had dominant or abusive mothers, who almost never take to serial murder, let alone go round slaughtering strange women for looking or acting like their mother did?

Shirley Ardell Mason, or as she is better known through the novel of her life story as Sybil from the novel Sybil is a good example of a woman who had a horrible mother, yet Miss Mason never grew up to kill anyone unless one of her split personalities got up to something. Yet she did have sixteen separate selves, but they were not killers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Ardell_Mason

[caz]

Sorry to but in, Caz you have a point.

What about all the women who had dominant or abusive mothers, who almost never take to serial murder, let alone go round slaughtering strange women for looking or acting like their mother did?

Shirley Ardell Mason, or as she is better known through the novel of her life story as Sybil from the novel Sybil is a good example of a woman who had a horrible mother, yet Miss Mason never grew up to kill anyone unless one of her split personalities got up to something. Yet she did have sixteen separate selves, but they were not killers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Ardell_Mason

Hi Semper,

A similar case is that of the artist Kim Noble (not the male comedian of the same name):

http://kimnoble.com/

She claims to have suffered sexual abuse as a child, though not at her parents' hands.

Maybe females tend to turn their pain in on themselves, or manage to block it out completely, while some males choose to turn it outwards and inflict suffering on others?

I use the word 'choose' deliberately here, as we are talking about a male killer (or killers, hi Lynn ) who got away with murdering and/or mutilating each female victim because nobody was ever seen in the act. I don't think that was merely a lucky accident each time, on the part of a madman who didn't know or care about any potential witnesses.

Love,

Caz
X

[lynn cates]

Mmmmm!

Hello Caroline. Thanks.

"as we are talking about a male killer (or killers, hi Lynn)"

Thank you very much. (A lovely person.)

Cheers.
LC

[Deathtosnails]

I don't think it's a matter of blaming a mother for creating a serial killer, but under the right circumstances with an absent or passive male role model and a dominant and abusive female role model combined with what ever wrong is going on inside a potential serial killer's mind can create the right conditions for a male to hate certain women and take his anger out on them in a way that fuels his fantasy.

Was Jack a product of these conditions? Or was there another woman in his life that fueled his hatred?

[Errata]

Hi Errata,

While you may be right, I thoroughly dislike hearing about such killers holding their mothers even partially responsible for the way they turned out and being believed by the profilers. What about homosexual killers who only targeted male victims? Do they also get to blame their mothers if they had miserable childhoods? What about all the women who had dominant or abusive mothers, who almost never take to serial murder, let alone go round slaughtering strange women for looking or acting like their mother did? Is it because women are better at dealing with such emotional scars, or are we looking at all this from the wrong angle? What about all the fathers who are abusive to their daughters as well as their sons? What kind of serial killers do they produce, and are the victims likely to be the same gender as the abuser?

As I have said many times in the past, I would hold our old friend testosterone responsible for the male serial killer and the gender of his victims, before looking at his dear old mum for any reliable answers.

The killer Levi Bellfield told his girlfriend that "blondes are slags and should all die". That was his lame excuse for taking a hammer to his victims' skulls. He didn't have sex with them; he wasn't interested. He just wanted to smash their heads in. He didn't kill men or boys. I would rather nobody suggested his mother was blonde and was horrid to him as a small boy.

Love,

Caz
X

All of this is true. But it doesn't work like that. I mean, a guy who is subconsciously murdering his abusive mother is still responsible for his own actions. Yes. She should not have abused him. But it's his coping mechanism, not hers. He's killing people. Not her. Look at all of the other coping mechanisms people use. Drinking, drugs, hypersexuality, emotional unavailability. Many people deal by helping those in a situation they themselves were in, pursuing more legislation against child abuse, demanding tougher punishments, etc. Does a guy who opens up a shelter for abused kids blame his mother for what he's doing? Of course not. It's what he chooses to do with his experience. We don't accept abuse as an excuse for a DUI, we don't accept it for knocking over a liquor store to pay for heroin, we don't accept it as an excuse for a parent never showing any affection for their child. We don't accept it for murder. If they want to blame their mommies they can, but nobody even remotely familiar with what abuse does to people buys it for even a minute. What kids do when they are still in that situation is one thing. What adults do when they are no longer in that situation is another.

For example. I will state up front that I was never abused. But I had a fraught relationship with my dad. Still do. I developed a habit of lying to him about just about everything to avoid criticism. A habit that persisted until about three years ago when my fiance pointed out to me that I was an adult and could do whatever the hell I wanted and he could "suck it". And at first this argument didn't move me, because I was trying to avoid conflict, and even as an adult that would still exist. And I argued that it was his fault I did that. And my fiance said no, it was his fault until the day you moved out on your own. Now it's your fault. And it was.

He could blame his mother until the day he became independent. But after that, he's calling his own shots.

[Bridewell]

White male.
Aged 25 - 30 in 1888.
Local man.
Employed.
Low profile.
Superficial charm.
Not physically ugly.