Did JTR ever change his M.O. intentionally?

[Abby Normal]

I agree with the fetish to an extent, but also think that there was something with the victimology beyond convenience.

Tom noted a few pages back that the MO changed after Chapman because he stopped trying to decapitate his victims. This would have to be revised, of course, if Jack was also the torso killer. Maybe he realized decapitation wasn't worth the time/effort in a time-sensitive environment.

But - Torso Murders aside - this still leaves Kelly. Why wasn't she decapitated? Clearly Jack showed earlier interest in this. He had plenty of time and mutilated her body in just about every other way. It seems like a notable omission. Had he completely lost interest in decapitation? If so, why? And/or, was he not physically strong enough to accomplish this task with the tools at his disposal and after Chapman he realized this? If so, what does that tell us about the killer?

Hi Barnaby
If jack and the torso were one and the same again I would say that dismemberment including decapititation was not his fetish(sig) but his MO in simply ease of getting rid of the bodies. So did not need to decapitate Kelly or the others.

If they are not one and the same perhaps it as you say. Or else he never tried to decapitate them and it just looks that way because the cuts were violent and deep.

[Abby Normal]

I'm by no means big noting myself here guys so please don't think I am because I'm not but I believe I was the first to suggest a change of MO when I discussed the possibility, which I now believe to be fact, that Jack crossed the Atlantic and killed Carrie Brown in America.

Now can someone please help me? I would like the year the official Scotland Yard investigation in to the murders ceased. Thanks in advance
Mr Holmes

Not sure when the investigation ceased, but the last document in the known files is a letter signed jack the ripper sent to the police dated 1896.

It's very similar in tone and handwriting to dear boss so much that the police at the time did a comparison but eventually concluded that it was not a match.

I'm not so sure, and have always thought that the possibility is there that it could be from the author of dear boss and from the killer.

It's a very interesting piece and the author speaks of returning from being abroad(Carrie brown?). It also references the GSG almost verbatim and uses other phrases and tidbits like ha ha that are from dear boss and saucy jack.

One thing for sure though is that it shows that of 1896 the police still had no clue who the ripper was or who wrote the dearboss and saucy jack letters.

[GUT]

G'day Abby

One thing for sure though is that it shows that of 1896 the police still had no clue who the ripper was or who wrote the dearboss and saucy jack letters.

Which says a lot about Macnaghten, Swanson Anderson Littlechild et. al. does it not?

[Abby Normal]

G'day Abby




Which says a lot about Macnaghten, Swanson Anderson Littlechild et. al. does it not?

Yes. They were just guessing and giving their personal opinions. As was abberline with chapman and the american doctor theory.

[GUT]

Yep, based on what we have today they were only guessing, just a pity so much of the file is lost to us.

[GUT]

However I do think we are a bit arrogant if we think our guess is better than the police who had all the material lost to us.

[Wickerman]

However I do think we are a bit arrogant if we think our guess is better than the police who had all the material lost to us.

Amen to that!

[GUT]

G'day Jon

Personally I expect that if the truth is ever known it will be someone the police had a good look at.

But I doubt that:

1. We will ever know who done it

2. We will ever know exactly who the police did or did not suspect

3. We will ever have all the material the police had

But that's part of the fun.

[Errata]

However I do think we are a bit arrogant if we think our guess is better than the police who had all the material lost to us.

Perhaps, but since the killer was never caught or named in any official capacity, it is not out of line to assume that the information that the police had was not enough to result in either identification or arrest. It's not about a better guess, it's about a different one.

There is no point in assuming the police were right. Just like there's no point in looking for your car keys in the place you just looked for your car keys. If they had been there the first time, you would have found them and the second search would be unnecessary. If they weren't there the first time, they aren't there and a second search in the same place is unnecessary. Time to look somewhere else.

[Wickerman]

This perspective could apply to a range of scenario's.

One scenario in particular is where we might assume to know better than the police did, on the evidence as it exists today.

For some inexplicable reason there are a few who choose to adopt the view that what we have today by way of evidence is all that was available to Abberline, Swanson, etc. That is where the arrogance comes into play.

[Abby Normal]

This perspective could apply to a range of scenario's.

One scenario in particular is where we might assume to know better than the police did, on the evidence as it exists today.

For some inexplicable reason there are a few who choose to adopt the view that what we have today by way of evidence is all that was available to Abberline, Swanson, etc. That is where the arrogance comes into play.

I agree to some extent but one word: Ostrog.

I'm sure for the most part the police knew more than us, but they were not omniscient and there are some things we apparently DO know more than them.

[lynn cates]

Ostrog

Hello Abby. Excellent. Ostrog is the word that should be repeated ten times whenever we think the police had solved the WCM.

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

I appreciate the point about Ostrog (him being in Paris). Though Ostrog was never considered a suspect, not even by Macnaghten.

What Mac. does say is, "Any one of the following three characters would potentially be a better suspect, than Cutbush".
Which is not the same as saying Ostrog was at any time suspected in the WCM.

The police were looking for him certainly, but due to a warrant for "Fail to Report", not in connection with the murders.
The police can hardly justify the cost of an international manhunt for a simple FtR warrant.

[lynn cates]

manhunt

Hello Jon. Thanks.

I wonder if their evidence justified a manhunt for ANYONE?

Cheers.
LC

[Wickerman]

Indeed.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Scotland Yard did know he was in Paris in the summer of 1888.

We know Scotland Yard had friends, 'contacts?' in the US, they just as likely had contacts in France too. We can still read international correspondence in the "Ultimate" that demonstrates Scotland Yard were in regular communication with the foreign countries of Europe.

So long as the Sūreté or Gendarmerie were aware Ostrog was wanted in the UK (I'm only saying 'if') it would only take a telegram from Paris to inform Scotland Yard he had turned up there and is under arrest.
What are Scotland Yard going to do with this "fail to Report" warrant?

Possibly, just forget about it, "he's someone else's problem now, for the next two years at least". He did eventually come back, and they nabbed him.