Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hell Is Other People

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hell Is Other People

    Something that struck me very recently is how all the murders took place in the near presence of other people. Nicholls is killed right below the windows of a small row house where a family lives. One scream & they wake up and look out the window. Chapman is killed in the backyard of a house with multiple occupants any of whom could have walked out to use the privy while he was at work. Stride--who I now because of this think was a Ripper victim--was killed basically up against the wall of a lively social club with people coming and going all night. Eddowes was killed very close to the watchman's hut of a large warehouse. Kelly was killed in a room set among other rooms all of which had people in and out all night. To add a cherry to the top of that murder, Mr Blotchy--if it was Mr Blotchy and I think it was--was actually seen by someone walking into Kelly's room with her.

    To say this is a thrill killer is to understate the case. The thrill was so clearly part of the process. Because of this I wonder if we can look at other attacks that took place in similar circumstances. We know that Ada Wilson lived upstairs another family. And since Ada saw a Mr Blotchy too I am as I've written in other posts inclined to believe she's part of the series. Tabram could fit this model. But I worry about the pattern of attack. Wilson's throat was slashed. As were the Canonical 5's. Tabram's wasn't. Did that murder go wrong? Did he try to slash her throat and she managed to avoid it? Could that be why she's killed with such anger?

    Either way I find it hard to believe that the killer came straight out of the gate with such a developed method and such assurance. There must be other attacks in similar circumstances either in London or somewhere else.

  • #2
    As I think Bury was the ripper I would be prepared to bet a small sum that he may have believed that he caught his STD (in May 1888) from Tabram, hence the fury of that attack. He carried a penknife, as per weapon used. Obviously, pure speculation.

    As for Wilson, that was a mile away from Bury's home and he has form for assaults following demands for money.

    As for thrill seeking, I'm inclined to believe Farmer was a botched effort - at 9.30 am and a pursuit was involved and one report has the attacker stopping to punch his pursuer.

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Chava,

      Just my take on Jack and his murders:

      I'm no expert criminal psychology, but I think there's is a good chance JTR was a psychopath but that doesn't mean he necessary had "previous". He may have led non-violent, non-criminal life up to the time of the murders. He may have been married, had a family and been a successful, respected member of his community.

      I believe a subset of the canonical victims were specifically targeted. I believe there was specific trigger for the murders, that the drive to murder was to deal with a specific problem and therefore I believe he did murder "straight out of the gate" as it were.

      The fact that he was willing to kill in risky situations with people all around him could be explained by known psychopathic traits of daring, intelligence, ruthlessness, and by the motivation to solve a particular problem, albeit in an highly inappropriate way!.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by mpriestnall View Post
        Hi Chava,

        Just my take on Jack and his murders:

        I'm no expert criminal psychology, but I think there's is a good chance JTR was a psychopath but that doesn't mean he necessary had "previous". He may have led non-violent, non-criminal life up to the time of the murders. He may have been married, had a family and been a successful, respected member of his community.

        I believe a subset of the canonical victims were specifically targeted. I believe there was specific trigger for the murders, that the drive to murder was to deal with a specific problem and therefore I believe he did murder "straight out of the gate" as it were.

        The fact that he was willing to kill in risky situations with people all around him could be explained by known psychopathic traits of daring, intelligence, ruthlessness, and by the motivation to solve a particular problem, albeit in an highly inappropriate way!.
        I agree with this in the main.

        Psychopathy is a spectrum. I am not aware of any well-known psychopaths who were high flying businessmen who suddenly turned to kill.

        Neurologically, there could be a synapse issue which in those with psychopathy are unable to switch off. It could be connected to a hunting gene leftover from prehistoric DNA. They are constantly in hunt mode. Most blue-chip CEOs would probably be diagnosed psychopathic, but their hunt mode is wired to business and not murder. How and why one psychopath with hunt mode desires to kill, and one desires to be financially successful is not understood.

        There has been some suggestion that psychopaths with a desire to kill may have warped that hunting gene through sociological factors that have allowed them to view other humans as objects to be abused or toyed with. They have learned the ability to dehumanise.

        Some say childhood abuse is a significant factor, but I have my doubts that it is as prevalent as psychologists may believe. If a serial killer psychopath is caught, he will do his very best to manipulate sympathy, which he can then exploit. We have to take what psychopaths say about their childhoods really with a massive pinch of salt.

        One article suggests that perhaps the warping of that desire to hunt is connected to a deep-seated fear of rejection. There could be merit in that.
        https://blog.oup.com/2021/04/what-ca...serial-killer/
        Author of 'Jack the Ripper: Threads' out now on Amazon > UK | USA | CA | AUS
        JayHartley.com

        Comment


        • #5
          Why these kills happened might well have a few answers rather than just this singular serial notion, isolating similarities is paramount if you have any intentions of resolving some of the more basic problems with this area of study. For me, the man who kills Polly then Annie is the same man. There are things to learn about him from these acts...once isolated from the rest of the "group".

          And I believe one of those is that he chose those victims by random opportunity. He was more comfortable with the idea that he was a stranger to them, made killing them in the fashion he did easier I suppose without any tangential emotional connections. Which brings the venue and scene in room 13 into different focus. Very intimate and personal.
          Last edited by Michael W Richards; 11-09-2021, 06:00 PM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Which brings the venue and scene in room 13 into different focus. Very intimate and personal.

            I completely disagree with that conclusion but even if we assume for the sake of argument that it is correct it wouldn't necessarily imply that Mary and her killer had some sort of relationship. It could also have been the result of something that Mary said or did maybe inadvertently. Who knows what could have set her killer off?

            c.d.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by c.d. View Post
              Which brings the venue and scene in room 13 into different focus. Very intimate and personal.

              I completely disagree with that conclusion but even if we assume for the sake of argument that it is correct it wouldn't necessarily imply that Mary and her killer had some sort of relationship. It could also have been the result of something that Mary said or did maybe inadvertently. Who knows what could have set her killer off?

              c.d.
              Only woman killed indoors. Only woman killed in her underwear. Only woman in bed when attacked. Only woman who had a rented room in her own name. Angry wounds, slashes, cuts without ultimate goals. Mary was killed by someone who had personal issues with her. Thats why he was in her room with her ok in the middle of the night, and to top it off, we know she was seeing someone else other than Barnett at that time, someone named Joe, and that he "treated her badly" on occasion. Its not Flemming, we have no records he was ever mean to her...in fact he wanted to marry her.

              So.. who was this Joe, and did he "treat her very badly" on that night...are great questions.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by erobitha View Post

                I agree with this in the main.

                Psychopathy is a spectrum. I am not aware of any well-known psychopaths who were high flying businessmen who suddenly turned to kill.

                Neurologically, there could be a synapse issue which in those with psychopathy are unable to switch off. It could be connected to a hunting gene leftover from prehistoric DNA. They are constantly in hunt mode. Most blue-chip CEOs would probably be diagnosed psychopathic, but their hunt mode is wired to business and not murder. How and why one psychopath with hunt mode desires to kill, and one desires to be financially successful is not understood.

                There has been some suggestion that psychopaths with a desire to kill may have warped that hunting gene through sociological factors that have allowed them to view other humans as objects to be abused or toyed with. They have learned the ability to dehumanise.

                Some say childhood abuse is a significant factor, but I have my doubts that it is as prevalent as psychologists may believe. If a serial killer psychopath is caught, he will do his very best to manipulate sympathy, which he can then exploit. We have to take what psychopaths say about their childhoods really with a massive pinch of salt.

                One article suggests that perhaps the warping of that desire to hunt is connected to a deep-seated fear of rejection. There could be merit in that.
                https://blog.oup.com/2021/04/what-ca...serial-killer/
                Interesting thoughts. These psychopathic behaviors (hunting, dehumanizing etc) do not of course exclude the motive to say take revenge against specific victims, but would be an influence on how he went about taking revenge (or whatever his motive was).
                Last edited by mpriestnall; 11-09-2021, 07:59 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Michael W Richards View Post

                  Only woman killed indoors. Only woman killed in her underwear. Only woman in bed when attacked. Only woman who had a rented room in her own name. Angry wounds, slashes, cuts without ultimate goals. Mary was killed by someone who had personal issues with her. Thats why he was in her room with her ok in the middle of the night, and to top it off, we know she was seeing someone else other than Barnett at that time, someone named Joe, and that he "treated her badly" on occasion. Its not Flemming, we have no records he was ever mean to her...in fact he wanted to marry her.

                  So.. who was this Joe, and did he "treat her very badly" on that night...are great questions.
                  You left a few differences out: And the only victim named Mary. And the youngest of the victims. And the only one killed in Millers Court. And apparently the prettiest of the victims. And the only one with red hair etc. etc. etc.

                  How in the world are all these differences (both the ones you cite and the ones I cite) in any way relevant?

                  I see no personal issues at all.

                  c.d.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Chava View Post
                    Something that struck me very recently is how all the murders took place in the near presence of other people.
                    Yes that's what I find very interesting about this case, and of course Chapman murder we think there was Cadosch on the other side of the fence going to the toilet and heard the murder happening. This guy was an absolute nutter, no doubt, probably fuelled by drugs and alcohol as serial murdererers often are/were - its surprising only the Stride murder was interrupted.


                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thanks for posting this link. Psychopathy and serial killers is such a fascinating subject, in general and relative to this case.



                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Chava View Post

                        To say this is a thrill killer is to understate the case.
                        A thrill killer who wasn’ t even adverse to the idea of staying put with a victim, in order to bluff his way out, perhaps?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by mpriestnall View Post

                          Interesting thoughts. These psychopathic behaviors (hunting, dehumanizing etc) do not of course exclude the motive to say take revenge against specific victims, but would be an influence on how he went about taking revenge (or whatever his motive was).
                          I would agree. A trigger is usually an excuse to unlock something that has long been there deep within - they just now have a motive (albeit a warped one) to initiate their darkest desires. Revenge against a class of people after an event, such as syphilis infection, could act as such a trigger.
                          Author of 'Jack the Ripper: Threads' out now on Amazon > UK | USA | CA | AUS
                          JayHartley.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by erobitha View Post

                            Psychopathy is a spectrum. I am not aware of any well-known psychopaths who were high flying businessmen who suddenly turned to kill.

                            https://blog.oup.com/2021/04/what-ca...serial-killer/
                            I think that to a great extent owes to how "high flying businessmen" feed their psychopathy/narcissism by way of their elevated societal position. The same goes for famous authors and artists etcetera - they do not have the kind of need for self-elevation by way of killing that the psychopaths who cannot (or are too lazy to) reach societal top positions sometimes have.

                            Which is why I tend to think that those pointing to people like Walter Sickert, Michael Maybrick, Lewis Carroll etcetera, are most likely barking up the wrong tree. Unless, of course, we are dealing with a stage in these people´s carreers when they are not yet established. An interesting example for me is Ted Bundy - what if he had risen to become a famous politician or a top barrister? Would he nevertheless have become a killer? I am not sure about that at all. I think there is a likely correlation between his failure to qualify for his chosen career and the fact that he became a serial killer.
                            Last edited by Fisherman; 11-10-2021, 12:32 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by c.d. View Post
                              Which brings the venue and scene in room 13 into different focus. Very intimate and personal.

                              I completely disagree with that conclusion but even if we assume for the sake of argument that it is correct it wouldn't necessarily imply that Mary and her killer had some sort of relationship. It could also have been the result of something that Mary said or did maybe inadvertently. Who knows what could have set her killer off?

                              c.d.
                              The second I found that Mary Kelly had had her abdominal wall cut away in large sections, just like Annie Chapman had suffered the exact same fate, I was never going to accept that these two women were killed by different men. Simple as that.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X